The Safe Streets and Communities Act - Effective Nov 6th 2012

• Establish mandatory minimum penalties for serious drug offences when they are carried out for organised crime purposes, or if they involve targeting youth.
  
  The proposed legislation supports the National Anti-Drug Strategy's efforts to combat illicit drug production and distribution and help disrupt criminal enterprises by targeting drug suppliers. For the purpose of this initiative, serious drug offences comprise:
  • production;
  • trafficking;
  • possession for the purpose of trafficking;
  • importing and exporting; and
  • possession for the purpose of exporting.
• Amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act to establish mandatory minimum penalties for the aforementioned offences for drugs listed in Schedule I, such as heroin, cocaine and methamphetamine, and in Schedule II, such as marijuana. Generally, the mandatory minimum penalty would apply where there is an aggravating factor, including where the production of the drug constituted a potential security, health or safety hazard. Also, the maximum sentence for production of marijuana would be increased from 7 to 14 years.
  
  The aggravating factors involve offences committed:
  • for the benefit of organized crime;
  • involving use or threat of violence;
  • involving use or threat of use of weapons;
  • by someone who has been previously convicted (in the past 10 years) of a serious drug offence;
  • in a prison;
  • by abusing a position of authority or access to restricted areas;
  • in or near a school, in or near an area normally frequented by youth or in the presence of youth;
  • through involving a youth in the commission of the offence; and
  • in relation to a youth (e.g. selling to a youth).
  
  
  The security, health and safety aggravating factors are:
  • the accused used real property that belongs to a third party to commit the offence;
  • the production constituted a potential security, health or safety hazard to children who were in the location where the offence was committed or in the immediate area;
  • the production constituted a potential public safety hazard in a residential area; and
  • the accused placed or set a trap.
• Amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act to move GHB and flunitrazepam, (the so-called date-rape drugs), and amphetamine drugs from Schedule III to Schedule I, which would result in higher maximum penalties for illegal activities involving these drugs.

• See "Annex A" for the proposed new mandatory minimum penalties for serious drug offences schedule I drugs (cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, etc.)
• See "Annex B" for the proposed new mandatory minimum penalties for serious drug offences Schedule II drugs (cannabis and marijuana)

• for the benefit of organized crime;
• involving use or threat of violence;
• involved use or threat of use of weapons;
• by someone who was previously convicted of a designated drug offence or had served a term of imprisonment for a designated substance offence in the previous 10 years; and,
• through the abuse of authority or position or by abusing access to restricted area to commit the offence of importation/exportation and possession to export.

• in a prison;
• in or near a school, in or near an area normally frequented by youth or in the presence of youth;
• in concert with a youth; and
• in relation to a youth (e.g. selling to a youth).

• the accused used real property that belongs to a third party to commit the offence;
• the production constituted a potential security, health or safety hazard to children who were in the location where the offence was committed or in the immediate area;
• the production constituted a potential public safety hazard in a residential area; and
• the accused placed or set a trap.

smokinrav said:

Good for you. Hope you weren't a big fan of hash or other forms of extract. Enjoy your criminilized "decriminalization"

Click to expand...

RollupRick said:

The law is contextual. And the big factor mentioned there makes sense - organised crime.

If you're growing for your own use, say even a dozen plants (which you can explain as required number for ensuring you don't run out, or have different attributes/benefits etc), then its up to the prosecution surely to prove that your intentions were actually linked to organised crime.

One guy could grow plants purely for profit, and will little regard for anything else.

The next guy could grow the same number of plants, purely for personal use/benefits.

Any fair court will find distinction between the two, despite them both being guilty of the exact same thing on paperwork, context would mean one guy deserves a harsher punishment than the other. The day a court doesn't consider context, is the day you're living in a police state.

In Canada you're lucky at least to have the ability to grow 'some' plants, the majority of the rest of the world doesn't even allow that.

Keep in mind industrial large scale criminal grows are a world apart from the geezer growing some planties in his small private grow room at home. In my own opinion, those types of people fuck it up for those of us who grow our own. We end up getting branded as made of the same shit.

Click to expand...

smotts said:

it just mentions plants... what if i jus got 5 plants growing, but got 2 tons curing in the basement?

oil and resin = hash?

Click to expand...