Change.gov
 

Shsss don't tell anyone but Marijuana Reform has more votes than any other subject on Obama's change.gov website! Bet that one will quickly be swept under the carpet :lol:
link

It was a week from de-criminalization here in Canada under our last Prime Minister. Then Harper took over. Our current top dog takes (Many) his cues from Bush admin.

On Tuesday our Government won't know what to do :lol:

Isn't he still kind of on the way oot though?

I really hope so, but for selfish reasons. If we go "L", the PM will be from my riding. Ignatiaff is Lakeshore South. If there's another Shwinnagate where the PM dumps huge bucks into his own riding, I'll be a part of it. :D

According to this link it was already swept under the carpet once.


Granted, NORML.org is dedicated to the issue, but there are at least 3 different articles on this one subject alone.

I wish you would stop posting garbage like this.

Sorry I meant to say, only on.
crime and punnishment
taxation
privatization of services
overseeing food production. as in Maple Leaf foods and cheeze in Quebec
Gun laws
Not seeing a global monitary crisis a week before talking bailouts
Both putting billions into American Car Industry
Taking over and proguing Parliment
The use of Military
Environmental issues.
access to information
The press's access to Government
Land destruction for oil.
thirst for power, the will to keep it

Yet you are correct, many more ways that they are not alike. Our guy is taller, he speaks well, got good grades in school, didn't own a ball team, the list goes on and on. I didn't intend to stereotype anyone, especially a lawyer. I should have said that there are many ways that the two men are alike, which I believe to be true.

It is also true that our government doesn't know what to expect yet from our largest trading partner. We might have to adapt Kyoto, because we don't want to be the only country not to adopt it. It's not Harper's first choice. But we might get shamed into it. We won't shape those policies until USA has answered them for themselves and the western hemisphere.

Then I should have said we adopt some of our policies from what ever admin. is currently in power down south. Which is so true that I won't give examples. But since the Bush admin is still in power till tomorrow; we make policies (some) based on the Bush admin. Since both Bush and Harper are "C"onservative, it stands to reason that they see eye to eye. Therefore Harper, (our top dog) takes many (but not all) his cues from the Bush admin. when it's in his intrest to do so.

I believe I've been clear and fair. But I type slow. I was too brief originally, but I did add a laughing face to make the point that I was obviously not being as serious as I should have been. I'm sorry to whom ever I angered I'll remove it, though I believe it to be 95% truthfull, it's not likely to be 100% true.

Well if wasting an hour doesn't teach me to not post, I don't know what will. I'm sorry for trying to be flippant and funny. It happens to me once in a while reading. I'm still learning. Have a great day and enjoy the site.

I'm reporting myself to the moderator forum. Gave myself a warning. I said sorry privately and publicly, so I'm not starting a petition to ban myself, yet. But I am going to keep an eye on Iron Fist for a while. :?

You have violated the Voice Morality Code!

You will be fined one and one half credits!

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go use the 3 sea shells...

--Vince

I've been judged. 8O

Could be worse, you could have been Demolished... :D

--Vince

Dread had a nice bike, but to big for me, I would get demolished :lol:

I have no interest in starting a political fight, but I will address the list you posted.
I will not respond further

crime and punnishment - getting tougher on crime is a bad thing?

taxation - lowering our taxes is a bad thing? ( you don't think we already pay FAR too much)

privatization of services - Example, and also the list of privatized businesses from the liberal era?

overseeing food production. as in Maple Leaf foods and cheeze in Quebec - he was responsible how? (you're not serious, here, are you?)

Gun laws - Have not changed. The liberal registration scheme was nothing but a mishandled, money wasting joke. Remind me, was it $1 billion, and it achieved what?

Not seeing a global monitary crisis a week before talking bailouts - everybody saw it coming, he just didn't overreact until the band of idiots forced his hand. One might suggest (correctly) that Canadian policies have prevented us from being in as serious trouble as some countries.

Both putting billions into American Car Industry - I don't agree with the bailouts, but it was, infact, the liberals, and NDP that were pushing for this.
Harper was against it.

