30 Mar 2013

When Bad Weed Moves In Next Door

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

Tin foil on the windows, children’s toys that never seem to move from their spot in the front yard and neighbours who don’t seem to live in the home they own.

These are just some of the signs of a marijuana grow operation residents should look out for in their neighbourhood, police repeatedly warn.

According to a 2007 Royal Canadian Mounted Police report on drug offences, 60% of offences related to marijuana production occurred in a residence.

And an Ipsos Reid study in 2012 – prompted by the Ontario Real Estate Association – said almost a quarter of Ontario residents have “seen or know of homes in their neighbourhood that have been used as a marijuana grow operation.”

No one wants to live in a mouldy ex-drug lab.  A past history of drug production can lower a property’s value for years by 15-20%, and make home insurance a pain to maintain.

That’s why Markham realtor Cathy Innamorato did not buy a grow-op home, despite the fact that it had been remediated, leaving little concern for mould.

A conversation with her insurance company left her walking away from the home, she said, because she ran the risk of increasing premiums in the future.

“And you have no recourse,” Innamorato said.  “So because of that I decided against purchasing this property.”

Despite remediation – the process of eradicating mould and other damage done to a building following it’s use for illicit drugs – a grow house never truly shakes its drug-related stigma, she added.  Remediation reports often don’t guarantee the home’s condition 100% and insurance companies are reluctant to accept them.

“How is the buyer protected?” Innamorato said.

A central grow-op registry would have all grow-op houses listed, making it easier for realtors to be open and for buyers to be confident of their purchase.

The Ontario Real Estate Association repeated its call for the registry in early March, supporting Nepean-Carleton MPP Lisa MacLeod’s recently tabled Clandestine Drug Operation Prevention Act.

“I think that there’s an appetite to protect our community and also crack down on this illicit activity,” MacLeod said.

The theft of hydro is a major related concern, as house grow-ops steal energy by rewiring, often risking electrical safety.

MacLeod said law-abiding customers wind up footing the bill for dollars lost to hydro theft.

“It’s quite significant, its a cost to our communities,” she said.

One man has made stigmatized properties his personal mission.

Barry Lebow, a GTA realtor and an expert in real estate stigma, said grow-ops can become long-lasting problems for homeowners and landlords when they try and sell their property in the future.

“Do you realize how many houses are stigmatized in this province?” Lebow said.  “Because the law is that there’s no such thing as a statute of limitations on stigma in Ontario.  It has to be reported forever.”

While he makes it clear he dislikes stigmatizing properties for housing as few as three or four marijuana plants – therefore causing no damage done to the home – he agrees a central registry disclosing grow-op homes ruined by organized criminal behaviour can help realtors and buyers.

“Where there’s been a professional criminal organization, that’s where I draw the line,” Lebow said.  “We have to quantify what they did to the house.”

There should be a difference between a home where a person has grown pot for recreational uses without touching the structure, and a home that has to be gutted after a massive grow operation, Lebow said.  Because the two aren’t the same.

“Therefore you have a problem on your hands because you’re stigmatizing people for something that really shouldn’t be stigmatized,” he said.

Lebow said he knows the impact of grow-ops on property owners.  He’s heard many stories of landlords who have returned to find tenants have ruined their investment homes by running grow-ops.  They take a huge loss of up to 20% in property value.

“Most of the houses that I’ve come across …  have been hardcore blue-collar people who have bought a house, put all their money in, and find out that they’ve got a 20% loss in value across the board,” Lebow said.  “Nobody can afford it but these people ( can afford the loss ) even less.”

Source: Sudbury Star (CN ON)
Contact: http://www.thesudburystar.com/letters
Copyright: 2013 Osprey Media
Website: http://www.thesudburystar.com
Author: Maryam Shah

5 Feb 2013

Marijuana Activists Want Vote On Pot

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

Larsen has dedicated his life’s work to cannabis law reform.

