New Canadian Bill calling for minimum jail sentences for +5 plants..

[Josh1r]

This is a link to the entire bill.
http://cannabisculture.com/v2/content/2011/09/20/Conservatives-Re-introduce-Dangerous-and-Costly-Crime-Legislation

This is a link to the drug section of the bill.
http://www.cannabisculture.com/v2/content/2010/12/06/Canadian-Conservatives-Attempt-Enact-Inhumane-Unjust-Anti-Pot-Law

here is what the Conservatives are calling for in minimum sentences.
Sentences for Growing Pot under Bill S-10

• Six months to 14 years if the number of plants is between 5 and 200.

• Nine months to 14 years for 5 to 200 plants, grown for the purpose of trafficking.

• One to 14 years for 200 to 500 plants.

• Eighteen months to 14 years for 200 to 500 plants, grown for the purpose of trafficking.

• Two to 14 years for 500 or more plants.

• Three to 14 years if for 500 or more plants, grown for the purpose of trafficking.

This bill was Reintroduced as of today.

Just food for thought. If you are canadian and do not stand for this BULLSHIT then 1 option is to sign the petition at http://whyprohibition.ca/

-Josh Out.

 

[NoDrama]

So grow 4 giant plants that yield 30 pounds each, that'll teach em.

 

[deprave]

it is bullshit but atleast you can't get life in prison like in the USA

 

[ChairmanMaow]

Time to grow some trees!

 

[Josh1r]

So grow 4 giant plants that yield 30 pounds each, that'll teach em.

Hahaha, you're glass truly is "Mostly full" hehe

 

[mrsql]

Josh, actually it's not just minimum, it's mandatory 6 months, you don't get a trial.

it's coming down the pipe this week and nothing you can do about it, might as well grow 200 plants get the same punishment. Harper and his fucked up priorities. Btw you can get life if they deem that you are linked to some organized crime operation. Comes bundled with warrentless searches and other bs. Keep the streets safe, yup don't bother to crack down on child molesters or other violent crimes. Increase jail time for non-violent crimes that would most likely promote violence. Btw grow couple weed plants near a school or any other public place people under 18 frequent and it's 3 years mandatory no trial. All in all pretty ridiculous, fuck up the country for 2 years then, next 2 years give some tax breaks etc some people forget. On the bright side if your in construction or engineering gonna be lots of work for you building new prisons.

 

[Carne Seca]

It's all about business folks. Canada started privatizing prisons like the U.S. and now they have to pay for them. Growers are a great resource for prison populations.

 

[NoDrama]

Josh, actually it's not just minimum, it's mandatory 6 months, you don't get a trial.

You get a trial if you want one, unless of course you confess. You will ALWAYS get a trial, they cannot arbitrarily judge you guilty because according to the Canadian Constitution you are considered INNOCENT until found guilty in a Trial. So if they aren't having trials, then they aren't convicting people.

 

[NoDrama]

It's all about business folks. Canada started privatizing prisons like the U.S. and now they have to pay for them. Growers are a great resource for prison populations.

Of course it's about money.

 

[Josh1r]

You get a trial if you want one, unless of course you confess. You will ALWAYS get a trial, they cannot arbitrarily judge you guilty because according to the Canadian Constitution you are considered INNOCENT until found guilty in a Trial. So if they aren't having trials, then they aren't convicting people.

This is HIGHLY questionable, going to trial with a charge like this against you doesn't mean you have a chance to avoid the mandatory minimum sentence, You can hire Johnny Cochran and if the judge still feels as if you did it with out "REASONABLE DOUBT" you are going to jail. The new bill states that the judge would "no longer" have the ability to be easy on the accused but would have to enforced the minimum mandatory sentence if found guilty..

Ps. I had my 2010 Genesis coupe 3.8GT impounded 2 times for excessive speeding 50+km's/h over the limit. Both times the vehicle was impounded on the side of the road, without a trial or admission, both cases went to court and the law was found to be in the "right" both times.. :S

 

[VILEPLUME]

The good news is they are creating more jobs for prison workers.

 

[NoDrama]

This is HIGHLY questionable, going to trial with a charge like this against you doesn't mean you have a chance to avoid the mandatory minimum sentence, You can hire Johnny Cochran and if the judge still feels as if you did it with out "REASONABLE DOUBT" you are going to jail. The new bill states that the judge would "no longer" have the ability to be easy on the accused but would have to enforced the minimum mandatory sentence if found guilty..

Ps. I had my 2010 Genesis coupe 3.8GT impounded 2 times for excessive speeding 50+km's/h over the limit. Both times the vehicle was impounded on the side of the road, without a trial or admission, both cases went to court and the law was found to be in the "right" both times.. :S

Correct, although a Jury will find you guilty, not a judge. I was responding to someone elses claim that this law would make you go to prison for a minimum amount of time WITH NO TRIAL! You have a 100% chance of not going to prison for the minimum amount of time if you are found Not Guilty. All criminal trials that end up with punishment taking away property or liberties must be tried in court before the punishment can commence. Impounding a vehicle isn't taking away your property, it is only limiting you from using said property until the fines have been paid. If they had taken your vehicle and sold it to someone, then you would have a case.

 

[dukeanthony]

Correct, although a Jury will find you guilty, not a judge. I was responding to someone elses claim that this law would make you go to prison for a minimum amount of time WITH NO TRIAL! You have a 100% chance of not going to prison for the minimum amount of time if you are found Not Guilty. All criminal trials that end up with punishment taking away property or liberties must be tried in court before the punishment can commence. Impounding a vehicle isn't taking away your property, it is only limiting you from using said property until the fines have been paid. If they had taken your vehicle and sold it to someone, then you would have a case.

Aint that Fucked up?

I know for a fact when the cops make a drug bust they do a title search to see if its been paid off
If your ride is paid off

Its gone

 

[NoDrama]

Aint that Fucked up?

I know for a fact when the cops make a drug bust they do a title search to see if its been paid off
If your ride is paid off

Its gone

You mean when they make a drug bust while you were driving your vehicle. They can't bust you at the beach and then go to your house and take your car. And what you are talking about is a Civil law vs, a Criminal law. A civil case is what is letting them confiscate property, that is why some people never have charges against them in a criminal case. Criminal cases must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, but civil cases only need to have a preponderance of evidence to have authority. That is why it is called Civil Asset Forfeiture and not Criminal Asset forfeiture. Basically the State is acting as a person and suing you in civil court for your vehicle, they only have to show some evidence to win. Cities/counties/municipalities that practice this are operating under the color of law, but not under the intention of the law, which was to damage large drug king pins economic base. Of course any law that gets made soon has a whole industry grow up around it (Cops who take your cars to provide themselves with cash)to take advantage of the monetary benefits.

 

[Josh1r]

The Car was impounded with again a "Mandatory road side suspension of 7 days" This happens before you go to trial, by the time you see a court room for the issue, you have already had to pay for the 1 week impound fee 1 week license suspension. That is complete bullshit! Because if you were in fact NOT SPEEDING excessively but were accused of doing so, you could only file for a reimbursement of said fee's once proven innocent.

That is against our rights in the constitution, and unfortunately there has only been 1 case presented to the supreme court of Canada about this and I believe the individual won.