[Unsound]

Based on, very broad, generalizations and assumptions about Gunny's morality, he should also refuse anything made by the bronfman family. So basically any seagrams product. And no doubt, with how incestuous businesses are these days, a whole whack of other products.

[ShepherdsDog]

Unsound Unsound:

Gunnair, do you have just as much contempt for the rum/whiskey/scotch/vodka/beer drinkers of the 20s?

Consumption of alcohol was NEVER illegal during prohibition in the US. Production, transport and sales, not approved by government licence (As you could easily be given a doctor's prescription for it) were. Also, Seagrams and other distilleries and breweries were producing products that were legal in Canada and most of the rest of the world.

[Xort]

Curtman Curtman:

If you say so. All that being true, its prohibition that makes it so. There's plenty of blame to go around, but prohibition has proven to be a failure at reducing numbers of drug users. The market grows every year with the current strategy.

And legalization also proved a failure it almost destroyed China, the UK fougth 2 wars with China to keep the drug trade open and legal.

So what we are left with is a failure for either method because people form addictions and engage in self justification of their actions.

$1:

Absolutely they should be pardoned. Where is the victim when those farmers drove grain across the border? It was illegal, but the law has been repealed. Why punish someone for something that isn't illegal anymore?

It was illegal at the time, the act of defiance against the rule of law is a different matter that just breaking a law. Saying this law doesn't apply to me because I think it is wrong is both a respectable action and a destructive belief.

If you break a law because you think it's wrong I say that you keep that record for life as proof of your conviction about how wrong a law is. If I came across a law I found to be wrong enought that I would willing break it to show my contempt for it, I would refuse a pardon even if the law I broke was removed or changed later.

"Do you have any convictions you haven't been granted a pardon for?"
"Yes, I ate ice cream on horseback on a Sunday."

[Public_Domain]

[Public_Domain]

[Xort]

Mr_Canada Mr_Canada:

Good ideals, can screw you for jobs though, sometimes...

Which is why you should only break a law if you think others will agree it was a bad law, if you are worried about employment.

$1:

Actually I wonder how that works. If a law is repealed does the crime stay on the record and still hold you back?

Yes. Although people might agree that a conviction for a repealed law would be a silly thing to hold against someone.

[Curtman]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

Unsound Unsound:

Gunnair, do you have just as much contempt for the rum/whiskey/scotch/vodka/beer drinkers of the 20s?

Consumption of alcohol was NEVER illegal during prohibition in the US. Production, transport and sales, not approved by government licence (As you could easily be given a doctor's prescription for it) were. Also, Seagrams and other distilleries and breweries were producing products that were legal in Canada and most of the rest of the world.

The bronfman family supplied Al Capone with alcohol, you're OK with that? What's your opinion of what Marc Emery did? He operated his seed business completely in the open. Filed taxes and everything. The authorities here refused to arrest him for it.

I don't think there is any law against consuming marijuana, or any other drug here either.

[Curtman]

Xort Xort:

Curtman Curtman:

If you say so. All that being true, its prohibition that makes it so. There's plenty of blame to go around, but prohibition has proven to be a failure at reducing numbers of drug users. The market grows every year with the current strategy.

And legalization also proved a failure it almost destroyed China, the UK fougth 2 wars with China to keep the drug trade open and legal.

So what we are left with is a failure for either method because people form addictions and engage in self justification of their actions.

$1:

Absolutely they should be pardoned. Where is the victim when those farmers drove grain across the border? It was illegal, but the law has been repealed. Why punish someone for something that isn't illegal anymore?

It was illegal at the time, the act of defiance against the rule of law is a different matter that just breaking a law. Saying this law doesn't apply to me because I think it is wrong is both a respectable action and a destructive belief.

If you break a law because you think it's wrong I say that you keep that record for life as proof of your conviction about how wrong a law is. If I came across a law I found to be wrong enought that I would willing break it to show my contempt for it, I would refuse a pardon even if the law I broke was removed or changed later.

"Do you have any convictions you haven't been granted a pardon for?"
"Yes, I ate ice cream on horseback on a Sunday."

The Opium Wars is what you think of when we talk about Legalization? Really?

$1:

Because of its strong mass appeal and addictive nature, opium was an effective solution to the British trade problem. An instant consumer market for the drug was secured by the addiction of thousands of Chinese, and the flow of silver was reversed. Recognizing the growing number of addicts, the Yongzheng Emperor prohibited the sale and smoking of opium in 1729, and only allowed a small amount of opium imports for medicinal purposes.

How well did prohibition work out for China?

[ShepherdsDog]

Curtman Curtman:

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

Unsound Unsound:

Gunnair, do you have just as much contempt for the rum/whiskey/scotch/vodka/beer drinkers of the 20s?

Consumption of alcohol was NEVER illegal during prohibition in the US. Production, transport and sales, not approved by government licence (As you could easily be given a doctor's prescription for it) were. Also, Seagrams and other distilleries and breweries were producing products that were legal in Canada and most of the rest of the world.

The bronfman family supplied Al Capone with alcohol, you're OK with that? What's your opinion of what Marc Emery did? He operated his seed business completely in the open. Filed taxes and everything. The authorities here refused to arrest him for it.