On Jan.  23, Dana Larsen spent his afternoon in UVic’s Student Union Building speaking about pot to an audience that no doubt consisted of a few more empty chairs than he would have liked to see.  This has become a typical day for Larsen in his capacity as the face of Sensible B.C., a campaign to reform B.C.’s cannabis laws through a provincial referendum.  Larsen, 41, has travelled across B.C., speaking at events both large and small as he promotes his campaign.

Larsen has dedicated his life’s work to cannabis law reform.  He was politically active as a student at SFU and, upon graduation, worked with Marc Emery, a prominent marijuana activist, at the magazine Cannabis Culture.  He was involved with the Marijuana Party until he joined the NDP in 2003.  In 2010, he ran for the leadership of the provincial NDP and received 2.7 per cent of the vote.

Sensible B.C.  aims to implement something called the sensible policing act.  This act would effectively decriminalize possession of cannabis in B.C.  by redirecting police personnel and resources away from targeting cannabis possession.  Activities like cultivation, trafficking and driving under the influence would remain subject to current policing and penalties.  Minors in possession of cannabis would be treated as though they were in possession of alcohol.

The second part of the proposed act calls for the full legalization of marijuana in B.C.  while recognizing that to do so would require some level of support from the federal government as the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act falls within federal jurisdiction.

For B.C.  to legalize marijuana, the federal government would need to either legalize cannabis or create an exception for B.C.  According to Larsen, this could be done through Section 56 of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, which allows for a person or “class of persons” to be designated exempt.

Both decriminalization and legalization would prevent people from facing criminal charges for cannabis possession.  Legalization would involve the government in the regulation and taxation of the substance, while decriminalization would not.

The sensible policing act would mandate that the provincial government establish a commission that would hold hearings to study how B.C.  should implement a taxed and regulated system if allowed to do so by the federal government.

Larsen voices few concerns about whether or not his initiative would pass if B.C.  residents vote on the proposal.  A 2012 poll by the research firm Forum found that 76 per cent of British Columbians favour either legalization and taxation of marijuana ( 52 per cent ) or decriminalization of small amounts ( 24 per cent ).  Eleven per cent of British Columbians are content with the status quo, while 12 per cent support increasing penalties.

What Larsen sees as the real obstacle to implementing the sensible policing act is collecting the required number of signatures to compel the government to hold a referendum.  Though eight initiative applications have been approved by Elections B.C.  since 1995, only the initiative to repeal the HST has made it through the entire process.

For an initiative to go to referendum, it must be checked by Elections B.C.  to ensure that it is clearly written and falls within provincial jurisdiction.  Advocates must then collect signatures from 10 per cent of registered voters in every provincial electoral district within a 90-day period.  Sensible B.C.  is planning to collect signatures between September and November of 2013 in the hopes of prompting a referendum in 2014.  To gain an advantage, Sensible B.C.  is asking supporters to register online so that they can be easily contacted once the campaign begins to collect signatures.

There has been debate about whether or not B.C.  has the capacity to decriminalize cannabis without the federal government’s support.  In a recent exchange with Cannabis Culture’s Jeremiah Vandermeer, B.C.’s Minister of Justice and Attorney General Shirley Bond responded, “Police are constitutionally required to enforce the rule of law.  Until and unless Canadian law is changed, the production, sale and use of marijuana is currently illegal ( controlled federal legislation ), and our police have a responsibility to enforce criminal laws for the good of all British Columbians.”

However, by approving the sensible policing act as an initiative, Elections B.C.  indicated that they felt it fell within provincial jurisdiction.  In response to a question from a member of the audience about the controversy, Larsen said, “Stephen Harper could sue British Columbia, go to court and fight us.  I say, bring it on.”

In order for any initiative to collect the required number of signatures, the proponents need a sizeable volunteer base.  Sam Vekemans, the local volunteer co-ordinator for Sensible B.C., asked that anyone interested in volunteering like the Facebook page Sensible BC – Victoria to stay updated.

