home

B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border

The latest rage in the drug war is occurring over B.C. bud and the Canadian Border. Thursday, four RMCP were killed during a raid on a grow operation. U.S. agents say it's a $7 billion a year business. They put part of the blame on Canada and its less strict drug laws. They warn that the violence associated with the potent form of pot is headed south.

Now law enforcement officials here fear the violence will migrate south. Mr. Winchell likened Seattle, with its currently low crime rate, to "Miami before the drug wars" because of what he said was an impending threat of drug-related violence. Vast amounts of drugs and money are now flowing through Seattle and other West Coast cities, he said, along the heavily traveled Interstate 5 corridor from California to the Canadian border. In many cases, law enforcement officials from both countries say, traffickers are smuggling cocaine north from California to Canada in exchange for B.C. bud.

Canadian agents deny their country in lax on large scale growers --they say Canada and the U.S. just have different philosophies when it comes to crime:

"Canada just has a different philosophical view to the use of jail than the United States," Mr. Prior said. "The only offense we are completely agreed on is murder. Otherwise, it's very different."

The killer of the 4 Royal Mounted Canadian Police yesterday has been identified as "a violent police-hater with a short fuse and an arsenal of weapons."

James Roszko, 46, was notorious in the town and was feared by waitresses, high school students and community officials for his aggressive behaviour. RCMP regional Supt. Marty Cheliak had few answers for a grieving community wondering how a police search for stolen property at Roszko’s farm could dissolve into a bloody massacre....He would not say who actually ordered the Mounties to approach a quonset hut on the farm that housed a marijuana grow operation.

....Cheliak said events started to unfold Wednesday when two officers went to Roszko’s farm to seize property under a civil court order. Once there, they found a marijuana grow operation and proceeded to get a search warrant. The RCMP guarded the scene to secure it while they waited for auto theft detectives from Edmonton to arrive Thursday. Two officers began the stakeout before dawn Thursday. They were joined by two more officers around 9 a.m.

About 15 minutes later, the auto theft officers arrived. When they stepped out of their car, they heard shots inside the quonset hut. Roszko then ran out of the hut and fired shots from a carbine assault-style rifle.

This was a one-lunatic rampage by a man involved in stolen property who also grew marijuana -- it was not an organized killing by a gang of B.C. bud growers. That hasn't stopped some in Canadian law enforcment from calling for tougher action on pot growers. But, some legislators think this just strengthens the argument for legalization:

I find it a shame that on the heels of this tragedy we have people calling for tougher sentences," St-Maurice said. "It is, sadly, a lack of respect, I think, towards those fallen officers to boil it all down to marijuana. By doing that, we're not serving their interests. We're missing the boat altogether."

One columnist in the National Post points out the "drug war" can't be won:

The number of people who died yesterday trying to fight the marijuana trade exceeds -- by four -- the total number of people known to medical science to have died from a marijuana overdose, ever. Compare this to alcohol, an addictive substance that kills a million people every year around the world, but which is advertised on television; or tobacco, which kills four times as many as booze, and which is sold at gas stations and pharmacies.

....Compared to the United States, we are half-hearted participants in the war on drugs. Unlike the Americans, we do not compromise the war for hearts and minds in Afghanistan by spraying poison on Afghan crops. We do not send nuns to their death in a bid to clear South America's skies of drug runners. We do not send armies of black men to jail for the crime of selling white men what they want to buy. To our great credit, we wage the war on drugs half-heartedly, armed with the secret knowledge that it is a fraud -- that drugs are a health problem to be treated in clinics, not a crime problem to be treated by SWAT teams.

< Choice Point on the Hot Seat | Report: More Seeking Treatment for Marijuana Use >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Mar 05, 2005 at 05:18:14 AM EST
    I have numerous friends in Vancouver and they no longer hike in certain places as it is too dangerous. Apparently there has been a lot of "scaring off" (i.e. - beating the crap out of) of hikers when they get too close to dope on public land. -C

    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#2)
    by TomK on Sat Mar 05, 2005 at 05:56:04 AM EST
    Cliff, thats another problem that would be solved if it were legalized. You know that.

