Wednesday, February 9, 2011

Stephen Harper screwed BC



Stephen Harper didn't just drop the ball, he intentionally screwed BC because he thought it would advance his own personal agenda. We want anti gang legislation. We want mandatory sentences for violent crime and trafficking hard drugs. We don't want mandatory minimum sentences for the possession of pot.

It's not a matter of him just not listening. It's a matter of him using our plight to promote himself instead of doing what's in the country's best interest. He wants the public to get angry at the Liberals for voting down anti drug legislation so he can get more seats in the next election and "govern."

Stephen Harper has peaked. His character or lack thereof has been revealed. Iggy is a dangerous idiot. Let's hope Justin Trudeau can do the right thing and submit legislation that will create mandatory minimum sentences for trafficking cocaine or meth not for the possession of pot.

It's not about pot. It's about being fiscally responsible and doing something positive that is within our power to do. The jails are over burdened already. Creating mandatory minimum sentences for trafficking hard drugs will cost more money for more prisons. Mandatory minimum sentences for the possession of pot is not within our fiscal reach and is totally counter productive.

Giving productive members of society a criminal record for the possession of pot makes about as much sense as giving them a criminal record for driving after two drinks. Yeah. Dum dum dum dum dum dum...

2 comments:

  1. I don't think the problem lies within Harper himself, as much as it does in the minority government.

    Harper wants to make changes... but he can't get anything passed. Don't blame Harper, blame the other a-holes who are out to make him look like an idiot at the expense of our country,

    ReplyDelete
  2. Harper wants to make changes but he is more interested in advancing his own political position than he is in doing what’s best for the people. I do blame Harper because he is refusing to take an amendment on the motion. I wouldn’t even vote for the bill without an amendment to it.

    ReplyDelete