injunction/court case updates

torontomeds

Well-Known Member
Show shome proof of what you claim or stop fear MONGERING with your lies.
You keep asking for proof, I have given a few examples in my last few posts, you act like Harper just saying we are lying and saying we are mongering? if anything you are. I guess this is what you do all day? your a real schrill, troll if I ever met one. True def of a net Troll is you my son.
 

torontomeds

Well-Known Member

Gmack420

Well-Known Member
2006
http://forums.cannabisculture.com/forums/index.php?/topic/133924-praise-flak-for-ndp-pot-resolution/




No fines mentioned back then either.

REGINA -- The provincial NDP's endorsement of a resolution backing decriminalization of marijuana laws at last weekend's party convention in Saskatoon drew both praise and scorn on Monday.

But NDP Justice Minister Frank Quennell says the resolution will have no effect on actions by the provincial government.

The resolution, which was supported by party members, calls for the provincial NDP to support the federal party's call for a "non-punitive approach to cannabis law, including all penalties for personal cultivation and possession by adults, and actively work to institute non-punitive cannabis policies at the provincial level." Quennell said he's not sure what the resolution means, since drug laws and drug prosecutions are both federal responsibilities.

"Police offi cers, prosecutors, judges, whether they're Crown prosecutors appointed by the province or judges appointed by the province, they're sworn to uphold the laws of Canada, whatever they might be. Saskatchewan can't change a federal law by subversion, if that's what's intended here.

That we wouldn't enforce federal law, then I'm against that," he said in an interview on the weekend.

"I believe the people who are in a position to administer the law should administer the law. If you don't like the law, you either as a legislator vote to change it or as a citizen you vote for a party that undertakes to change the law." Benn Greer, the president of eNDProhibition Saskatchewan, the provincial branch of the "unof- fi cial anti-prohibition wing" of the party, said in an interview he agrees with Quennell about the need to enforce laws as they exist.

But he helped push forward the resolution because he believes the provincial party can help advocate to the federal Conservative government to decriminalize marijuana.

"It's a first step in a long process, I think," said Greer, a former ministerial assistant to Premier Lorne Calvert who is now a personal chef in Regina.

"It isn't a good thing for everyone to smoke (marijuana). But . . . punishing both chronic and casual users with criminal sanctions and ruining the chances of getting a job, travelling abroad, things like that, is just wrong." Quennell said decriminalization is clearly not on the Conservative radar in any case. He said the provincial government has acknowledged in the past there are issues around the punishment for marijuana possession.

"There's a lot of details about where you draw lines. There's no question that I think most Canadians, if they realized what the maximum sentence was for simple possession, would like to see some change," he said.

NDP provincial secretary Doug Still said he didn't think it was likely the party would take much of an advocacy role on marijuana decriminalization.

The Saskatchewan Marijuana Party, which was registered as a provincial party seven months ago, issued a news release Monday praising the NDP for the resolution and said it would work with the party "to turn this resolution into reality."

Liberal Leader David Karwacki also weighed in the issue, criticizing the NDP for allowing eNDProhibition to run an advertisement on the back of its convention program. While the former federal Liberal government had planned on decriminalizing marijuana, Karwacki said the NDP appears to be advocating legalization and the use of marijuana.

Among others, the ad quotes federal leader Jack Layton as saying the party favours a "legal environment where people can enjoy marijuana in the peace and quiet of their own home, or in a cafe, without the fear of being criminalized." "I don't think it's appropriate," said Karwacki.

But Still said the organization has the right to advocate to change laws and the provincial party does not believe in censorship.
Direct from the Ndp. No fines. Can you even read or is reading clear cut evidence not play into your option that's based on bullshit?
 

Gmack420

Well-Known Member
You keep asking for proof, I have given a few examples in my last few posts, you act like Harper just saying we are lying and saying we are mongering? if anything you are. I guess this is what you do all day? your a real schrill, troll if I ever met one. True def of a net Troll is you my son.
Where have you shown that the NDP not anyone else the NDP will fine rec pot smokers? No proof none. Not one quote anywhere. Jesus you're all thick.
 

Gmack420

Well-Known Member
it shows that the NDP have done their market research, by appealing to the largest contingent of voters, they have the best shot of breaking on through to the other side..
Why is it you seem to be the only one today that gets this? The fear MONGERING and outright lies about the party that's going to give us the freedom we need and the way we need it is now being compared to the conservatives on here? Wanna put $ on everyone who's saying vote liberal on riu have plans to make $$ off of rec sales?
 

torontomeds

Well-Known Member
Where have you shown that the NDP not anyone else the NDP will fine rec pot smokers? No proof none. Not one quote anywhere. Jesus you're all thick.
LOL your pissing in the wind my son. No one on here is believes you. I gave you the definition of the too words, what more do you want?
 

torontomeds

Well-Known Member
Why is it you seem to be the only one today that gets this? The fear MONGERING and outright lies about the party that's going to give us the freedom we need and the way we need it is now being compared to the conservatives on here? Wanna put $ on everyone who's saying vote liberal on riu have plans to make $$ off of rec sales?
Nope, I think everyone voting Lib on riu wants freedom to do them, weather it be making money or simply growing, I want the option to buy my herb in a dispensary, or grow it, or both, I want craft growers like craft brewery's, I want the freedom I have when I go to Denver, all my buddies in Denver have home grows and work in big grows, if your telling me you don't want all of that then maybe you are on the wrong forum?
 

