Police want pot crusader barred from stations

edmontoncanada.com ^ | 8.12.03 | Derrick Penner

[freepatriot32]

Shaughn Butts, The Journal / Followers look on as Marc Emery smokes up Sunday.

EDMONTON - Wearing a conservative blue suit, B.C. marijuana activist Marc Emery lit up a water pipe in front of Edmonton police headquarters Sunday afternoon and was promptly arrested.

The leader of the B.C. Marijuana Party contends poss ession laws no longer exist because of recent Ontario court decisions.

Before lighting up, Emery said the fact that people can be political and take action makes Canada "the greatest place on Earth."

Two Edmonton police constables stepped into the crowd and led Emery inside, to a chorus

of boos and jeers from about three dozen supporters who decried the arrest as unconstitutional.

Federal Crown prosecutors have told Edmonton police that laws prohibiting marijuana possession are still in effect, said Insp. Dick Shantz. Officers charged Emery with a single count of pot possession.

Police also tried to stop Emery's campaign by asking that a Canadawide ban preventing him from going to police stations unless he has a legitimate complaint be made one condition of his release.

"We're getting tired of dealing with him," Shantz said. "He's tying up our manpower with his illegal crusade and we're not going to put up with it."

Others were also smoking marijuana but Shantz said no one else was arrested because police did not have the manpower.

Emery, publisher of the magazine Cannabis Culture, was arrested in Calgary on Saturday.

He was earlier arrested in Winnipeg, Regina, Moncton, N.B., and St. John's, Nfld. He was not arrested at stops this summer in Toronto and Charolettetown, P.E.I.

dpenner@thejournal.canwest.com

[StriperSniper]

So now you know more about drug use than Ozzie

I do, I know smoking a couple doobs is O.K., what Ozzie did is not O.K.!

[randog]

Also, there is research that contradicts the assertion that marijuana is harmful to you. Neither side has won the debate yet.

True, although I think that as pot becomes more accepted, more research will be forthcoming and we're going to find that sucking hot gas derived from a burning weed (tobacco, marijuana, whatever) into your lungs is not healthful.

[presidio9]

Because they prove your hypocritical stance that alcohol can remain legal, even with harmful side effects, yet marijuana can't become legal.

I voiced no opinion whatsoever about alcohol. The drugs have distorted your ability to seperate fantasy from reality.

[Quick1]

I'd like to know more about eating it, though. I haven't had the joy of trying them, but I've heard pot brownies can be pretty good.

I'm sure that inhaling smoke isn't exactly healthy for you. But for someone like myself, who smokes up maybe once a month at most, how harmful is that?

[presidio9]

what Ozzie did is not O.K.!

So drugs are potentially bad for you then?

[GSWarrior]

what time is it????

It's 4:20, silly!

[Quick1]

Ok, then I'll take this moment to ask you what your stance is on alcohol. I simply assumed that you were like the other 99% of Americans who would like alcohol to remain legal.

I guess that's what I get for assuming.

[StriperSniper]

So drugs are potentially bad for you then?

Absolutely, so is an all ice cream diet.

[Quick1]

Yes, all drugs can be potentially bad for you. Moderation in all things. Taking 100 Aspirin probably isn't very good for you, either (unless you have one hell of a hangover).

[randog]

...for someone like myself, who smokes up maybe once a month at most, how harmful is that?

Dunno, hence the need for more research. Let's hope, for your sake, that the "second-hand smoke" cabal doesn't get ahold of the research grant......;^)

[presidio9]

Ok, then I'll take this moment to ask you what your stance is on alcohol. I simply assumed that you were like the other 99% of Americans who would like alcohol to remain legal.

For the purposes of this thread, I have no opinion on the legality of alcohol. I will, however, point out that alcohol use fell by 50% during Prohibition.

[Quick1]

...And crime rose incredibly.

mmm, organised crime... *droool*

/Homer Simpson

[presidio9]

...And crime rose incredibly.

Only in some urban areas. Prohibition ended not due to outrage over organized crime, but because a majority of voters wanted to drink and were fed up with the law. This is not the case with marijuana.

[Quick1]

This is not the case with marijuana.

I wouldn't be so sure. There are lots of people who like to smoke, and even more people who feel that the law is infringing on our right to do so. It's not exactly an overwhelming majority, but more and more people are becoming anti-War on Some Drugs.

[presidio9]

Sure, and more and more people are pro-war on drugs too. Contrary to your naive brush-offs, I have a lot of first hand drug addicts. All of them started with pot. Many can not stand alcohol.

[Quick1]

I bet all of them breathed oxygen and drank water before trying harder drugs, too.

I'll repeat my example from above: I know plenty of pot smokers who have never tried or needed to try anything harder.

Is pot the reason for their switching to harder drugs, or is it just because they had addictive personalities and were screwed up in the first place? My guess is the latter.

I'll repeat my example from above: I know plenty of pot smokers who have never tried or needed to try anything harder.

[Quick1]

Oops. Omit the last sentence.

[presidio9]

I'll repeat my example from above: I know plenty of pot smokers who have never tried or needed to try anything harder.

Exceptions do not make the rule. Pot is not a good thing.

[Quick1]

Exceptions do not make the rule.

Does that apply to the addicts you know then, as well?

[Yeti]

Exceptions do not make the rule.

Well, if you take the number of people who do smoke and have smoked pot, and compare that number to the number of people who are addicted to hard drugs, it would seem that the pot-smokers who become hard-drug addicts are the exception, not the rule.