I'm sure I'm but one of many Province readers who responded with disbelief to the decision of B.C. Supreme Court Justice Catherine Bruce to throw out the evidence in a marijuana bust because the RCMP apparently made a slight error.

After securing a search warrant, knocking on the front door as per protocol and receiving no reply, Surrey RCMP drug squad forcefully entered with weapons drawn.

But in spite of the discovery of 704 pot plants, it is the police who are declared at fault.

[continues 87 words]

Re: 'City abandons its addicts,' Times Opinion, June 17.

Christina Toths column is filled with compassion for the plight of the addicts in Abbotsford because of the recent zoning bylaw change proposed by the city council. As a Christian, I certainly agree that compassion is needed.

However, I do have a question regarding responsibility. Toth says, "This city is giving up its responsibility for you [addicts]."

Is there not the distinct possibility that the addicts have the major responsibility for the deplorable condition in which they find themselves? No one ever became an addict without choosing to take these drugs, with the possible exception of the very few who may be addicted because of prescription drugs given to them by physicians attempting to treat illnesses. For most of those on the streets of nearly every community in B.C., they are addicts because they chose to allow themselves to follow that path.

[continues 54 words]

Editor, The News:

In his letter of Jan. 30 (`Harm reduction decision uninformed,' Viewpoint), Christoph Reiners suggests that "One would expect city council to care for (the) disadvantaged."

Perhaps we are forgetting a vital part of this admittedly difficult problem of drug abuse.

Were those on drugs forced into that position?

Or is it possible that they are actually suffering the result of poor choices they have made?

How has their situation now become society's responsibility?

Please don't misunderstand me.

[continues 158 words]