    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Mar 05, 2005 at 05:57:54 AM EST
    Cliff - maybe you and your friends just make people want to beat them up, have you ever considered that? Anyway, I'm sorry you're frightened of the big bad Canadians, I hope you get over it. Your fears drive your politics to such an extent, maybe if we just gave you a backbone you'd stop being such a ninny. Thanks for the anecdote about the mean streets of Canada.

    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#4)
    by Dadler on Sat Mar 05, 2005 at 10:21:18 AM EST
    what an idiot. crime will only migrate anywhere when crime is attached to a substance that has no business being criminalized. she prohibition in the early 20th century. this is insane. and the people in charge are halfwits and imaginative vacuums of the highest order. idiots.

    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#5)
    by Sailor on Sat Mar 05, 2005 at 10:52:48 AM EST
    folks - like usual the first reports were inaccurate: "The chain of events that ended in the deaths of four RCMP officers on an Alberta farm began with efforts to repossess a pickup truck. " Most of the officers were from Auto Theft.

    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#6)
    by karen on Sat Mar 05, 2005 at 10:58:51 AM EST
    We have got to decriminalize pot. This is crazy. I often take a few hits and then wonder why anyone thinks I should be in jail for it. Crazy.

    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Mar 05, 2005 at 11:45:18 AM EST
    I live in Vancouver. Cliff is, as usual, full of the least artificial of manures. The killer was described by family and acquaintances as a "walking time bomb." He evidently had serious and very well known mental problems from his youth onwards. How do we find and neutralize these people before they do something like this, without trashing everyone else's civil liberties? That would be a discussion worth having. At least he killed himself afterwards and thus spared us all a far-right howl about restoring the death penalty to deter police killers.

    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#8)
    by pigwiggle on Sat Mar 05, 2005 at 12:21:25 PM EST
    Buy quality, buy American.

    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#9)
    by scarshapedstar on Sat Mar 05, 2005 at 12:39:05 PM EST
    Hmm. You know, it might be that the violence isn't caused by potent pot - in fact, it's generally accepted that more potent pot makes you less violent. Maybe the violence has something to do with that whole DRUG WAR thing. I know, it's a crazy idea, associating violence with war in this day and age...

    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#10)
    by Patrick on Sat Mar 05, 2005 at 04:04:35 PM EST
    Scar, Or perhaps greed is a motivation for violence, but hey, there I go blaming the person again and not the system....

    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Mar 05, 2005 at 05:18:46 PM EST
    Decriminalizing pot would be a dangerous example to set. Didn't you hear how treatment admissions for marijuana have skyrocketed by 169 percent since 92? Good idea, lets make drugs MORE available. So SMART!

    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Mar 05, 2005 at 07:01:17 PM EST
    Gee, my four friends who live in Vancouver are two married gay men, one straight married man, and one straight single woman. But I guess they're all full of crap and know nothing. And I guess pot growers in CA are so much less violent than the ones in CA, FL, TX, etc. Golly, silly ol' me. -C

    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Mar 05, 2005 at 08:00:10 PM EST
    Gabe, the same kind of sneering was engaged in by those who ranted and raved...against making alcohol legal again. Yet when was the last time you were held up at gunpoint by an wino wanting his fix of Ripple? The damage done to society in the form of graft, corruption, drive by shootings, etc. by alcohol Prohibition was far in excess to that done by the use of the drug alcohol itself; Al Capone didn't get rich peddling matchsticks and pencils, and neither did today's narcotrafficantes. Those who profess to oppose regulation and control of presently illegal drugs invariably wind up supporting the very murderers they claim to scorn. Bad laws create black markets and the violence inherent with them, but the prohibitionist always feigns blindness to this and refuses to see that fact. Especially when their paycheck is involved.

