I was doing a little bit of research on the net 'cause i had nothing better to do today..

I came across some news that the Honorable Keith Martin (Liberal Member of Parliament for Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca, Canada) was going to introduce a private member's bill today to decriminalize possession of small amounts (less than 30g) of cannabis or cultivation of a maximum of two (2) plants.

While looking at some other info, i came across a ruling from the B.C. Supreme Court stemming from the decision from the federal goverment to close the safe injection site in Vancouver B.C.

The operators filed a complaint based on the unconstitutionality of the right to live with addiction and use the drugs in a regulated place like InSite where the users are provided clean needles and correct dosage to prevent overdose, and the fact that the users may die from disease or overdose if the clinic was closed.

Here is the ruling from the B.C. Supreme Court:
http://www.cfdp.ca/sif_bcsc.pdf

Now, the ruling is 60 pages long and hard to understand if you're not a lawyer.
But it clearly stated at the end that the judge finds section 4 and 5 of the CDSA to be uncontitutionnal and of no force and effet and I quote :

''[158] In sum, I declare that ss. 4(1) and 5(1) of the CDSA are inconsistent with s. 7 of the Charter, and of no force and effect. (...)I suspend the effect of the declaration of constitutional invalidity until June 30, 2009. In the interim, and in accordance with the direction of the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Ferguson, 2008 SCC 6, 228 C.C.C. (3d) 385 at para. 46, I grant users and staff at Insite, acting in conformity with the operating protocol now in effect, a constitutional exemption from the application of ss. 4(1) and 5(1) of the CDSA.
“I. Pitfield J.”''

Now....If i understand correctly, unless the federal goverment changes the laws to accomadate InSite and their work, or gets an additional extension from the courts or wins their appeal (http://sobernclean.blogspot.com/2008...site-case.html) change the laws, on June 30th 2009, the laws on illegal drugs will be nullified.

Now correct me if i'm wrong, but that means total legalisation in Canada for all illegal drugs.

Anyone care to comment on my findings??
Feel free to tell me if i'm wrong, i'm not a lawyer or anything so....

Peace and Pot!!!!

__________________
430w HPS SON Agro bulb

Ha thats funny. Less then 1% of all private members bills get passed. In all honesty, its as close as legal already, why not just put it in writting.

Now the safe injection site, this ruling just means that by closing the site the government is violating a charter right. Doesn't make existing durg laws void lol.

The reason for not putting it in writing is purely political...Conservative government..
The charter violation does make the law void (ie. no force and effect) but the judge left the conservatives until june 30th 2009
This is to give the conservatives time either to change the laws, apeal the verdict (which they did) or come up with a stupid regulation type thing like they did with medical maijuana.

__________________
430w HPS SON Agro bulb

Um you clearly do not know what your talking about. This ruling will not make drugs legal. The government forced the closure of the centre, doing so violated the charter....this has nothing to do with possession charges.

sorry, i'm baked so maybe I didn't say it right.

What i meant to say is that it would make ''possession'' legal

The point is the fact that the users of the facility and the staff there aren't in any legal framework since the drugs are illegal.
In that view the staff can be charged for trafficking (ss5(1) of the CDSA if they hold a syringue that has heroin for the patient. (and the patient for possession ss4(1) of the controlled drugs and substances act)
Therefore section 7 of the charter of rights and freedoms of Canada (7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.) is violated because of the ''security of the person'' ie the heroin addict went to clinic to get ''safe & sterile needles'' and ''correct dosage''

I read the whole judgement in detail... above sums up what is says
You know, these past few years have been murky in the courts....

The thing is that if the government doesn't get the appeal judgement in time, doesn't get an extension, doesn't change the law or enact regulations the laws would be voided to respect the section 7 of the charter.

This is my interpretation, i might be wrong

__________________
430w HPS SON Agro bulb

Thats pretty correctas I see it too batlam.. It really seems like the proposal is trying to mirror the MM challenge from a few years back.. And murkey isn't the word.. Black with dismissiveness of federal rulings would be a better description..
Our laws are in shambles on the subject, so they're pretty much just following Steve's 'policies', or tossing things out of court on the basis that good judges rule on matter of law.. Its a craps shoot as to how you'll be treated in court, as random as how strict a kid's parents happen to be on pot smoking..
Pretty BS.. I don't know why Harper doesn't just declare War Measures so any whim of policy is acceptable at a moment's notice.. I know he wants to.. The slogan for the conservative party should be "Constitutions are for Pussies"..

LOL nice slogan!

BTW the judge doesn't rule on any specific schedule (ie. drug category), so that's why all illegal drugs would be included.

__________________
430w HPS SON Agro bulb

Are you sure 'addictive' wouldn't be a criterion given the wording??
I use 'sure' loosely obviously.. Any opinion??

As long as we have a conservative government in place (I am true-blue) we will not see marijuana legalization. It's as simple as that, it was a campaign promise.

The Drug Control Act is essentially the Young Offenders or Criminal Code of the drug world.. Purely federal legislation is enforced on a provincial level.. We will see more of what is happening in BC, LE turning a blind eye. The closest we ever came to decriminalization (not legalization as you are confused) was in 2003-4.. With Paul martin proposing his bill C-17.. Which was later dismissed due to Mr. Harper coming to power.

Unless Harper fucks up royally, I doubt the educated populous will vote back in a liberal. If the NDP and Liberals merge we will see legalization, otherwise.. I wouldn't count on it.

__________________
- NO TELL
- NO SMELL
- NO SELL

Bubble slow and you'll get it eventually.

Funny thing is, the only province not crumbling economically (AssScratchaton) is under NDP at the moment.. Conservatives don't do well in polls when their policies aren't keeping businesses happy.. Can't disagree with your assessment, but I'm really hopeful that ppl are going to start admitting that Harper has infact fucked up royally.. I'm also hoping pictures show up of him with his cock in a tranny's mouth..