Source: Martlet (CN BC Edu)
Copyright: 2013 Martlet Publishing Society
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.martlet.ca/

26 Nov 2012

Seed store goes to pot downtown

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

Windsor’s new downtown business sports marijuana leaves on its sign, an oversized poster of a marijuana plant inside and a mural-sized price list for its only product – marijuana seeds.

On Thursday, customers walked in, inquired about various strains and were invited to peruse a catalogue. If the store doesn’t have something a customer is looking for, Danielle Capin, a 25-year-old Hamilton, Ont., woman who’s running the store with her brother Joel, said she can get it within a week.

In short, Seeds for Less on Maiden Lane is selling the seeds to grow an illegal drug as openly and casually as Home Depot sells geraniums. How can they do that?

To Capin, the question is amusing. In the Greater Toronto Area, where her brother owns another location of the store, there are so many other places selling marijuana seeds that nobody bats an eyelash.

“Out there it’s saturated. Everybody’s already doing that,” she said. “Out here it’s some-thing new.”

Capin said the business is not only perfectly legal, it’s not even promoting illegal activity – i.e., growing marijuana for recreational use or sale on the street. She sells the seeds to people with medical marijuana licences or as novelty items, she said.

“In Canada, if you have a licence, you can grow marijuana,” she said. “We’re not trying to promote illegal things.”

But Windsor police Sgt. Matt D’Asti said the Capins had better take another look at the Controlled Substances Act.

People with licences to grow medical marijuana are supposed to get their seeds from Health Canada, he said.

It’s illegal for anyone else to sell seeds capable of sprouting, whether it’s a compassion shop – a store that sells marijuana and seeds for medicinal use – or a drug dealer.

D’Asti said police are consulting with Health Canada and researching the issue. If police decide to pursue the matter and test the seeds to determine whether they’re viable, Seeds for Less could be in trouble.

“Compassion shops have no right to be selling marijuana seeds or products to people with licences,” D’Asti said. “We will be definitely monitoring the store for any criminal activity and, if warranted, charges will be laid.”

As for what neighbouring business think of Seeds for Less, Downtown Windsor BIA president Larry Horwitz was diplomatic.

“They could make the downtown a little more interesting,” he said.

“They could attract a good crowd. But we don’t know enough about it to really say.”

Horwitz promotes attracting a more diverse mix of entertainment and retail downtown, but admits this wasn’t exactly what he had in mind.

“It’s certainly not the direction we’re going in.”

Source: Windsor Star (CN ON)
Copyright: 2012 The Windsor Star
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.canada.com/windsorstar/
Author: Claire Brownell

12 Nov 2012

Tough New Law Irks MLA, Pot Supporters

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

C-10.  Federal bill’s mandatory sentencing for serious drug crimes came into effect on Tuesday

If you grow six marijuana plants, prepare to spend six months in the slammer.

Canada’s drug prohibition laws got tougher as a component of Bill C-10 came into effect Tuesday, legislation B.C.  MLA and former police chief Kash Heed dubbed “ridiculous” when it comes to marijuana.

The bill imposes harsher penalties and mandatory jail time for drug offenders who participate in organized crime, sell drugs to or near youth, and produce drugs where they could be a safety hazard to youth or residents.  While the law doesn’t put mandatory penalties on simple possession, it includes jail time for production of six to 200 marijuana plants and increases maximum sentences to 14 years.

This will “fog up our court system” by putting people in jail for “such a ridiculous amount of marijuana,” Heed said in an interview.

After 30 years in law enforcement, Heed is “dumbfounded” the government isn’t taking a balanced approach that focuses on demand reduction as well as locking up gangsters.

“We will never arrest our way out of this particular problem,” Heed said.  “Marijuana prohibition has not worked in Canada for many years, and it will not work in Canada.”

The Conservative government does not support legalization or decriminalization, federal Ministry of Justice spokeswoman Julie Di Mambro said in a statement.  The bill targets criminals, she said.

“Criminal organizations that rely on the drug trade do not respect the current penalties – they simply see them as the cost of doing business,” Di Mambro said.

The new sentencing laws won’t necessarily change how Vancouver police enforce drug crimes, Const.  Brian Montague said.