Taking over and proguing Parliment - He is the PM, thats what hes supposed to do. He has the support of the majority of the country.

The use of Military - I don't agree with their policies here.

Environmental issues - no different than any leader before, nor after him.

access to information - explanation?

The press's access to Government - This is my favourite part of the Harper strategy. Absolutely brilliant. IMO, there is no more dangerous force today to any party than the media. They are omnipresent, and self important.
They can destroy a person in a single day, with no regard for the truth.
I stopped listening/watching/reading the news 25yrs ago, and it was the smartest thing I've ever done. You can believe NONE of it. The reporting on the liberal/NDP coalition is a beautiful example of just how bad it is.

Land destruction for oil - Different from any of our previous leaders, how?

thirst for power, the will to keep it - no politician before him was like this, right? They're all power hungry, thats why they're there.

Pay attention.
He is a CONSERVATIVE. These are typical conservative policies. What do you expect? Suggesting that hes taking 'cues' from bush is just nonsense.
Sure, I'm conservative, but I defy you to suggest a better leader for our country. Dion is a bumbling idiot. Layton, nice guy, but NDP.
Ignattief? A rookie politician whos more American than Harper will ever be. You want to talk about power hungry, I hope this guy never manages to get voted in.
[/i]

Sorry Fist, but I'm with supf1y on this one. Harper's biggest drawback is his personality, aking to a dead fish. Fortunately that doesn't make him a bad PM. Too often we've voted for politicians who had better PR than substance. I'm not saying he' s the 2nd coming, but he's arguably the best we've got at present.

He did lower the GST after all and he did suspend the practically useless Gun Registry (Yay $60 rebate). BTW, gang bangers in TO aren't registering their 9mm.

Harper is a career economist. Ignatief is a career academic who spent the majority of his life outside Canada. Who would you rather have running the show when the economy is in the tank?

I don't know the Canadian Politicians, but I liked Bush. He kept the us from entering this recession in 2001. I don' like all the money he has spent during his terms and so of his decision's, but he has kept us from more terrorist attacks in this country and lowered the taxes on millions of Americans.

I too don't watch TV news or read anything in a newspaper. I have seen firsthand the information distorted by TV/paper reporters. (The place I work is in the news alot, please don't ask.)

Obama is most likely going to be bad for America, but it is unfair to judge him before he starts.

My ancestors did not come to America so that government could control there lives and support there every need. They came here to get away from the religious persecution and the chance to succeed on there own.

I better stop babbling now.

Allen

You folks in Canada are the same as us down here.
the folks that don`t read or watch the news no the most.
PS. Don`t say any thing bad about bush,only say the good things
about him that way Canada will be a much quiter place. :roll: :roll:

Yer right. I'll go away now.

We are all entitled to our opinions.

I should clarify. I don't watch TV to get my news. I may see something, but I usually go to find another source to verify the information before forming an opinion.

If we all listened to the media and the people at TT none of us would be riding a chinabike.

We went and found true objective unbiased information before making a decision.

Allen

And yet another marijuana law reform discussion is swept under the carpet and out the door... :lol:

HAHAHAH! So true.

Personally, I don't know why alcohol consumption is legalized but marijuana isn't. (I don't use either, and have no interest in it). I suspect alcohol causes far more problems than marijuana could.

On the Harper/Bush/Obama topic....


I find it interesting to hear thousands of Canadians moaning for a young. charismatic leader like Obama when they had the opportunity to elect one a few years back and soundly rejected him. Stockwell Day (remember him) was running for change too (remember the Reform Party?) but the media jumped on his back (especially Rick Mercer, partly, I suspect, because of his own personal interests in the election - I'm not trying to bash Rick here, but I think that's why he started that Doris Day vote).

Stockwell was deemed "too scary" because he wanted Canadians to become more self-sufficient and stop sucking the government teat.

Now, (and I don't mean this offensively to anyone) I had no use for Bush because he wasted soldier's lives on a war he couldn't finish. Plus, while he ran under a veneer of conservatism, the government got bigger and bigger when he was in. I think Bush is very socialist. Too bad the only other options were Kerry and Gore.

