More from (fake) Conservatives on why ending drug prohibition makes sense

So it turns out that a little cutting and pasting is fun. Here is another article in which I have substituted drug prohibition for the long-gun registry to make a point.

No, Minister Toews does not to my knowledge oppose drug prohibition; these are not his real views. And MP Rae to my knowledge also does not oppose drug prohibition though he should.

Toews defends bill to kill drug prohibition

The federal drug prohibition does not help keep drugs out of the hands of Canadians, says Public Safety Minister Vic Toews, and so should be abolished in favour of a stronger drug-licensing system.

Toews said Sunday there are more effective ways of spending taxpayers’ money than to “harass consumers and sellers for drugs.”

“The prohibition does nothing to deal with the issue of who is entitled to possess drugs, and that’s the licensing issue and we are strong supporters of a strong licensing system,” Toews told CTV’s Question Period.

“Even the police officers who are opposed to the drug prohibition (and) support the licensing provisions. The police officers I’ve talked to say there’s nothing that the drug prohibition adds that the licensing system doesn’t already provide.”

Toews’s comments come days after RCMP Deputy Commissioner Bill Sweeney told the Commons public safety committee that drug prohibition helps both police officers and the public. “I believe that there’s compelling evidence that prohibition promotes officer and public safety,” Sweeney said Thursday. “That’s a personal opinion.”

The Conservatives, however, have long argued that the prohibition, brought in in the 1930s, has been a waste of money and infringes on the rights of law-abiding drug consumers. A private member’s bill to kill the prohibition, sponsored by Conservative MP Canwe Enditnow, has passed second reading and is now being studied by a Commons committee.

“We do need to make sure we have strong processes in place to make sure that the wrong people don’t get their hands on drugs,” Enditnow told Question Period. “But the prohibition does nothing to address that.”

In the meantime, the Tories announced this week a one-year extension to an amnesty for drug owners who have not yet registered their drugs.

Liberal MP Bob Rae said during his time as Ontario premier, police chiefs in both cities and rural communities praised the prohibition as a useful tool to track down where drugs are in their communities.

Rae said it’s not a question of whether people should be allowed to own drugs, but whether they should be registered.

“We register dogs, cats, bicycles, cars, we register all kinds of things,” Rae told Question Period. “It’s a little odd that we wouldn’t register drugs.”

Read the original unedited story.



  1. adel on

    The federal drug prohibition does not help keep drugs out of the hands of Canadians.

  2. nenaviovicente on

    Too many marijuana activists don’t understand that they are not alone in the world…

  3. Paul Geddes on

    Excellent article!! We all have different “hobbies” in life, but certain killjoys keep sticking their noses into other people’s lives. Because these concerned citizens don’t understand other people’s hobbies, they panic and run to government to get some laws passed! This is why our sex lives are regulated, why our choice in food gets limited, even why we have to wear stupid helmets when we want to ride a bicycle.

    Liberty is indivisible. Too many marijuana activists don’t understand that they are not alone in the world. Instead of dividing the public into groups of different interests, shouldn’t we allow liberty for all?

    Let the peaceful gun lovers enjoy their guns. The same philosophical outlooks would allow the money lovers to enjoy their profits and the marijuana users their pot.

    To each their own!

  4. Anonymous on

    guns and drugs are completely different things duh

  5. Anonymous on

    It seems to be that you miss the point of the piece he wrote. He doesn’t deviate from the facts, he just shows how simple it would be for politicians to change their rhetoric to the cannabis revolution. I agree we should stick to facts, but we should not be above using examples to illustrate our position, such as this piece and as such believe Cannabis Culture is doing something completely right.

  6. Anonymous on

    Problem is that Conservatives by the very definition of the word, appose any changes and want to keep things the way they currently are, regardless of whether or not it’s a good policy. Thus why they will fight for gun rights but against drug users rights. It doesn’t have anything to do with which is better, but more to do with maintaining a familiar status quo simply for there own comfort.

    In less words, the conservative party is founded on ignorant old men who wish for the old days back. Since drug prohibition has been around for 70 years, most current conservatives were born after prohibition\refer madness. It’s like arguing evolution with a creationist, no matter how much evidence you show them they just childishly act like your opinion is meaningless, because you disagree with there long held belief.

    PC = Ignorant old men
    Liberals = Cowards who suck up to PC’s

  7. Lev on

    I agree with the above comment; though I might have been more tolerant of it, if it simply made the changed text in bold or italic.

  8. Anonymous on

    This actually pisses me off… was this made by an anti-cannabis lobbyist?
    I apologise in advance to Mr. Kirk Tousaw, but I truly believe this kind of this doesn’t help.

    Seriously, we have enough truth to use in our fight. Creating bullshit for ANY reason is liable
    to destroy the credibility of the responsible intelligent people fighting to end prohibition.

    I realize it’s a joke, but seriously, how long until it’s taken out of context and
    used as an example of propaganda? I’m a bit dissapointed Cannabis Culture would publish an article that is fake, whether it is a joke or not.

    We need to stick to FACTS! There is plenty of clear supporting evidence to support ending prohibition… making anything up to prove a viewpoint only harms credibility in the end.