Canadian Government Considers Growing Marijuana Twice As Bad As Sexually Assaulting a Child????

I wont blame this on the Tories. It seems that for some time now sexually assaulting a child in Canada warrants a mere slap on the wrist. The new Tory punishment of 90 days in jail is actually harsher than it was at 45 days under the previous governments.

So as it stands with the new Tory crime bill... being caught growing more than 5 plants with the purpose of trafficing will get you a mandatory minimum one year sentence. Anyone who is caught committing a SERIOUS sexual offense against a child will face a mandatory 6 month sentence. Less serious offenses against children will only get you 3 months.

Is it just me or is there something completely out of balance here? I was under the impression that committing crimes against children was the ULTIMATE offense. Now it is growing marijuana.

I know that the grow-op community has been growing fast and something should be done to control it but who was it really hurting? Organized crime is heavily funded from grow operations, but that might account for 10-15% of all grow operations, the rest are the usual ma and pa set ups that help with the lack of old age security, and help fill in the gaps of unemployment while taking the weight off of welfare funding.


Crime Bill Updates

* Title: Protecting Children from Sexual Predators Act
* What’s new: The bill would amend the Criminal Code to create new offences and impose increased or new mandatory minimum penalties for certain sexual offences against children. It would also update the act with language surrounding the Internet.
* What’s in it: Anyone who commits a sexual offence against a child will face at least 90 days in jail, up from 14 days. Anyone who commits a more serious sexual offence against a child will face at least six months in jail, rather than the current 45 days. There are new mandatory minimums, too: Anyone who commits bestiality in the presence of someone less than 16 years old will face a new minimum penalty of imprisonment for at least one month, for example. The bill would also add two new offences: Making sexually explicit material available to a child for the purpose of committing an offence against that child, and arranging over the computer to commit a sexual offence against a child. The former carries a mandatory minimum sentence of at least 30 days imprisonment, and makes it clear that “grooming” young people online by sending them sexually explicit material is a crime.
* The buzz: Mark Hecht, a professor of law at the University of Sherbrooke and senior legal counsel for child advocacy group Beyond Borders, said the bill ensures that child sex offenders do not receive lax penalties. He also said, however, that it could lead to more criminals pleading to lesser offences that do not carry a mandatory minimum sentence.

* Taken from: Penalties for Organized Crime Act * What’s new: Mandatory minimum sentences for drug crimes. * What’s in it: Anyone caught growing as few as five marijuana plants for the purpose of trafficking would be jailed for at least six months, according to the latest version of the bill. Anyone caught growing more than 500 plants would be jailed at least two years. The bill would also impose a minimum one-year sentence on anyone caught trafficking marijuana, or if there was a threat of violence. That penalty would increase to two years if the trafficking took place in or near a school. The maximum penalty for marijuana production would be increased from seven to 14 years. * The buzz: Justice Minister Rob Nicholson told the justice committee that mandatory minimums would crack down on the growing “scourge” of drugs, and that there is “support for this bill from many ordinary Canadians who are quite concerned about drug abuse.” Errol Mendes, a law professor at the University of Ottawa, noted opposition parties argued the bill could “lead to lots of young people hauled before the courts and imprisoned, finishing off their careers.”

It's the same here in the states...getting caught growing can land you more time in jail than molesting little kids or even robbing somebody at gunpoint would...we certainly live in a backwards world sometimes

reply to post by here4awhile



It almost seems ironic that i hear more and more about the need to become more laxed on certain laws in the states; California especially, then here we are in Canada adding all the laws to our legislation that the US is finding out was causing more harm than good.

Makes my head spin thinking about it

reply to post by tom goose


Seems to address Steve's value system. Glad I voted against him.

Can't help but ponder on who it is that molests children - I think its similar to the old line
"the laws were made to protect the criminals"

Now - growing a plant - oh the danger--

C'mon.

I almost have to laugh at the added amendment about performing bestiality infront of a child. I really had no idea that was a problem here in Canada. I am a humbled man now, we are truly just as messed up as anywhere else on the planet

reply to post by tom goose


Sounds like a child molester haven. Here according to where you are since each state is different and depends on the charge you can be looking at 25 years to life. In Iowa it is mandatory to serve 70% of the time before you are eligible for parole.

Six months for intention to traffick plants and less than 3 months for serious sexual assault of a child? What sentence does procuring a child for the purpose of trafficking (or actual child trafficking) carry?

The problem is that compared to pharma lobbyists, child protection lobbyists lack financial clout. Child protectionists cannot make large 'donations' to electioneering funds.

As far as I can see, both, the safety of children and the medicinal value of mj, are anathema to the depopulationists.