Gmack420

Well-Known Member
LOL your pissing in the wind my son. No one on here is believes you. I gave you the definition of the too words, what more do you want?
The resolution, which was supported by party members, calls for the provincial NDP to support the federal party's call for a "non-punitive approach to cannabis law, including all penalties for personal cultivation and possession by adults, and actively work to institute non-punitive cannabis policies at the provincial level." Quennell said he's not sure what the resolution means, since drug laws and drug prosecutions are both federal responsibilities.

Seems pretty clear cut what the federal ndp's plan is. But your definition from wiki that says may/maynot include fines is much more convincing then the evidence I put forth.
 

Gmack420

Well-Known Member
Nope, I think everyone voting Lib on riu wants freedom to do them, weather it be making money or simply growing, I want the option to buy my herb in a dispensary, or grow it, or both, I want craft growers like craft brewery's, I want the freedom I have when I go to Denver, all my buddies in Denver have home grows and work in big grows, if your telling me you don't want all of that then maybe you are on the wrong forum?
$20 grams? Fuck off with that noise.
 

torontomeds

Well-Known Member
Until ol uncle Tom decides other wise, or better yet he puts it in the hands of law enforcement to make up the new rules. You are really on his nuts, you must be a high ranking member of his party.
JT has made it clear, Legal Cannabis is a priority. Legal means no more prohibition.


The resolution, which was supported by party members, calls for the provincial NDP to support the federal party's call for a "non-punitive approach to cannabis law, including all penalties for personal cultivation and possession by adults, and actively work to institute non-punitive cannabis policies at the provincial level." Quennell said he's not sure what the resolution means, since drug laws and drug prosecutions are both federal responsibilities.

Seems pretty clear cut what the federal ndp's plan is. But your definition from wiki that says may/maynot include fines is much more convincing then the evidence I put forth.
pr
 

Gmack420

Well-Known Member
Until ol uncle Tom decides other wise, or better yet he puts it in the hands of law enforcement to make up the new rules. You are really on his nuts, you must be a high ranking member of his party.
JT has made it clear, Legal Cannabis is a priority. Legal means no more prohibition.



pr
See this Is a clear cut case of FEAR MONGERING. Lots of talk with no truth in it just pure speculation. I've shown you clear cut proof of the federal ndp's decriminalizaton plans and you still can't show me anything other then a Wikipedia page(whichever anyone can edit to their liking mind you) that itself says decriminalizaton may or may NOT include fines. Lol sound reasoning my friend.
 

doingdishes

Well-Known Member
i am for choice and I think both have said they are going to loosen the rules.
beer is legal but you'll get a fine walking down the street drinking one..but you won't have a criminal record for that "offense" but your pocket book will be lighter
 

torontomeds

Well-Known Member
$20 grams? Fuck off with that noise.
20 for rec users, and most of that is tax that helps build the community, thats a win win. All med users pay way less and everyone is entitled to grow. Your bitching about 20 a gram for mostly out of towners when that money does good things? I thought this was the reason to go Legal so that criminals would lose profit and humanity would gain.

Regadless you are not seeing the biggger picture, your actions make it seem like you want it to stay gray for some sort of black market motives. Anyways enjoy your fines, please do not come back to riu in a year complaining if your man gets in.
 

CalyxCrusher

Well-Known Member
I don't think either party has actually come out and truly explained what their policy on mmj would be.
Without a detailed explanation it's all just guessing right now.
Not much longer to wait and see.

It's easier to get people to vote for you when using vague terms and not specifics. That's because if said party wins THEN they'll iron out the details. Could be for the better or worse. At the end of the day ALL they want is your vote to win, once they're in you can believe this whole cannabis issue wont be at the top of their list of priorities. Regardless or what party wins, none of their platforms for the upcoming election is based on the cannabis issue alone. In fact, that'd also be near the bottom of the list. Let's not kid ourselves, it's a crap shoot, just like it's always been.
 

Gmack420

Well-Known Member
The resolution, which was supported by party members, calls for the provincial NDP to support the federal party's call for a "non-punitive approach to cannabis law, including all penalties for personal cultivation and possession by adults, and actively work to institute non-punitive cannabis policies at the provincial level." Quennell said he's not sure what the resolution means, since drug laws and drug prosecutions are both federal responsibilities.

Seems pretty clear cut what the federal ndp's plan is. But your definition from wiki that says may/maynot include fines is much more convincing then the evidence I put forth.
i am for choice and I think both have said they are going to loosen the rules.
beer is legal but you'll get a fine walking down the street drinking one..but you won't have a criminal record for that "offense" but your pocket book will be lighter
I know you can read. What's a non punitive approach to cannibis law, including ALL PENALTYS FOR PERSONAL CULTIVATION AND POSSESSION BY ADULTS mean exactly? It seems that it's up for debate. I take it to mean no penaltys(including fines) but others seem to think this means it's a half measure and a cash grab. Maybe I don't read between the lines to well.
 

Gmack420

Well-Known Member
It's easier to get people to vote for you when using vague terms and not specifics. That's because if said party wins THEN they'll iron out the details. Could be for the better or worse. At the end of the day ALL they want is your vote to win, once they're in you can believe this whole cannabis issue wont be at the top of their list of priorities. Regardless or what party wins, none of their platforms for the upcoming election is based on the cannabis issue alone. In fact, that'd also be near the bottom of the list. Let's not kid ourselves, it's a crap shoot, just like it's always been.
Toms running on a day one dealing with mj policy platform. That's a pretty good lie to make. What lp is paying TM? The liberal party is the one who need to say what they mean. Saying Colorado style isn't close to telling us what jt has in store for us.
 

CalyxCrusher

Well-Known Member
So you're saying that Tom Mulcair and his party's primary focus going into the elections, front and center is cannabis? And they've stated this?
 
Top