Jeez, looking at the comments here, you'd think a lot of those who voted "No" have difficulty distinguishing legality from morality. Need we list every law throughout history that violated what we now hold to be basic human rights?
If we've deemed cannabis use to be legal and irrelevant to a person's moral standing now (and we have, save for a few stubborn stragglers), it was irrelevant to a person's moral standing then as well. Unless the laws of the universe have shifted, the person arrested and convicted for possession in 1982 didn't do anything that the legal consumer in 2018 will do.
Something being illegal doesn't make it immoral, and vice versa. If you hold the "appeal to authority" that close to your heart, you might be the kind of person who admired their high school principal.
Kevin - 6 years ago
!
Murray - 6 years ago
A person's character is defined by three actions. If one behaves contrary to social standards and requirements then there character is defined by such. Making something legal does not remove that poor judgment or behavior. There character is defined and has been measured. The measure of character is moot erased by changing a law
Bob - 6 years ago
We can't be granting pardons for past convictions. If we do that for one person where will it end? Andy wants a pardon. Jim wants to be reimbursed the $1,500 fine that he got for possession. George wants to be compensated for the 30 days that he did back in the 80s when he was convicted for possession. And Uncle Willie, he spent time in jail but he's died now but maybe his spouse is eligible for compensation still?
The lawyers would be getting rich that's for sure.
Thelma - 6 years ago
Paedon or amnesty for possession and trafficking only following an assessment as to the level of criminality of the individual and the seriousness of the circumstances. For example, no amnesty for gangsters ,importers, or criminal organizations. Pardon for small possession only!
Brent - 6 years ago
I don't understand your comment "cash grab mentality". What does cash grab have to do with carrying a criminal record? The true cash grab is the legalization process. If anyone believes the Feds are legalizing it to keep pot out of kids hands is kidding themselves. This is all about creating revenue for the gov't.
John - 6 years ago
How could anyone vote no . Unless violene was involved every pot related charge or conviction should be expunged
The burden a criminal record for a breaking law that was never in the best intrest of Canadians . Stop the cash grab mentality and remove it from existance .
JC
Jeez, looking at the comments here, you'd think a lot of those who voted "No" have difficulty distinguishing legality from morality. Need we list every law throughout history that violated what we now hold to be basic human rights?
If we've deemed cannabis use to be legal and irrelevant to a person's moral standing now (and we have, save for a few stubborn stragglers), it was irrelevant to a person's moral standing then as well. Unless the laws of the universe have shifted, the person arrested and convicted for possession in 1982 didn't do anything that the legal consumer in 2018 will do.
Something being illegal doesn't make it immoral, and vice versa. If you hold the "appeal to authority" that close to your heart, you might be the kind of person who admired their high school principal.
!
A person's character is defined by three actions. If one behaves contrary to social standards and requirements then there character is defined by such. Making something legal does not remove that poor judgment or behavior. There character is defined and has been measured. The measure of character is moot erased by changing a law
We can't be granting pardons for past convictions. If we do that for one person where will it end? Andy wants a pardon. Jim wants to be reimbursed the $1,500 fine that he got for possession. George wants to be compensated for the 30 days that he did back in the 80s when he was convicted for possession. And Uncle Willie, he spent time in jail but he's died now but maybe his spouse is eligible for compensation still?
The lawyers would be getting rich that's for sure.
Paedon or amnesty for possession and trafficking only following an assessment as to the level of criminality of the individual and the seriousness of the circumstances. For example, no amnesty for gangsters ,importers, or criminal organizations. Pardon for small possession only!
I don't understand your comment "cash grab mentality". What does cash grab have to do with carrying a criminal record? The true cash grab is the legalization process. If anyone believes the Feds are legalizing it to keep pot out of kids hands is kidding themselves. This is all about creating revenue for the gov't.
How could anyone vote no . Unless violene was involved every pot related charge or conviction should be expunged
The burden a criminal record for a breaking law that was never in the best intrest of Canadians . Stop the cash grab mentality and remove it from existance .
JC