Canada’s War on Pot Just Got Weirder

[SurplusElect]

And theft.

Address my acknowledgement of this point you wish to drive home.

What will the police be doing to prevent theft? Writing up reports after everyone has gone home?

Anyone who has been to a skihill knows that if you leave your gear out unsecured it is vulnerable - but there is also a broad sense of community and somewhat trust. Every once in awhile in awhile a bad apple gets up there and steals gear and since everyone is wearing ski gear and has relatively the same equipment it's fairly easy to pull off and impossible to stop until the person who comes back out from lunch finds their gear missing and unless they shut the whole hill down and start searching people it's a moot point and it's gone. Easier to check the pawn shops and classifieds. It's like I worked at a Chalet or something as a young man before...

I don't have a problem if the ski hill hired some rent-a-cops to stand by the equipment and patrol the chalet and lockers

The ski patrol - patrol the hills. They are very well trained and look out for saftey. That job is taken care of. They enforce the rules of the hill.

Aside from the "left wing cbc" trying to make it about pot angle - the article clearly states that the RCMP will be up there to give out possession charges "as well as" prevent theft. The theft prevention idea is clearly just window dressing because the police are going up an down the hill - not guarding the gear! They are riding the chairlift and cruising the hills to make drug busts and catch people smoking. People are not being mugged for their gear at the top of the chairlifts or having their gear stolen half way down the slope, lol.

Pursuing marijuana possession charges based on offensive smells (my neighbor smells bad - can I call the cops?) is a waste of tax dollars and the majority of the general public agrees.

It's not about theft.

[Fancy]

Police services are being utilized for more than one reason as has been pointed out.

Pursuing marijuana possession charges based on offensive smells

Offensive ILLEGAL smells - it is not legal to smoke pot in the gondolas and I have no sympathy for those that are whining their fun is being taken away.

[Jonrox]

For Surplus this thread isn't even about the ski hills - he's just using it as another way to express his feelings about marijuana use. He doesn't care whether the RCMP are volunteering or are paid, are on the ski hill or the street corner - he doesn't think pot possession should be prosecuted regardless of where it happens. That's all he cares about.

But maybe they catch someone doing something illegal and maybe they don't. Either way, their presence on the hill may be enough to deter someone from riding high or drunk, stealing a board, damaging property, breaking into a condo, or committing any other crime. They don't have to be arresting someone to have an impact.

It's a great program and I hope to see it expanded nationwide to all hills. Kudos to the RCMP officers who are offering their time to make our hills a safer place for everyone!

[steven lloyd]

Kudos to the RCMP officers who are offering their time to make our hills a safer place for everyone!

No doubt - the last thing we want to see on the ski hill is a bunch of violent potheads and a run on the snack shack.

[Jonrox]

Not sure why you think this is only about pot.

[steven lloyd]

Not sure why you think this is only about pot.

As Bago already pointed out ...

The theft prevention idea is clearly just window dressing because the police are going up an down the hill - not guarding the gear! They are riding the chairlift and cruising the hills to make drug busts and catch people smoking. People are not being mugged for their gear at the top of the chairlifts or having their gear stolen half way down the slope, lol. Pursuing marijuana possession charges based on offensive smells (my neighbor smells bad - can I call the cops?) is a waste of tax dollars and the majority of the general public agrees. It's not about theft.

It certainly seems like this is an agenda to “go bust some potheads”. If we’re talking about some other type of crime that is rampant at the ski resorts I highly doubt it is occurring on the actual skill hill (purse snatching maybe?) and any credible problems occurring on the slope – such as reckless skiing, skiing out of bounds, etc. is already being address by the ski patrol. If these members were volunteering to patrol the parking lots, pubs, etc., that would be a more credible claim.

I don’t know. To be honest I don’t even ski (or smoke marijuana). Are you aware of some out of control crime problem occurring on the actual ski slopes? (aside from a few crazed potheads smoking that scary whacky tabacci I mean)

[Captain Awesome]

Not sure why you think this is only about pot.

While I don't know what kind of crimes occur on the hill, I highly doubt it's a crime-free environment. Police presence is a deterrent, on the other hand. We expect to see police anywhere we go just in case there is a need - and ski hill is a no exception.

[Jonrox]

While I don't know what kind of crimes occur on the hill, I highly doubt it's a crime-free environment. Police presence is a deterrent, on the other hand. We expect to see police anywhere we go just in case there is a need - and ski hill is a no exception.

Exactly. And as taxpayers we're getting this service essentially for free from volunteer RCMP officers, which is why I fail to understand the huge objections to it on this forum.

[Captain Awesome]

Exactly. And as taxpayers we're getting this service essentially for free from volunteer RCMP officers, which is why I fail to understand the huge objections to it on this forum.

For some people can't see the big picture past their doobie.

[Poindexter]

Actually it's my common sense I cant see by. Do we really need to arm the slopes against stoned teens. And even if they do find it via smell, how exactly do you pull over a chair lift? Do you really believe they'll still have it by the time they get to the top, or the bottom for that matter if chased.

What must the prosecutor prove to convict you?
In court, the prosecutor, also called the crown counsel (Crown), must prove – beyond a reasonable doubt – that you:

* had control of the marijuana – for example, the police found it on you or in an area you controlled, such as a car, suitcase, or bedroom, and
* knew the marijuana was there.
The only thing people will be charged for is injuring an officer trying to chase them through the trees.

It's a PR campaign, telling families our slopes are safe, nothing more and should be taken as such. Not one charge will likely come out of this, just another futile attempt to wage a war that can't be won but putting on a brave face for the media.

[Fancy]

Seizures would be just fine.

[Corneliousrooster]

Seizures would be just fine.

And just what would that accomplish? If the cops smelled it that means its already been smoked. Are they going to do a body search on the mountain on their "day off"? Do you have any idea how much pot is smoked in public areas where there is currently a police presence? what makes you think that a couple cops on a MOUNTAINSIDE will have any effect? Especially if it is just the threat of confiscation and inconvenience......

You know those hot pursuits that police sometimes engage in in traffic that endanger innocent bystanders? (the ones that are frowned upon and discouraged as of late)
How long do you think it will be before some gung ho RCMP tries to out race some teenage pot smoker and inadvertantly collides with and injures someone or him/herself?

I look forward to the headline

[Fancy]

And just what would that accomplish?

Less smoke and stoned people on the slopes (there already have been seizures).

[SurplusElect]

Less stoned people...

I assume you can provide some data that shows a range of injuries and deaths from winter sports marijuana impairment?

I mean, I am afraid of being mugged by a circus clown at the top of ski hills...but I doubt that I could suggest it is a actual threat without actual facts.

[Fancy]

Less stoned people...

lol - when drugs are taken away wouldn't that mean less are used?