But Dana Larsen of the Medical Cannabis Dispensary said his organization could receive mandatory minimums for trafficking more than three kilograms of cannabis.

“We rely on the tolerance of our community,” he said.  “If I was elsewhere outside Vancouver, I’d be a little more nervous.”

Source: Metro (Vancouver, CN BC)
Copyright: 2012 Metro Canada
Contact: [email protected]
Website: http://www.metronews.ca/vancouver
Author: Emily Jackson

6 Sep 2012

Pot-Smoking Driver Raises Issues

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

The recent acquittal of a Saskatchewan driver on impaired driving charges — even though she admitted using marijuana before hitting the road and bungled a number of coordination tests — is raising questions about the ability of law enforcement to go after drugged drivers.

Some advocates say that Canada’s drug-impaired driving laws introduced in 2008 are deficient and that federal lawmakers should move to adopt drug-intake thresholds similar to the 0.08 blood-alcohol limit.

The judge in the Saskatchewan driver’s case said police and prosecutors failed to convince him that her use of marijuana actually affected her ability to operate a vehicle.

Saskatoon police set up a roadside checkpoint on June 19, 2011. An officer approached a vehicle and smelled an overwhelming odour of marijuana.

The driver admitted to the officer that she had smoked marijuana about 2-1/2 hours earlier. The officer, who was a trained drug recognition evaluator, had the driver perform a number of coordination tests. During the walk-and-turn test, the driver missed a number of heel-toe steps and failed to turn, as instructed. During the finger-to-nose test, she was able to touch her nose only once during six attempts.

The officer also noticed eyelid tremors and reddening of the drivers’ eyes.

Following these and other tests, the officer concluded the driver had marijuana in her system, which was later confirmed by a urine analysis.

But in a court ruling Aug. 21, provincial court Judge Daryl Labach said the evidence presented in court only showed that the accused had used marijuana prior to being stopped and that some of it was still in her system when she was evaluated by police.

“What (the officer’s) evidence does not convince me of is that at the time she was driving, her ability to operate a motor vehicle was impaired by marijuana,” he said.

The judge said he was left with many questions: What signs of impairment would one expect to see in someone who has been using marijuana? How long after using marijuana would you expect to see these signs and how long would they last? Was the accused’s performance in some of the tests just as consistent with someone who has poor balance or poor coordination as it was with someone who had used marijuana?

The lack of answers, and the lack of evidence of erratic driving, raised reasonable doubt the driver was driving impaired, the judge said.

There have been similar acquittals in other jurisdictions. Labach referred to a 2010 case out of Ontario.

A man had hit a mailbox with his car and went off the road. Police observed that the driver had droopy eyes, slow and thick speech, and was unco-ordinated.

A police drug-recognition expert concluded that the driver was likely impaired by a central nervous system depressant, which was later confirmed by a urine analysis.

But Ontario Justice Stephen J. Fuerth acquitted the driver, saying evidence of the driver’s impairment was “far from compelling,” and that the Crown had failed to show beyond a reasonable doubt that the drug had caused the driver to be impaired at the time he was driving.

“The hurdle for the Crown in these cases is to relate back the findings of the evaluation, and the subsequent chemical analysis, to the time of the driving,” the judge said in his decision.

Representatives of Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) said Friday that data on drug-impaired driving convictions in Canada have been difficult to obtain. But they said there is now growing recognition that federal lawmakers need to remove some of the subjectivity contained in Canada’s drug-impaired driving laws by simply adopting “per se” limits for certain common illicit drugs, as there is for alcohol.

“This is the way to go,” said Robert Solomon, a law professor at Western University and MADD’s national director of legal policy. “We need clear, bright line indicators … that are capable of enforcement.”

One challenge, however, is getting experts to agree how much of a certain drug needs to be found in someone’s system to constitute impairment.

Solomon said that “there’s no reason for Canada to reinvent the wheel” as many jurisdictions in the United States, Western Europe and Australia have already adopted such standards.

