Pot busts surge in some cities now that decriminalization bill's dead

catman

Electoral Member
Sep 3, 2006
182
4
18
OTTAWA (CP) - The number of people arrested for smoking pot rose dramatically in several Canadian cities last year after the Conservatives took office and killed a bill to decriminalize small amounts of marijuana.

The spike in arrests for simple possession of cannabis appears in data compiled by The Canadian Press from municipal police forces through interviews and Access to Information Act requests.

National statistics will only be released next week but preliminary figures suggest the number of arrests jumped by more than one-third in several Canadian cities.

Toronto, Vancouver, Ottawa and Halifax all reported increases of between 20 and 50 per cent in 2006, while Montreal and Calgary saw their number of arrests dip a few percentage points from the previous year.

As a result thousands of people were charged with a criminal offence that just recently was within a whisker of extinction.

Every party in the House of Commons except the Conservatives supported a bill to decriminalize small amounts of marijuana, but the Liberal government that sponsored it never brought it to a final vote.

Several police officials say the trend is linked directly to that legislation, which died as a result of the federal election on Jan. 23, 2006.

The head of one police association said many forces simply stopped laying charges after the Liberals first introduced a decriminalization bill under Jean Chretien in 2003.

"There were several police jurisdictions not laying the simple ... possession charges," said Terry McLaren, president of the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police.

"Everybody was waiting for what was going to happen. ... There'd be no use clogging up court system with that decriminalization bill there.

"'When that was defeated, I'd say it was business as usual."

The number of people charged plunged from 26,882 in 2002 and remained relatively steady, below 19,000, for the three years that decriminalization was being debated in Parliament.

But police say many pot-smokers - especially younger ones - appear unaware that the bill never actually passed.

So even if marijuana consumption remains as illegal in Canada as it has been since 1923, police say some people are toking more boldly than they've ever toked before.

Which makes it far easier to arrest them.

"You'd have a youth smoking a joint out on the street without any fear of being caught," said Toronto police Det. Doug McCutcheon.

"You go to any high school and do a quiz. Find out how many kids realize that it takes three readings (in the House of Commons), plus Senate approval, before something happens."
The stillborn bill by the previous Liberal government would have made possession under 15 grams a non-criminal offence punishable by fines starting at $150.
Nearly half of Canadians have committed the crime spelled out in Section 4 of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. It sets out a maximum six-month prison sentence and a $1,000 fine for anyone caught with 30 grams of marijuana or less.
Liberalization advocates say 600,000 Canadians unfairly carry a criminal record because of existing laws. They call the decision to scrap decriminalization wrong-headed.
"It seems to me that the clock is turning backwards here," said New Democrat MP Libby Davies, a persistent critic of current laws.
"'They may charge more people - but they're not deterring youth, they're not putting in funds for education or prevention.
"The (Tories) have a very regressive policy that's in line with what the U.S. is doing in its so-called war on drugs - which is a total failure."
If this is a war on marijuana, the public is getting mixed messages about the declared enemy.
The reality is that about only half the people arrested for simple possession even get charged, and the vast majority of those who are charged for pot possession alone never do any time.
In some cases people are handcuffed, brought to jail, and strip-searched by police after being stopped. In other cases they just get told to toss away their joint, or get served papers ordering them to appear in court.
That erratic application only serves to infuriate critics of the status quo.
Several pot-smokers interviewed for this story shared anecdotes that illustrate how inconsistently the law is applied.
One pot activist has been arrested at least seven times, been strip-searched, forced to ride in a police van with more violent criminals, and was once stopped for carrying just enough weed to roll a tiny joint.
Marc-Boris St-Maurice compares that with the last time he was stopped by police, just a few weeks ago on a trendy Montreal boulevard.
The former leader and founder of the federal Marijuana party tossed away his joint on the sidewalk and ended up chatting casually with two officers about politics.
One Montreal cop who asked not to be identified said some officers can spend an entire career on the force without ever arresting any of the people they catch smoking a joint.
"I'd rather stop someone breaking into a house or stealing a car," he said.
He said some officers might lay charges in conjunction with an unrelated offence to increase the likelihood of a criminal conviction - for instance, if they detect pot during a domestic-abuse investigation.
McLaren agrees that most possession arrests occur when officers are investigating another incident. He estimates that seven out of 10 pot busts stem from things as diverse as busted brake lights, break-and-enters, or traffic stops.
A 2002 Senate report expressed alarm that the law is not applied equally to all Canadian citizens.
While pot-smokers are regularly prosecuted in some parts of the country, the RCMP detachment in Richmond, B.C., told the Senate that only five per cent of cases resulted in charges there.
The Senate committee - led by then-Progressive Conservative Sen. Pierre-Claude Nolin - proposed going even farther than the Liberals did, suggesting the legalization of marijuana.
A 1972 royal commission headed by Gerald Le Dain also recommended liberalizing marijuana laws but its suggestions were immediately rejected by the government.
The Nolin committee cited 1996 figures that pegged the annual cost of policing and prosecuting drug offences at $400 million, but suggested in its final report that the actual number could be more than double that.
One police drug-policy expert said the cost to society of substance abuse is far greater. He said years of decriminalization talk has sent mixed messages.
Barry McKnight expressed hope that the Conservatives' coming $64-million National Anti-Drug Strategy, promised in the last federal budget, will drive home one simple point.
"I'm hoping for a clear message: ... that drugs are bad," said McKnight, a drug-policy expert with the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police.
"Marijuana is a harmful drug. It's as simple as that - no ifs, ands, or buts. Period, end of sentence."
The Nolin committee reported that excessive marijuana use can cause chronic bronchitis, create psychological problems, and affect learning. It also noted a higher concentration of some cancer-causing carcinogens in marijuana than in cigarettes.
But the report also called pot less addictive than either alcohol or cigarettes.
One criminology professor and drug-policy expert points out that alcohol consumption and cigarette-smoking rates have plummeted since the 1970s, while pot use has risen.
Tighter controls and public awareness of the dangers associated with booze and cigarettes have succeeded where prohibition failed, said Eugene Oscapella, a lawyer and criminology professor at the University of Ottawa.
"Going into the 21st century we should know better than to bludgeon the use of this drug with criminal law," he said.
"It doesn't work, hasn't worked, never has worked, there's no prospect that it ever will work. Yet we continue to do it."
The Senate committee also questioned the popular wisdom that marijuana is a so-called gateway drug that leads people to more dangerous substances.
Philippe Lucas, an addiction researcher at the University of Victoria, says marijuana is more of a buffer than a gateway.
He describes marijuana as a lesser evil that helps reduce the use of hard drugs, cuts into drinking and therefore prevents alcohol-related injuries. Lucas works at the local Compassion Club which supplies medical marijuana, and says many visitors believe pot keeps them out of worse trouble.
"People don't view it as a gateway drug. They view it as an exit drug," he said.
"They use cannabis to stay away from more dangerous substances. They use it because they've just quit heroin, they use it because they want to stay away from crystal meth and alcohol."
But Oscapella says the status quo is still not justified by the traditional view - that marijuana is just plain bad.
"Prohibition has been an utter and total failure," he said.
"Not only has it failed to do anything, it has actually made the problem worse. It's not like some government programs that fail to do anything at all - this one does actual harm.
"Instead of just keeping us static and wasting money, it actually moves us backwards. And wastes money. And destroys lives. And finances terrorism, and insurgent groups around the world."