Harper.......well, he's done some stupid stuff and some smart stuff. If he can survive his current problems, he may stay in power long enough to change this country. Like frostbite, I appreciate his stance on gun control/hunting, but he has made some bad choices (screwing the East coast on election promises, cozying up to seperatism). I still haven't figured out what to think of him. I do like him better than the other options available.

I'm not trying to offend anyone on here. This is just how I see it. You are entitled to your own opinions.

We could use a new $40 billion dollar industry about now! And California could use the $13+ billion dollar crop to tax. And money saved in law enforcement and our court system would be a plus!

We will see if we get Change.............
.........or if its ......................
.................. Just the same old song and dance
.................................................. ..............................my friends!

I don't really think the multi national corporate's would really allow people to have a say about the laws we live under :lol:

You said a real sad but true mouthful !!!!!
I could not agree more.

ok just from my take on this people seriously think that obama is going to be the great green hope and leaglize dope.

now i neither commend nor condone pot useage but i think there are bigger issues that need to be addressed long before pot is even thought about..

how bout the new laws that are going to be passed that takes away your civil freedoms

1. making it illegal to talk on a cell phone while in your car.
2. making it illegal to smoke in your own car.

and by making pot legal you will be opening the door to other arguments to legalize other drugs and it will send this country into a spiraling decent into darkness from which we will never return..... but wait were halfway there anyway.

1. making it illegal to talk on a cell phone while in your car.
2. making it illegal to smoke in your own car.

Those are laws here. Not trying to stir the pot.

its all good i just dont think i need big brother telling me whats best for me. i work i pay my bills and pay my taxes. if the government is going to start telling me what i can and can not do with my own personal property and what i can and cant do in my car i WILL be sending my payment book addressed to MR. Obama at 1600 pensylvania ave.

what we need in this country is less government control. i dont need someone telling me when its time to go to the bathroom and how many sheets of tp i need to use when im through. thats all im saying.

That cell phone one is bogus... It is already the law in some states, and in some Canadian provinces... They make completely ridiculous claims like driving while talking on a cell phone is the same as driving drunk (yes they said this, which I guess means it's no big deal since our Premiere and Police do it), or that you are 400% more likely to crash if you are using your cell phone. How is it that talking on a cell phone is more distracting then talking to the passenger of the vehicle? The reason they are coming up with these ridiculous stats are that there are more people on the road, and there are more people with cell phones, who may be using them on the road. Just because someone crashed while they were on the cell phone does not make the cell phone the cause, but that is what these people would have you believe. We should blame the cell phone for all our problems and take no personal responsibility. And for the record I would like to state that I am not a big cell phone fan, I simply use a cell phone for communication when needed. I drive all day every day, and I talk on the phone while driving, I also talk on the radio, drink bottled water, and occasionally snack on some crackers or a sandwich. I wonder why I haven't crashed, maybe I should try my hand a DUI, if it is really the same as driving while talking on the phone I would be a pro. :roll:

Disclaimer: I am not encouraging driving while intoxicated, I am simply being sarcastic.

I spend a lot of time on the road, and drive a lot more than most. I DO NOT like the gov to interfere with my life, but... I support the ban on cell phone use in cars 100%.
I don't think anyone will disagree that there are a lot of drivers on the road that struggle to drive well under ideal conditions (know where I'm going here?).
Sorry guys, but I've seen far too many people driving 20 km/h under the limit, in the wrong lane, with a cell phone stuck to their heads.
They are a danger to themselves, and me.

ok you support the ban on all cell phone use in a car. so in the case of an emergency and your away from home and something happens to one of your loved ones you would rather wait till you get to your end destination then power up your cell phone to find out that something bad happened. if

you want to ban something that is pointless and a severe distraction you should go after all the gps units i see people messing with at 70+ mph trying to figgure out where there going.

my cell phone is my only phone it is used for business and personal calls not answering it or missing a call could cost me lots of money.