Asked for comment Friday, a spokesman for Justice Minister Rob Nicholson said: “Our government takes impaired driving very seriously. This is why we increased the penalties for impaired driving while giving police new tools to better investigate drug-impaired driving.”

Source: Calgary Herald (CN AB)
Copyright: 2012 Canwest Publishing Inc.
Contact: http://www2.canada.com/calgaryherald/letters.html
Website: http://www.calgaryherald.com/
Author: Douglas Quan

14 Aug 2012

Activist Gets House Arrest After 37 Lbs Of Pot Found

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

The medical use of marijuana was on trial Friday at the Sudbury courthouse.

David Sylvestre was sentenced to 10 months under house arrest after pleading guilty to production of a controlled substance — cannabis and cannabis resin — he said he uses to treat severe diabetes.  Sylvestre, 54, was also charged with possession for the purpose of trafficking and possession of property obtained by crime in February 2009, after a search warrant executed at his St.  Charles home turned up almost $100,000 worth of illicit substances.  Those charges were withdrawn.

Police seized 37 pounds of marijuana, 12 pounds of cannabis oil or resin and $1,300 in cash at Sylvestre’s home.

Sylvestre appeared in the Superior Court of Justice before Justice Robbie Gordon, who heard submissions from Sylvestre’s lawyer, Denis Michel, and Crown prosecutor Denys Bradley prior to delivering his sentence.

Michel was seeking a conditional sentence of house arrest for his client and Bradley was seeking a jail sentence of nine to 12 months.

About 40 supporters of Sylvestre’s, in favour of the medical use of marijuana, packed into Courtroom J to lend support to the man who ran for the Green Party of Ontario against Sudbury Liberal MPP Rick Bartolucci in the 2007 election.

Michel said his client had never been in trouble with the law and was a practitioner of natural medicine who derived a product from marijuana he thought was a “miracle cure” for controlling diabetes.

Sylvestre has post-secondary education in chemical engineering and was growing marijuana and experimenting to see whether it could replace the conventional medications and insulin he was taking for diabetes.

Sylvestre worked for more than 25 years and raised a family, and when he was charged by police, he and his family were just “getting on with enjoying the Earth’s benefits,” said Michel.

Michel told the court while Sylvestre had a prescription from a physician for the use of marijuana and had applied to Health Canada for permission to use the substance, he hasn’t been licensed to do so.

Gordon questioned why Sylvestre would have grown such a large quantity of marijuana when he said he needed less than eight grams a day to control diabetes.

The judge pointed out police seized 36.9 pounds of marijuana buds, 12 pounds of cannabis resin and 38 plants from six to 18 inches tall.

“Does that seem to you to be an inordinate amount?” he asked Michel.

Michel agreed it did, but said Sylvestre needed that quantity to produce the substance that gave him relief from diabetes symptoms.

“I’m not saying it’s a cure for everyone,” said Michel of his client’s use of cannabis to control diabetes.

But his client didn’t want to become wheelchair-bound from complications from the disease.

Sylvestre later told Gordon, because he hadn’t grown marijuana before, he didn’t realize how much of the substance he was producing.

Michel said his client was not a danger to society.

“A conditional sentence is jail, it is custody.  There’s no denying it,” said Michel.

Some people think it’s a “glorified probation order,” he said, but it’s not.

Bradley spoke of the impact a grow operation this size could have on the wider community, suggesting people like Sylvestre are “the reason there are drugs in schools in our community.”

Sylvestre’s supporters booed and jeered at that remark before being admonished by Gordon they weren’t doing Sylvestre any favours.

Bradley urged the judge to send a message to citizens with his sentencing of Sylvestre that jail is the result of running “large, sophisticated” grow operations.

Sylvestre told Gordon he did not have “monetary profit” in mind when he grew the large quantity of marijuana.

At one point, Gordon cautioned Sylvestre he was venturing “a little far afield” when he spoke about nutrition and soils in relation to diabetes, urging him to stick to the matter at hand.  “I have an intent to do no harm in honesty and integrity,” Sylvestre told the judge.

