|
Holy Smoke Four right to oppose prohibition |
|
Written by Herb Couch, Express Newspaper
|
|
Wednesday, 15 October 2008 |
Letter to Ed
Dear Editor,
Judge Donald Sperry was wrong to quickly dismiss the "Holy Smoke Four's" necessity defence.
Judge Sperry said the undercover police officers who bought the marijuana were neither underage, sick or concerned with quality.
First, it is true that the undercover police officers were not underage. If they were underage, they would not have obtained marijuana. The Holy Smoke Four stated that they only sold marijuana to people over the age of 19. That was a responsible business practise.
Second, the Holy Smoke Four sold to many sick people.
I'm sure that medical users consider their medicine a necessity. Holy Smoke should not have to watch sick people suffer or possibly die in order to prove their defence of necessity for selling marijuana.
Third, regarding quality, I assume they were not buying for personal use. So, it didn't matter to them if the marijuana was safe or organic.
I applaud the Holy Smoke Four for opposing marijuana prohibitiion.
It is dangerous to hand over a $7 billion per year B.C. inustry to organized crime.
Prohibition only creates rich, greedy gangs with their violence and drug turf wars.
It is indeed a "necessity" to end marijuana prohibition and create a safe, legal and regulated market.
|
|
Last Updated ( Saturday, 25 October 2008 )
|
