MARIJUANA PROHIIBITION: CORRECTING THE MYTHS

　

MARIJUANA PROHIBITION: CORRECTING MYTHS          

I read a “Stop The Violence BC” article about marijuana prohibition. There have been numerous statements by every sort of authority and many writers of opinion pieces which claim that the gang violence we are witnessing in British Columbia is a fight over marijuana. Examine this premise logically. Marijuana is produced in BC and the gang related activity must be activity which results in the sale of large amounts of marijuana far from British Columbia. I am sure there is local distribution of marijuana but with production facilities located in every British Columbia town, where would the conflict occur over the large amounts of money gangs fight over. Where the marijuana is sold, if there was a surplus of marijuana, which I understand is not the situation outside of British Columbia, if there was a surplus, gangs might fight to maintain an exclusive market. This conflict if it does occur would occur far from production facilities.

There will be individuals who would steal from other persons, and this could be the source of some violence in British Columbia. Correct me if I am wrong but I don’t recall gang violence being linked with theft from means of production of marijuana. This is not to say that that doesn’t happen, its just that I’ve never heard of innocent victims being gunned down at the scene of a fight over theft at a marijuana production facility.

What do criminal gangs fight and kill for? Criminal gangs fight and kill for the control of incredibly more lucrative per pound and per transaction hard drug sales. The gangs are fighting over control of Heroin, Cocaine and Meth sales. Any of the gang related murderers appear to have been mostly in the Cocaine trade. Correct me if I am wrong.

There is another very important aspect of the prohibition of marijuana use. The prohibition of alcohol, the most widely known prohibition was not nearly as all inclusive or wide ranging as the anti pot laws. The brewing of beer for ones own use could be accomplished by buying a beer starter culture at the grocery store, adding water, letting the wort ferment and then enjoying ones own beer at home without fear of violent attack. Furthermore the production of wine was legal and one could consume ones own wine at home without fear of violent attack. Note: There were political enclaves, towns, counties and even states which had additional restrictions placed on alcohol production and consumption.

There were social clubs where under a variety of different exemptions members could gather and enjoy beer, wine and even hard liquor. Any club which had saved itself a supply of spirits could continue to serve them indefinitely and some private clubs had hard liquor enough to last the length of prohibition.

The laws against marijuana use prohibit any of the aforementioned personal or group enjoyment of marijuana even though the consumption of alcohol is more dangerous and debilitating. The marijuana laws reflect the new preoccupation by Prosecutors and Police with zero tolerance. While zero tolerance may seem reasonable, what it is is a systematic punishment without discretion for personal acts that harm no one. Zero tolerance is a brutal tool wielded by psychopaths given licence to commit acts of violence degradation and destruction by charlatans.

IN THE RESPONSE TO THE "HAVE TO INVESTIGATE" ARGUMENT

IN RESPONSE TO THE “HAVE TO INVESTIGATE” ARGUMENT

　

The “have to investigate” doctrine is a misinterpretation of Canadian Law which has the effect that while you are at your home or business, at leisure or at work anywhere you can be interrupted by the arrival of Regional District Authorities or Police and have to account for yourself or even be “found in contravention” and hauled off to a frozen cold windowless concrete cell, at any time. The proponents “have to investigate” could be sent to your home or other location by a phone call from an anonymous source. You or I could be selected for special attention for any number of reasons which are beyond control.

I have to address the arguments which are advanced that would enable the unlawful interventions against myself while I am on my own property which I find destroy my peace of mind, my enjoyment of my property and my ability to do work .

A test of what is reasonable and just is what would a reasonable man knowingly agree to willingly. The administration of justice is not to be an unknown factor . I am constantly subjected to unwanted and undeserved and unexpected interventions into my affairs where the property involved is unequivocatively mine . It is unlawful to enter onto another person’s property with the intent to do damage . To merely enter onto private property is not unlawful ; when you are told not to enter or your intent is to do damage or even to merely discomfit the resident or owner, then the entry is unlawful and is trespass or even a violation of the Criminal Code of Canada , an offence under the Protection of Private Property Act .