    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#14)
    by pigwiggle on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 07:14:12 AM EST
    Patrick, Gabe- As much as you approve of the current legal status of marijuana, or drugs in general, yours is a loosing battle. If you trust the ONDCP, and I generally don’t, the price of illicit drugs has dropped, quality has improved, and use has generally increased. Why would this surprise anyone? Like any market; good product increases demand, large demand increases competition, and competition increases quality and lowers cost. Take, for example, marijuana; the ONDCP reports “U.S. marijuana users spent approximately $10.5 billion on marijuana in 2000, compared to $15 billion in 1990. Although more marijuana was consumed in 2000, the price decreased from 1990 to 2000, resulting in a decrease in the total amount spent on the drug.” High demand and competition for business; the consumer wins with lower cost. Further, According to the federal Potency Monitoring Project at the University of Mississippi, in 1985, the average THC content of commercial-grade marijuana was 2.84%, and the average for high-grade sinsemilla was 7.17%. In 2001, commercial-grade marijuana averaged 4.72% THC, and the potency of sinsemilla in 2001 averaged 9.03%. [taken from TrueHigh.com] And, if you believe the ONDCP “Average THC levels rose from less than 1 percent in the mid-1970s to more than 6 percent in 2002. Sinsemilla potency increased in the past two decades from 6 percent to more than 13 percent, with some samples containing THC levels of up to 33 percent.” Anyway, be as anti-capitalist as you care; It is simple, you cannot fight free enterprise.

    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#16)
    by pigwiggle on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 08:56:39 AM EST
    “Next, pig will tell us to legalize heroin, crack, and prostitution. His Utopia is one controlled exclusively by the all-mighty dollar with little regard for health and safety.” I would; you know me so well. My utopia is one controlled by personal choice and freedom. Folks would be free to do whatever they choose so much as it does not directly impinge on the freedom of others to do the same. I have great regard for health and safety, however it ranks just behind my regard for people’s liberty to endanger, exclusively, their own health and safety. Before you run off at the keyboard, mistaken about what I have just said, reread and pay close attention to how exclusive and own qualify the previous sentence. And if you disagree then we are perfectly clear that you are advocating restricting the freedom, under the penalty of violence and imprisonment, of consenting adults for reasons you consider in their interest, reasons they may consider arbitrary. I can imagine only a few greater evils. Also, I’ll remind you that the power of the dollar is one you control, one that lies exclusively in your wallet. The purpose of mentioning the anti-capital bent of prohibition? Simply pointing out that you folks are tilting at windmills. It’s silly and cartoonish; like the thousands of bugs dying on a windshield collectively attempting to slow my progress on the freeway. Good luck with that.

    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#18)
    by pigwiggle on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 09:32:16 AM EST
    “I enjoy a good Ayn Rand book as much as the next Libertarian,” Huh? And Paul Wolfowitz is a Green; laughable.

    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 09:50:31 AM EST
    Average THC levels rose from less than 1 percent in the mid-1970s to more than 6 percent in 2002. Sinsemilla potency increased in the past two decades from 6 percent to more than 13 percent, with some samples containing THC levels of up to 33 percent. So, average THC levels have increased from 1% in the mid 70's to as much as 33% now?? Thats a 3300% increase! What more potent marijuana? Next, pig will tell us to legalize heroin, crack, and prostitution. His Utopia is one controlled exclusively by the all-mighty dollar with little regard for health and safety.

    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 09:51:15 AM EST
    Pig - or shall I call you, John Galt? I enjoy a good Ayn Rand book as much as the next Libertarian, but I fear you are building your freeway through downtown Hopelessness and Despair. Perhaps if you could skirt those locations you might find more popular support.

    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#19)
    by Patrick on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 10:18:53 AM EST
    Pig, I suggest a paradigm shift. You are looking at this issue as a win/loose scenario. I see it completely different. I cannot loose, I don't choose to use drugs, nor do I drink, and as of a year ago I am tobacco free. I will keep my job whether or not marijuana or any other drug for that matter is legalized or not. If drugs are legalized, everyone will loose. You ever heard of the law of unintended consequences? How may government agencies are going to be created out of such a movement. How are taxes, medical insurance, disability insurance, workers comp, Doctor availablity...ect going to be effected when we become a society of addicts? You need more than a the myopic view of "Me, myself and I" when examining this issue. So far more people agree with me, than with you. Until that changes, I will gladly continue to support the government it this endeavor.

    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 01:04:17 PM EST
    Heh.. 'Addicts' This from a guy who can't tell 'lose' from 'loose'. Legalize, standardize and tax the hell out of it like they do alcohol and tobacco. Hmm.. Drop a few bilion in law enforcement and incarceration costs and make a few billion in additional taxation. Sounds like a 'win-win' deal to me. Heck, thanks to the already-in-place marijuana stamps laws, they already have a pre-existing method of taxing.