***edit to add insted of new post***

ok if they ban cell phones i have another list of things to ban from cars
1. that cup of coffee between your legs
2. food of any nature
3. your spouse (we all know what a distraction that can be)
4. your kids (enough said)
5. any and all dash or window mounted bobbles
6. no radios allowed in any vehicles
7. pets
8. passengers

oh well enough of my babbling

Then ***PLEASE WATCH YOUR LANGUAGE****, and make your call.
Infact, these GPS units with video display (are there any other kind?) are not legal in most places, but routinely ignored.
Nothing you have to do is so important that you must be able to talk on your phone while you drive down the road.
This option did not exist until recently, and we all managed.

Cars haven't really existed all that long either and we used to manage... You want people pulling over wherever they are when they need to talk on the phone? That is often a dangerous thing... You cannot just pull over on the high way. You can not pull over on narrow roads, or roads with cars parked along both sides.

Why is it you think talking on a cell phone is worse then talking to a passenger? All I am is saying is you should not be blaming the phone. You should be blaming the driver. It is not the cell phones fault that there are bad drivers, if it was, then there would have been no accidents prior to the invention of cell phones...

I also spend a lot of time on the road. And quite often the worst drivers I see do not have a cell phone. They have poor driving skills, anger issues, a bad attitude, or are generally incompetent behind the wheel.

Edit: I am sorry if I am being argumentative, I am only posting my thoughts on the cell phone issue. This topic has gotten awfully sidetracked from it's original topic and I am partly to blame for that.

Hands free phones are legal here.
On star is legal.
Hands free GPS is legal.
Phone to the ear is not.
Texting is not.
Spitting, peeing, swearing, and painting a wooded ladder, is not.
Your bag of pot, might be taken away with no charge, or you may go to jail, loose your job and your kids. Officers discression if charges are laid.
$250 for smoking in your car with your kid is the law.

Police have stated that it might be some time before the first charge is laid. They are giving it very low priority. Those are facts and not my opinions on the matter. Sorry to those offended by my writing this, especially Mr. fly.
I'm trying very hard not to state my opinions, only the facts, which are verifiable with media reports.

Mr. Fly. "Infact, these GPS units with video display (are there any other kind?) are not legal in most places, but routinely ignored. "

At least "GPS units with video display" is legal still in Ontario. :roll:
but not if you hold it in your hand.

Yes, I would prefer people pulling over. That way that aren't sitting at green lights yakking on the phone. :lol:

Evidence? Here you go:

http://unews.utah.edu/p/?r=062206-1

Like my wife pointed out to me yesterday. When you're talking to a person in the car, they notice things your are missing because you are distracted (Don't ask how that came up :oops: ).

As far as I know, no video display is legal in the front seat of a passenger vehicle, in Ontario.


If you read my post, thats exactly what I did.
You won't offend, or even bother me with your comments.
You are surely entitled to them, as I am.
Typically, I am against gov interfering in my life (You people that voted liberal, and you know who you are, are to blame for the worst gov. ever to lead Ontario), and generally do not feel that strongly on a lot of issues. Based on my experiences, this one issue is an exception.
Do I think you should pull over on the highway to talk on the phone?
No, that would be illegal. I think you should use a little discretion, and common sense. Nothing you have to do on the cellphone is so important that you need to do it while driving down the road. If it truly is an emergency, then you are 100% justified.
I own a successful small business.
I spend a great deal of time on the road, 65,000+ km/yr.
I do not now, nor have I ever owned a cellphone.
I just don't need it, and have never been in a situation where I wished I had one.
Suggesting that its necessary, and that you absolutely need to use one while driving, with rare exception, just doesn't fly with me.

I got one for you, here in my little town we have one person who is so cell phone addicted that I have seen her driving and talking on two cell phones at once!
One in hand and trying to cradle one between neck and shoulder! I don't think that means we need a law against using cells while driving here in Thorne Bay but I wish they would give her about a $500 ticket for stupidity. :wink:

Back to the legalize pot part of the thread,
Is pot a drug or is it a Herb, most drugs are derived from plants (concentrated) or made synthetically.
Pot falls more into the group of coffee, tea, and tobacco as you use it in its natural form.