Originally posted by teapot
Six months for intention to traffick plants and less than 3 months for serious sexual assault of a child? What sentence does procuring a child for the purpose of trafficking (or actual child trafficking) carry?

The problem is that compared to pharma lobbyists, child protection lobbyists lack financial clout. Child protectionists cannot make large 'donations' to electioneering funds.

As far as I can see, both, the safety of children and the medicinal value of mj, are anathema to the depopulationists.

I have my suspicions that a large part of the failure to increase sentencing against child offenses has its roots in the religious votes. I don't want to make this a debate about priests being down right perverted or not but im sure a severe increase in the punishment towards child offenders would result in some concern from one of the most publicized institutes and its members that are too often accused of these types of crimes. The religious right carry a big influence in the voting numbers. And they also are the one group that seem to carry out organized crime against children.

How do they measure it?
What if it is like 2.5 times worse?

I guess if i did not compare the lack of serious punishment of child abuse to the growing of marijuana then this thread will still be in a political forum.

Hey mods... I still have time to change the title, if i remove the reference to the penalties of growing marijuana, will you move this back to a political forum?

Originally posted by tom goose
So as it stands with the new Tory crime bill... being caught growing more than 5 plants with the purpose of trafficing will get you a mandatory minimum one year sentence. Anyone who is caught committing a SERIOUS sexual offense against a child will face a mandatory 6 month sentence. Less serious offenses against children will only get you 3 months.

Well it seems obvious that Canada considers keeping people from smoking marijuana much more important than keeping people from sexually abusing children.

This marijuana stuff must be twice as dangerous as child molesters, huh?


(sarcasm)

Originally posted by teapot
The problem is that compared to pharma lobbyists, child protection lobbyists lack financial clout. Child protectionists cannot make large 'donations' to electioneering funds.

Plus a lot of politicians are child molesters apparently. I'm sure plenty of them also smoke pot and worse, but cops let people off without charges as it is, let alone for a politician, because it's no secret that pot is not actually any more dangerous than a cigarette. It's actually less dangerous than a cigarette.

Originally posted by tom goose
I almost have to laugh at the added amendment about performing bestiality infront of a child.

I really had no idea that was a problem here in Canada. I am a humbled man now, we are truly just as messed up as anywhere else on the planet

You mean you didn't know that?? yep..we have some really whacked out sorts here, as far as the sexual perversity goes...and the punishment does not fit the crime. You'd be surprised as to how many are in government , and positions of respect as well.

Originally posted by here4awhile
It's the same here in the states...getting caught growing can land you more time in jail than molesting little kids or even robbing somebody at gunpoint would...we certainly live in a backwards world sometimes

I agree, we do live in a screwed up backwards world, just look at the casey anthony case.

That is completely messed up how is growing pot with intentions of trafficking the product more serious than a sex offense to a child.

It seems to me that the problem here is not that the pot law is too strict, but the child molester law is outrageously lax. If you rape a child you only get 90 days to 180 days in jail? What the hell? There must be a typo or something. That makes absolutely no sense at all. Actually yeah, that has to be it. A typo. I refuse to believe that child molesting will only get you 6 months anywhere.

Originally posted by here4awhile
It's the same here in the states...getting caught growing can land you more time in jail than molesting little kids or even robbing somebody at gunpoint would...we certainly live in a backwards world sometimes

That's because the Injustice System is all about protecting the wealth of the Criminals In Charge. Growing marijuana threatens the elite's revenue from drug trafficking, whilst abusing children actually furthers their aim of totally breaking up civilised society and reducing humans to the lowest level possible, and it costs them nothing.

I wouldn't thank you for a joint, it just wankers me and I have a 'whitey' but come on.....how can growing a naturally existing plant that has proven medicinal benefits and provides enjoyment for countless numbers of people without harming others be considered worse than abusing the trust children have in adults and damaging children for life just for self-gratification.
Abusing children is the most heinous crime there is in my book, smoking weed harms no-one.

That former is considered less serious than the latter speaks volumes about the law makers, how in touch with reality they are and just who and what their priorities are when drafting laws etc.

One has to seriously wonder who they are trying to protect.

I was always completely bewildered by this as well, but of course it makes sense.

Growing/cooking/selling any drug is a great business to be in - lots of money in that, that the government never sees. I always said if I had no morals or ethics, it's something I may consider. Cash only, and lots of it, and if you're really good, you've got repeat customers who are going to spread the word and next thing you know you're rolling in it.

So what would be a bigger threat in their eyes? Some random middle-aged man who has a perverse attraction to little kids, but otherwise contributes to society and pays his taxes making an honest living - or some random middle-aged man who is raking in well over $100,000 a year that the government doesn't see a penny of?

Backwards and mind-boggling, yeah, but that's the government for you.