    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#21)
    by Sailor on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 03:04:11 PM EST
    " You ever heard of the law of unintended consequences? How may government agencies are going to be created out of such a movement. " Thanks for making our point for us. This is EXACTLY what has happened in the WOD. Prisons overflowing w/ non-violent drug users, huge federal and state bureaucracies, cops & whole departments corrupted by the huge amount of money given out as an incentive to bust relatively harmless or even completely innnocent people (tulia anyone?). Cancer and other chronic pair sufferers denied the safest and most effective medicine. Let's try logic and science instead of puritanism and control.

    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#22)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 03:36:04 PM EST
    Let's try logic and science... Ok. Logic: Legalizing drugs will make them more readily available. Science: Drugs are addictive. The number of drug addicts will increase as a result of legalization making drugs more easily accessible. These addicts will likely be less productive (economically and socially) and require more resources (healthcare, counseling) - probably at taxpayer expense. Someone stands to profit (wellfare state) from drug legalization and it sure isn't Joe Crackhead who'll piss his life down the drain as a result.

    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#24)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Mar 06, 2005 at 08:48:24 PM EST
    Well, I'm going to throw my two cents in on this one. It seems that the main concern of law enforcement is to go after the "big guy". Not the kid buying sacks down the street, not the middle man that sells it to him, but they want the main supplier. With that in mind, why don't they try to arrest and imprison God? He, our creator, is the one that made such a lovely plant after all. :)

    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#25)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 09, 2005 at 10:05:25 AM EST
    Posted by: The Horse with no Name 04:36 PM
    Let's try logic and science...
    Ok. Logic: Legalizing drugs will make them more readily available.
    I've been smoking recreationally since 1975. How much more readily availabe can they be made when I can leave my office and be back in half an hour with as much MJ as I desire??
    Science: Drugs are addictive. The number of drug addicts will increase as a result of legalization making drugs more easily accessible.
    Some drugs are addictive to some people, just like alcohol, tobacco, percocet and morphine. Drugs couldn't be more easily accessible, so your theory folds. In addition, many non-partisan studies have indicated that the addiction/consumption rate would go up approx. 5%, if at all.
    These addicts will likely be less productive (economically and socially) and require more resources (healthcare, counseling) - probably at taxpayer expense.
    I put myself through night school at Harvard, am an active volunteer in my community and am well enough employed to contribute a sizeable share to taxes collected in the good ole US of A. I'm also very healthy. However, I am a "criminal" because of stupid, ridiculous drug laws.
    Someone stands to profit (wellfare state) from drug legalization and it sure isn't Joe Crackhead who'll piss his life down the drain as a result.
    Who made you the arbiter of Joe Crackhead's life? And, BTW, I learned years ago that the people profiting from the WOD are the ones who keep drugs illegal (paid off officials, corporate prisons, politicians who have a strawman to pull out of their hat). Legalize drugs. Tax them. Provide help for those who need it. God Bless America

    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#26)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 09, 2005 at 10:07:55 AM EST
    By the way, pot hasn't gotten more potent. Perhaps there is less "ragweed" out there but the average $40 bag (used to be "dime" bags) lasts just as long and gets you just as high as 20 years ago. I think that bit of PR is designed to scare hippie parents into thinking what their kids are doing is more dangerous than what they did.

    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 09, 2005 at 02:58:46 PM EST
    I used to smoke quite a bit of pot from the mid- 60s through the late 70s. Then I stopped with only an occasional joint until about a year ago when I began using pot to cope with stress and help with the creeping onset of late middle age arthritis. It has worked very well for helping both the stress & arthritis & I enjoy it. It is no more potent than it was in the 60s but a lot more expensive. Although it can be habit forming it is not addictive. If you don't have it you miss it but you certainly don't crave it or need it. The WOD is a tragic joke when it comes to pot. Pot is the most harmless drug I can think of including asprin.

    Re: B.C. Bud and the Canadian Border (none / 0) (#28)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Mar 16, 2005 at 10:16:19 AM EST
    i love smoken bud it helps me think and it helps me keep a hard on when i f u c k and i can go 4 hours well thats why i think smokin bud is good for you and me!!!!!!