:angryfire:
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/pot_arrests_spike
 

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
Crimedog McGriff says, 'If you can hear me talking, turn yourself in, arrrufff!' High, way too high!
 

Unforgiven

Force majeure
May 28, 2007
6,770
137
63
Just another useless neocon using drugs to appear to be managing the nations business. How about that violent crime business? Remember when people were wondering how deported criminals could return to this country and then be difficult to deport again? No there is nothing going on there. How about the gangs that rule the streets now and have absolutely no fear what so ever of shooting people in broad day light? Wasn't there something about putting more cops on the street to deal with that problem?

No it's clear that some kids smoking pot aren't going to be any where near as difficult as busting some gang bangers with automatic weapons. Besides when we need to put some stats up for an election, we want to show Canada that the government is tough on crime.

Pardon me while I snicker.
 

catman

Electoral Member
Sep 3, 2006
182
4
18
It is such a waste of police resources.

Plus, the hypocrisy of it all.
 

gc

Electoral Member
May 9, 2006
931
20
18
I've seen statistics that show nearly half of Canadians have tried smoking pot. Unless you are willing to turn yourself in and spend time in prison, if you've tried smoking pot it's very hypocritical to suggest that others deserve to punished for something that you yourself have done.

Even if you've never smoked it in your life, chances are that your best friend, or your wife/husband, or your father/mother/son/daughter has. How many people out there think that their friends deserve to go to jail? That's basically what you are saying if you think that possession of pot should be a crime.
 

triedit

inimitable
I don't think anyone is arguing that it should be a crime. The bottom line is it is a crime. If you break the law you should be willing to risk the consequences. If I use this drug outside of medical prescription and I get arrested I shouldn't complain. If you seriously want the laws changed, do something about it. Whining and ignoring and claiming "It's not fair" aren't going to get you far.
 

Unforgiven

Force majeure
May 28, 2007
6,770
137
63
I don't know who does that. I think talking about why it's a bad law and how it is impossible to enforce is how you get people to understand the issue and perhaps vote accordingly. At the very least accumulated data on the subject is educating.