I find that the trespasses and destruction of natural habitat which have occurred at my twelve acre property at Otter Point BC are or were damaging and distressing . The reaction of the Capital Regional District was to always ignore calls to come to my property and view and document violations of various regulation or trespass which have damaged or are damaging my property and which are visible, not complained about, as gone now but had happened or would happen . The Federal , Provincial and Regional District officials and enforcement officers will ignore what is right in front of their eyes and call police and create documents and profiles based on alleged fears of future retaliation against persons who have created destruction or damage or are retaliating against me by fabricating complaints .

The continual triggering of Police and Regional District Authorities against me in response to my complaints about trespass and property damage has gone on for decades . The CRD have not ever protected my property , they state that this is their policy. They will not only refuse service to me but they will assiduously try to punish, provoke and criminalize me . They treat every noise complaint about any tenant or animal on my property or every allegation about what I must be doing as a justification to invade all of my properties in Victoria and out here at Otter Point as well . They attack me with bogus charges and of late collect fines by manipulating the situation so that no rebuttal of the allegations can be accomplished . Don Brown and Miles Drew and any of their staff or superiors I have met or contacted think that they do not need a warrant to enter onto my property , they think they can enter onto my land to “ have to investigate”. The CRD typically bring an entourage of police with them to accost me on my property and never ever even once have they arrived while anything was happening , it was always regarding some other time that a complaint is phoned in and they flood onto my property up the 160’ driveway and, in writing, they say that if there are any doors or windows open , they are coming in . What reasonable man would knowingly buy property to be subjected to such abuse ?   

The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that it is not lawful to step one foot onto private property without a warrant, I have viewed the video taped proceedings on C.P.A.C. in addition, I have viewed the Supreme Court of Canada Justices' ruling that in is a stalking, criminal harassment offence to be visually examining ones neighbours property with the intent of informing authorities.

If you are truly being disturbed in a serious manner or you are actually in danger or your property is being damaged by the actions of persons on adjacent property's, you can call the Police or Regional Authority's to your home or place of business to observe the damage or annoyance which is afflicting you on your property.Don't think you can send them to another persons property. Just don't do it.

　

　

　

DIFFICULTIES WITH FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUESTS

The situation arises where one is certain that there must be or have been prejudicial information about ones self in Police Files. The only way to know what happened is to obtain the Police records. Over the years I have tried a number of times to find out what was said to Police so that I could rectify the record. I would say that there was only one occasion when heavily blanked out pages reveled any information. I have received in response to a number of requests and a number of communications a standard complaint form  which posed to me a series of questions. The questions are on a standard complaint form. I have posted my answers and my explanation and my request for all of the information regarding myself .

I consider the situation where my name comes up and prejudicial information is obtained. I am sure that the Police or almost anyone else I think, get the information without third party approval, supplying records of their previous requests and specifics as to what persons were involved or how could anyone get their permission. I am sure that all that's required is my name to get the information about me.

Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada

Place de Ville, Tower B

3^rd Floor

Ottawa Ontario KIA 1H3

　

Lindon Collard

4129 Otter Point Road

Otter Point B.C.

Canada V9Z OK2

August 29 2011

File Number # GA-3952-3-04094/11

REQUEST DENIED: Answers to Privacy Act Complaint Form

NEWS FLASH: Just recieved docuements and CD. November 1st 2011.


Q-4 Reply: My complaint is that information has been accumulated regarding myself which is not disclosed to me when I request the information. The actions and words of Police and other persons indicate that there is prejudicial information held regarding myself.

In some cases persons are complaining about my complaints; a complaint about unlawful behaviour cannot be an unlawful complaint. Constantly monitoring, and creating records and pursuing a person onto his own property, unless there is a Public Safety emergency or theft or a Judicial Warrant has been issued is an unlawful action, stalking or criminal harassment are offences which relate to the aforementioned information, it is not clever, it is overtly criminal or negligent to ignore the facts and accuse a person who is dealing with stalking and criminal harassment of criminal harassment because of the measures which are being taken to deal with the situation.