One thing that really irked me was on TV I saw Spokane police complaining about the fact that they did not make big money off busting crank labs. The police stated unlike pot growers meth manufactorers seldom own their houses and often have very little of value to confiscate, also mentioned was clean up cost. After hearing what was said it left me to believe that law enforcement put meth (crank) below pot in importance because police could make more money raiding pot growers as they were more responsible citizens.

But mostly I started this thread and posted the Link as I was amazed to see it was the peoples choice of laws that need Obama's attention and I noticed the press was ignoring it, when I googled it there are almost no hits.

As far as off topic we are in the misc so say what ever :wink:

Pot is the least of this nations worries, Legailze it and move on I say. Heck they process cigarettes with chemicles which would make them more of a drug so why are they still legal? They can tax the snot out of pot and make up some more revenue.....less money spent on police enforcing a lame law and boom it's a win win....And no I do not smoke pot :lol:

On this, we are on the same page.

I DID INHALE! i believe that IF pot is decriminalized, the GOV should TAX the heck out of it and make all the money that george W spent back! LEGALIZE!... or at least decriminalize.

Great green hope? lol...hardly.
Perhaps you're unaware that Joe Biden was largely responsible for the obscene mandatory minimum sentencing laws. Perhaps you're unaware that Obama has already ignored the idea of marijuana law reform. Perhaps you're unaware that, while he does not encourage the use of federal time and money being used to persue medical marijuana patients, he has NEVER stated any support for it's recreational use.

Yes, great green hope, indeed. 8O

On the other hand, perhaps some people recognize this as one of the few times in this country's history when our leader is actually asking for input from regular citizens and that perhaps this is a rare opportunity to simply have a RATIONAL discussion on the idea of legalization.

Your "spiraling decent into darkness" statement is precisely why this discussion is needed. The statement is not only false, but it's laughable. And sadly, too many people have bought into the ignorant notion that pot is somehow "the devil's weed".

I know people who have smoked pot for more than 30 years. They work, have families, contribute to their communites and generally live life like everyone else, aside from the fact that they have hide in their homes to have their own choice of "cold beer" or "glass of wine". They have to fear losing their jobs or being charged w/ DUI for up to 30 days after consumption because the THC remains in their system MUCH longer than it has any effect on their actions or ability.

If you want to pull out the "slippery slope" argument...you'll need to explain alcohol first. It's legal, it is taxed, and it IS a drug. If the slope is truely that slippery, then alcohol must also be criminalized.

Either they are both legal, or they are both illegal. You can't have it both ways and remain on the rational/logical side of the argument.



And while you're worried about laws that haven't yet gone into effect, we continue to deal with the laws that are already in effect. Like the Patriot Act. Warrantless wiretapping is NOT constitutional. You worry about the rights of people to smoke cigs in their car, yet you condem those who wish to smoke pot in their own home?

You can't claim to support a less invasive government whilst also supporting invasive laws like those against marijuana.


Obviously this country has a lot of issues to deal with currently, and obviously this issue is not at the top of the list...however, more people were arrested for marijuana in 2007 than were arrested for violent crimes. To me, this screams of poor priorities and laws that place an unfair burden on everyday citizens.

While your local cops are out busting pot smokers...the violent criminals are running rampant.

Read this for the reality of the situation - http://blog.norml.org/2008/09/15/872...-52-from-2006/

“Over the past ten years, arrests for just about every crime have declined. Arrests for all violent crimes have dropped by 8.9% and property crime arrests declined 12.5%. Many other miscellaneous crime arrests have seen double-digit percentage declines, like fraud (-30.8%), prostitution (-22%), and offenses against family and children (-16.9%). Meanwhile, in that ten years, the only crimes for which arrests have gone up are robbery (+5.9%), drug law violations (+17.6%), and embezzlement (+26.5%).”


Hope is welcome, no matter what the color.

Speed South I followed your link to NORML, very sad indeed are the arrest statistics!
I also found this interesting, I'm not able to watch but someone else might.


SHOW TIMES
Premieres Thursday, January 22nd 9p | 1a ET

link to NORML Blog