I don't think anyone is arguing that it should be a crime. The bottom line is it is a crime. If you break the law you should be willing to risk the consequences. If I use this drug outside of medical prescription and I get arrested I shouldn't complain. If you seriously want the laws changed, do something about it. Whining and ignoring and claiming "It's not fair" aren't going to get you far.
 

gc

Electoral Member
May 9, 2006
931
20
18
I don't think anyone is arguing that it should be a crime. The bottom line is it is a crime. If you break the law you should be willing to risk the consequences. If I use this drug outside of medical prescription and I get arrested I shouldn't complain. If you seriously want the laws changed, do something about it. Whining and ignoring and claiming "It's not fair" aren't going to get you far.

There are plenty of people in Canada who think it should be a crime. If everyone in Canada thought it should be legal, it would be legal by now :smile:
 

Walter

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 28, 2007
34,843
92
48
When I was more stupid than I am now, that is when I was younger, I smoked some pot. I always knew it was illegal and I never carried it with me. I always let some mule friend of mine carry it if we were going to a party. It is still illegal and I don't miss it one bit. If you can't take the punishment don't do the crime.
 

Unforgiven

Force majeure
May 28, 2007
6,770
137
63
So if the government made a new law that says: no one can allow people with blue eyes to live and it is now your duty to go out and kill all those in your house, work and neighbourhood with blue eyes, that you are going to pick up the axe and obey the law lest you pay the price by first killing your family and then killing yourself?

When I was more stupid than I am now, that is when I was younger, I smoked some pot. I always knew it was illegal and I never carried it with me. I always let some mule friend of mine carry it if we were going to a party. It is still illegal and I don't miss it one bit. If you can't take the punishment don't do the crime.
 

gc

Electoral Member
May 9, 2006
931
20
18
When I was more stupid than I am now, that is when I was younger, I smoked some pot. I always knew it was illegal and I never carried it with me. I always let some mule friend of mine carry it if we were going to a party. It is still illegal and I don't miss it one bit. If you can't take the punishment don't do the crime.

So, did you turn yourself in for smoking pot? Or do you think it should be legal?
 

Twila

Nanah Potato
Mar 26, 2003
14,698
73
48
Laws were made to be broken.....wait...or was that rules? Oh well...same thing
 

Pangloss

Council Member
Mar 16, 2007
1,535
41
48
Calgary, Alberta
yeah let's just ignore all those silly little laws we don't agree with.

How, exactly, ought smoking weed be a crime?

If there are harmful effects from the use of the drug itself, they are visited upon the user themselves. The drug, itself, harms no second or third parties.

The beneficial effects are legion and well documented.

It can be sown, harvested and consumed in one's own backyard.

The only harm in the criminalization of cannabis seems to come from that very criminality.

Plus, great way to have a whole bunch of people in jail that surely ought not to be there.

If I was not allergic to the stuff, darn right I'd use it - as an act of civil disobedience against an unfair, unjust and unreasonable law.

Pangloss
 

Pangloss

Council Member
Mar 16, 2007
1,535
41
48
Calgary, Alberta
When I was more stupid than I am now, that is when I was younger, I smoked some pot. I always knew it was illegal and I never carried it with me. I always let some mule friend of mine carry it if we were going to a party. It is still illegal and I don't miss it one bit. If you can't take the punishment don't do the crime.

What horrific and unethical and careless behaviour. The stupid thing you did wasn't smoking pot - it was in being so expolitive and cold to those you called friend. You knew it was illegal, and yet you had "some mule friend carry it" - unbelievable! And you write about it as if you did nothing wrong!

If you want to do something, take the risks yourself. What you write of are the acts of a coward and a user. You should find those "friends" and apologize to them.

If you can't take the punishment don't do the crime, indeed.

Pangloss
 

triedit

inimitable
Pan, I don't care one way or t'other whether it is made legal or not. What peeves me is those who knowingly break the law then whine about it. Obviously the bill didnt have enough support to legalize it and this is supposed to be majority rule, right? So just like I can't do 130 on the 401 and not expect a ticket, those who smoke dope don't get a free pass.
 

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
Perhaps a referendum ought to be held, where Canadians could decide rather than politicians afraid to appear lax on crime, or whatever nonsense drives them. An unjust law, draconian and out-dated, and a tremendous burden on an increasingly burdened law enforcement community.
 

Unforgiven

Force majeure
May 28, 2007
6,770
137
63
No one is whining. Putting voice to an issue over bad law isn't whining at all.

If you do 130 on the 401 you are perhaps more likely to harm me traveling along the same route. Should I smoke some weed, it doesn't impact you in any negative way.

Pan, I don't care one way or t'other whether it is made legal or not. What peeves me is those who knowingly break the law then whine about it. Obviously the bill didnt have enough support to legalize it and this is supposed to be majority rule, right? So just like I can't do 130 on the 401 and not expect a ticket, those who smoke dope don't get a free pass.