Q-5 Reply: I have made every effort, writing to the RCMP , as soon as the scheme was threatened ,in Ottawa ,on the advice of my Lawyer Charles Phippen QC; I was literally challenged that false accusations would be made to Police and other Authorities if I would not sign over all of my assets to my ex-wife Betty Collard. She declared her hatred of myself, her father and “all men”. She told me that she had been to see all of the neighbours who had come on to my property and done property damage and that she would spread false stories about me and encourage other persons to make complaints about me to Police and Regional Authority. Since that time in the early 1990’s I have regularly and correctly made application under the freedom of information act and by contacting every Law Officer it could be to deal with the situation I was afflicted by. The response’s were not of any useful nature and I would characterize the actions of Police Officers who were given the responsibility of dealing with my requests as uncooperative and even intimidating. The RCMP Policy of turning over all complainants about misuse of calls to Police misuse of the records kept by Police or complaints against Police to the same detachment were the prejudicial actions were taken is entirely counter productive. Regardless of whom I contacted I have never received any meaningful cooperation and I think that persons who will not do their duty complain about the methods which must be used to obtain information when there is not a willing attitude of cooperation.

There are a large number of documents, too many to simply send off on the hope that you will finally do something about the misinformation and false record keeping. Bear in mind that if information is given to Police which is untrue, the person and the information cannot be protected or the Royal Canadian Mounted Police are aiding a criminal and participating in a criminal offence. To reiterate, anything which is not true is false, and cannot be lawfully withheld .

Q6-Reply: (see recent attachments) Yes, I have repeatedly notified RCMP and other Government Agencies or Officials of my concerns. Are you aware of the fact that many complaint processes could be conducted by telephone?

Q7-Reply: You are asking for the names of persons who have not responded or have not responded properly to requests or complaints. If I thought that there was a disciplinary process I might be very interested in supplying the aforementioned names. At this point I will say that you have records which can be accessed, I get the impression that you which to force work onto myself. I suggest that you are being paid to work and I am not.

Q8-Reply: My concerns are that I have been falsely characterized and that in order to accomplish this many false and exaggerated complaints and statements by others are cached in your files. I which to know each and every, and every single bit of the information which you are holding in connection with myself, my activities, my property and regarding fraudulent predictions which were made about what my behaviour would be. I have reached the age of sixty-five years and I have not harmed anyone, is this not long enough that you would realize that the predictions of violence which were used to involve Police are false . The Police are not empowered to enforce obsequiousness or politeness. The Police are suppose to be protecting persons against violence. Many persons who interfere or trespass on private property are told to leave. Any fabrications which are developed in response to being humiliatingly routed are not bona fide complaints. Worse still I have contacted RCMP at the detachment level and that contact has made me aware that persons who complain about being ordered off of private property make totally unrelated, totally false complaints to Police to get even. This includes citizens, By Law Officers and Police. For that reason all of the files must be provided.

Q8-Reply: I expect to receive all information regarding myself in any way.

Q9-Reply: I expect to receive all information regarding myself in any way.

To Conclude: I have records, documents and a daily diary focused directly on the issue which is before us. I created a Supreme Court Writ regarding the creation of false characterization and prevarication and in February 2000, at an interlocutory hearing the precedent was admitted that collusion could be written in a statement of claim in the form of an accusation of conspiracy. At this point Harold Turnham of Turnham, Woodland, Waddell, Raponni had Sheriffs surround me in the Supreme Court and thus brought an end to my attempts to litigate against and have prosecuted persons who had created a false record. I then continued without success and I believe that there should be a Police investigation of not only this instance but of a pattern of behaviour which is unlawful by members of the British Columbia Law Society. Every effort was made to launch a BC Law Society investigation without success. Fraudulent denial and ignoring the law cannot be permitted.

Lindon Collard

LIE ABOUT NOTHING

The success of the lie about nothing is horrific.

Baseless totally counterfactual statements are made and no amount of rebuttal and proof that the baseless is untrue are simply rejected without cause and the totally false baseless statement is droned on and on as if its own mantra was enough to over come all reason.

Most of the fear laden counterproductive baseless and false statements are false prophecy, hogwash, a statement designed to appeal to hate for and rejection of others.

Unfortunately lists of lies about nothing fill the records of Police and Government agencies.

CAPRICIOUS JUSTICE: CAPRICIOUS JUSTICE: CAPRICIOUS JUSTICE: MILITARY D...

CAPRICIOUS JUSTICE: CAPRICIOUS JUSTICE: CAPRICIOUS JUSTICE: MILITARY D...: "CAPRICIOUS JUSTICE: CAPRICIOUS JUSTICE: MILITARY DICTATORSHIP"

CAPRICIOUS JUSTICE: MILITARY DICTATORSHIP

CAPRICIOUS JUSTICE: MILITARY DICTATORSHIP