Re: Marijuana busts spark online discussions, www.northumberlandnews.com I read Crystal Crimi's opinion on cannabis and found it interesting. When laws are made on questionable evidence and a majority of the population disregard them, they should be repealed. The increase in people speaking out is because they know the evidence in creating the law was wrong. The fears of booby traps and other dangers are created by prohibition and could be reduced dramatically with a proper system. Legalizing cannabis like wine would do two things: it would reduce crime and it will put cannabis into the control of the government, something decriminalization and fines won't do. [continues 100 words]
RE: Colin Mayes' column in the March 28 Eagle Valley News. Colin Mayes has conveniently avoided the main issue in his opposition to legalizing marijuana. Marijuana is a cash crop. Why else would all these illegal grow-ops go to such expensive, highly-technical procedures to maintain their operations? Take away the huge profit margin and it would flop just like any other business - legal or otherwise. Remember back in history when prohibition was tried, and what a fiasco that was? Now alcohol is legal yet abuse of it is every bit as dangerous as any other drug. I presume Mayes is a total abstainer as I saw no mention of alcohol in his account. [continues 87 words]
To the editor: The Conservative government of Stephen Harper's has several former police officers in it, including our MP Rick Norlock. When these former police officers where arresting people, they always had to go by the evidence before them to build a case. It makes one wonder what happened to that common sense once they were elected. As Mr. Harper's government gets closer to bringing in its large crime bill, which includes warrantless searches of your Internet use, where is the evidence that these new mandatory minimum laws will be effective? [continues 241 words]
Dear Editor, The Canadian government's proposed changes to the medical marijuana regulations are not an improvement for sick and dying Canadians as they claim. Instead, it will actually affect many who presently have access to their medication for the cost of growing it who will no longer be able to do so. The only part of this proposal that makes things easier for sick Canadians to access their medication, is that they will no longer have to request a licence from the government, instead they will receive a prescription from their doctor that you will take to a commercial business, much like people do with pharmaceuticals. The cost of growing one's medication can be as low as $100 per month, which is much less than a person having to pay the commercial price of $1,500 a month or up to $18,000 a year for the same amount of medication that a person can grow for $1,200. Unfortunately, the new regulations do not mention anything about medical coverage for patients who cannot pay the commerc! ial price. This will force patients to take the government to court to fight for their right to affordable medication instead of being forced to go without it or forced onto addictive narcotic painkillers. [continues 580 words]
Editor, The Record; Re: TAVs keep police officers safe In regards to Const. Jason Raaflaub's letter to your paper, I would like to make one suggestion that would solve his and other officers' concerns. In order to make your communities safer I'd like to suggest taxation and regulation of marijuana. I'm sure he may not agree as it would increase unemployment among his fellow brothers of the force. Just like people say, guns don't kill people its the trigger operator who does. Some day people will finally realize that prohibition is the cause of his concerns and not the plant itself. Al Graham, Campbellford [end]
Re: "Inspectors needed now" (July 27). I read your editorial on how legal medical marijuana growers are not being inspected. Your concern, other than the fact Health Canada doesn't inspect legal growers, was solely based on the health and safety of those who live in these houses. I am wondering why you are not as concerned with all indoor hydroponic gardens, whether it's for marijuana, tomatoes or flowers. Common sense tells me they are all plants, growing inside, and all have the same risks. So why the hysteria on legal gardens? Al Graham (The government doesn't license people to grow tomatoes indoors) [end]
Re: Most Canadians OK with medicinal marijuana: poll, Nov. 2. As a federal medical marijuana exemptee, I'd like to thank the Citizen for publishing this article. The poll, showing that more than 93 per cent of Canadians support the use of marijuana as a medicine for the sick proves that Canadians support sick people like me. Our government and the American government would like us to believe that marijuana is not a medicine, but the support for medicinal marijuana states otherwise. [continues 69 words]
I'd like to congratulate the Sun on its series on marijuana. At first it looked like a negative image of the industry, but in the end it spells out the problems caused by prohibition of marijuana-- crime, gangs and health concerns. I'm sure the intent of the series is not to show the problems of pot prohibition, but in the end it really points this way. Legalization and regulation will eliminate all of the negatives pointed out. Al Graham Campbellford (No it won't, not as long as pot is illegal in the U.S.) [end]
Two thumbs up for Ian Robinson's Nov. 28 column "Keeping pot illegal is real reefer madness." The real problem is with prohibition -- and not the plant. Why can't people understand that legal, regulated marijuana would be grown in proper-built buildings and that these crime-related grow operations would thus go away? The marijuana plant doesn't make people build these grow-ops, prohibition does. Al Graham (We support decriminalization, not legalization.) [end]
I grow hydroponic veggies and tropical plants in my house. I also love tropical plants. Without any proof at all, the province will allow Ontario Hydro to shut down my power and search my home for electrical problems, because they believe I'm using excess power, which they believe might be used for growing marijuana. Will police pay for a new door for my house if they bash it down? Will I be able to sue for stress-related damages when they come in with their guns drawn? Are you innocent until proven guilty, or guilty till proven innocent? Al Graham, Campbellford [end]
Editor: Recently I have read many articles in regards to Marc Emery being sentenced to 92 days in jail for "trafficking" of marijuana. His act of "trafficking" was the passing of a joint to another consulting adult. According to our laws apparently the passing of a joint is trafficking even though no money was being exchanged. If this is so wrong then I believe that one who offers his friend a sip of his cold beer or other alcohol beverage is by know means breaking the law also. Bootlegging was outlawed years ago and the passing of ones beer to others should fall in the same category. Probably the best example of how the laws are out of touch with reality is to look at the resent shooting of Tony Brooks in downtown Toronto. Here is a guy who is convicted of assaulting his wife and kids, plus threatens them with death and what does our justice dept. give him for his violent behavior. 80 days total. Can anyone tell me how passing a joint from one consenting adult to another deserves a harsher sentence than something convicted of assault and uttering death threats? Why does a peaceful act deserve more time in jail than one of a violent behavior as the laws are presently written? [continues 339 words]
The most important statement about attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder that I have seen in print is the last paragraph of your article ["hyperactivity overdiagnosed?", Health & Science, Sept.2]. In it, Dr. Louis H. McCormick is quoted as saying, "we don't have a blood test to evaluate ADHD. ADHD is an educated guess." Ritalin is a powerful psychoactive agent. Those who refer to it as "mild" have probably never been forced to take it. If an educated guess is good enough to start a lifetime dependency for up to 20 percent of a population, parents would be well advised to get educated on their own about the dangers of Ritalin and start out-guessing the questionable authorities who created the diagnosis- the psychiatrists. Alan Graham Santa Ana [end]