“I am not a criminal, not at all, and so I stand here before you …  I could tell you lots more, but it would probably not be what you want to hear.”

Sylvestre said he watched a friend die of diabetes-related complications, and feared that was his fate if he continued with traditional medicine.

He even contemplated suicide, “that’s how bad my quality of life was,” said Sylvestre, who is now on a disability pension.

He said it was “unbelievable” he would be denied a way to improve his health, but he said he had no intentions of breaking the law.

“I want to prosper life, not just for me but for everybody,” he said.

Gordon asked Sylvestre what happens when that desire conflicts with the law.

Sylvestre said people should work to change those laws.  Several members of the gallery cheered.

Said Sylvestre: “I cannot just sit back and do nothing, but I will not break the law.”

An activist involved in Occupy Sudbury protests, the anti-poverty movement and community gardening, Sylvestre said he tells people to “respect the law” and “do no harm.

“I don’t know what else to say.”

Gordon said he believed Sylvestre did not sell the cannabis he grew, but Gordon said he “wasn’t naive enough to believe it wasn’t shared with others.”

Bradley had told the court he feared just that — that cannabis shared with others would end up in the wrong hands.

Gordon said he doubts Sylvestre will stop using cannabis, but said he did not think Sylvestre posed a threat to the community.

This is one of the rare instances where a conditional sentence is appropriate, said Gordon.

“This is no slap on the wrist,” and 10 months of house arrest reflects that.

Under the terms of his sentence, Sylvestre must remain at his home in the Flour Mill at all times except for medical appointments and Saturdays from 10 a.m..-4 p.m.

He cannot possess weapons for 10 years.

When asked if he could comply with those conditions, Sylvestre said yes.  “Good luck,” said Gordon before adjourning.

Supporters broke into loud applause, cheers and whistles, crowding around Sylvestre and hugging him as he spoke with reporters.

Sylvestre said he was never worried about going to jail, although his family was.

One of his supporters, a man about 30, began to weep when Sylvestre repeated his mantra of “no harm in honesty and integrity.”

Said the man: “That’s Dave.”

23 Jul 2012

Pot-smoking Moms Defend Their Habit

posted in: Cannabis News | 0

Which parent is worse: The one who smokes pot or the one who knocks back wine?

Some pot-smoking mothers are defending their habit and say they’re tired of being judged by other moms who religiously drink glasses of wine.  “Any hypocrisy is hard to swallow.  A drunk mother is pathetic and I often leave parties when I experience other mothers tying one on,” Margaret, a mother of two boys, told Today Moms.

And she’s not the only mom who feels this way.  One mother recently raised eyebrows when she acknowledged that she takes care of her daughter when she’s stoned.  And the Moms for Marijuana group has garnered close to 20,000 likes on Facebook.

Margaret, who didn’t want her last named used, told Today Moms that smoking marijuana helps her relax so she can get through her day without stressing.  “It can make folding a pile of laundry fun.  If I didn’t smoke, that’d be three piles later in the week.”

But she’s careful to keep her habit hidden.  Margaret keeps her stash locked away from her kids and doesn’t tell other moms for fear of ostracizing her children.

“Marijuana parents aren’t perfect, but they’re far less imperfect than parents who use alcohol irresponsibly,” says Diane Fornbacher, the co-vice chair of the Women’s Alliance at NORML, the non-profit lobbying group working to legalize marijuana.

She told Today Moms that parents shouldn’t be judged if they’re using a substance that makes them more productive and causes no harm.  “Cannabis can influence people to be nicer to one another.  You rarely find a story that says two stoners beat each other up outside of a bar.”

In Canada, it is legal to use marijuana for medical purposes.  But according to a recent poll, 66 per cent of Canadians believe possession of small amounts of the drug should be decriminalized.

But, of course, there are health concerns for parents who smoke pot around their kids, such as a higher likelihood that the child will use the drug or starting smoking it earlier.  And those who smoke marijuana before 16 have a higher rate of psychiatric disorders, according to Today Moms.

1 2 3