I don't think there is any law against consuming marijuana, or any other drug here either.

To smoke it, you have to possess it. Unless you have a medical chit, then possession is illegal.

As for the Bronfmans, they were a legal business producing a legal product in Canada....as I've already clearly stated, so no more needs be said about them. Capone's men were the ones who were transporting it into the US, which was illegal there and not in Canada. Emery wasn't charged with anything and shouldn't have been shipped to the States. American authorities should only have been able to arrest him if he crossed into their territory, after he'd broken laws there.

[Curtman]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

As for the Bronfmans, they were a legal business producing a legal product in Canada....as I've already clearly stated, so no more needs be said about them. Capone's men were the ones who were transporting it into the US, which was illegal there and not in Canada. Emery wasn't charged with anything and shouldn't have been shipped to the States. American authorities should only have been able to arrest him if he crossed into their territory, after he'd broken laws there.

OK, so in regards to the legal grow-ops in Canada supplying the medicinal supply. If gangsters purchase that marijuana and make a fortune trading it on the black market, you don't hold the growers accountable?

[ShepherdsDog]

If you're aunt had balls, she'd be your uncle. How are gangsters going to purchase enough government pot to make a fortune? If they are, then it isn't being legally obtained in a mounts the government has authorized, and the growers are knowingly breaking a shit load of Canadian laws in Canada. Your scenarios are really weak.

The booze was a legal product legally sold in Canada. It only became illegal once it crossed the American border into the US. The onlyy thing they could get nailed for was hiding the profits...and be charged for tax evasion, like capone was in the US. Americans could drink it, they just couldn't produce or sell it without a government licence.

[Curtman]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

If you're aunt had balls, she'd be your uncle. How are gangsters going to purchase enough government pot to make a fortune? If they are, then it isn't being legally obtained in a mounts the government has authorized, and the growers are knowingly breaking a shit load of Canadian laws in Canada. Your scenarios are really weak.

The booze was a legal product legally sold in Canada. It only became illegal once it crossed the American border into the US. Americans could drink it, they just couldn't produce or sell it without a government licence.

The government doesn't grow it. They license growers to grow it. Health Canada can give you a license to grow it for somebody if they are too sick to grow it themselves. There are very few inspectors enforcing the regulations. That's how.

When alcohol prohibition was repealed in 1924, there were strict regulations on how much could be sold, where it could be consumed, etc. It's the same thing. They knew they were selling booze to gangsters, and nobody stopped them.

[Gunnair]

Unsound Unsound:

Gunnair, do you have just as much contempt for the rum/whiskey/scotch/vodka/beer drinkers of the 20s?

Well, yeah. We've romanticized the hell out of them, bUt they essentially did the thing.

Now, for all those people who grow and smoke their own product, I really don't have much of an issue.

[Gunnair]

Curtman Curtman:

Gunnair Gunnair:

No.

Nor should the farmers have been pardoned.

Try not to forget, Curt, as your begin the monthly crusade, that those millions of drug users are willfully supporting gangs and terrorists as they run out and purchase their pot, coke, etc.

Willfully...

Happily throwing cash at gangsters and terrorists.

Happily....

Yet you blame the government for the gangs and not those who selfishly support them to satisfy their narcissistic needs.

Telling.

If you say so. All that being true, its prohibition that makes it so. There's plenty of blame to go around, but prohibition has proven to be a failure at reducing numbers of drug users. The market grows every year with the current strategy.

Absolutely they should be pardoned. Where is the victim when those farmers drove grain across the border? It was illegal, but the law has been repealed. Why punish someone for something that isn't illegal anymore?

Do you refuse a Sleemans because of principles or because you need the hard stuff?

I don't like Sleemans because it's crappy beer. For hard stuff, I like a nip of Talisker in the winter. I support the local microbreweries and the Island wineries.

You're not very good a flinging shit, Curt.

[ShepherdsDog]

Curtman Curtman:

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

If you're aunt had balls, she'd be your uncle. How are gangsters going to purchase enough government pot to make a fortune? If they are, then it isn't being legally obtained in a mounts the government has authorized, and the growers are knowingly breaking a shit load of Canadian laws in Canada. Your scenarios are really weak.

The booze was a legal product legally sold in Canada. It only became illegal once it crossed the American border into the US. Americans could drink it, they just couldn't produce or sell it without a government licence.

The government doesn't grow it. They license growers to grow it. Health Canada can give you a license to grow it for somebody if they are too sick to grow it themselves. There are very few inspectors enforcing the regulations. That's how.

When alcohol prohibition was repealed in 1924, there were strict regulations on how much could be sold, where it could be consumed, etc. It's the same thing. They knew they were selling booze to gangsters, and nobody stopped them.

Their own elected officials for the most part didn't really give a shit, and only paid lip service to the law, why should Canadian companies have really cared?

$1:

The government doesn't grow it. They license growers to grow it.

Never said they did. I said those who are issued permits were knowingly violating the terms of their licence, issued by the government...Health Canada.


If you really need to toke that bad, plant 3 or 4 plants at a time, harvest it, smoke it and then plant another 3 or 4.