Drug War

You Call That a Mandatory Minimum?


Canada, which has long taken a less repressive approach to marijuana than its neighbor to the south, is showing that it can be mindlessly draconian too. "Under the Tories' omnibus crime legislation tabled Tuesday," notes Province columnist Ethan Baron, "a person growing 201 pot plants in a rental unit would receive a longer mandatory sentence than someone who rapes a toddler or forces a five-year-old to have sex with an animal." But Canada still has a long way to go before it equals the absurdly harsh drug sentences we enjoy here in the U.S. The new mandatory minimum penalties include six months for growing six to 200 marijuana plants and one year for more than 200; the maximum penalty for cultivation of any amount is 14 years. Under U.S. law, by contrast, growing fewer than 50 plants can get you up to five years, while 50-99 plants can get you 10; 100 plants will get you a five-year mandatory minimum (10 times the Canadian penalty) with a maximum of 40 years, and 1,000 or more will get you a 10-year mandatory minimum with a maximum of life. Canadians are such pussies. 

[Thanks to Richard Cowan for the tip.]

NEXT: Reason.tv: CATO's David Boaz on What America Can (and Shouldn't) Learn From the French Revolution

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Canada is bigger and on top. If this was prison, the US would be our bitch

    1. America would definitely be a power bottom.

      1. A power bottom is a bottom that is capable of receiving an enormous amount of power.

        1. I prefer soft bottom butches, myself.

    2. I’m not so sure that your riding the US cowgirl makes it your bitch, but whatever.

      1. But it does mean that the US is into fat chicks.

  2. Oh, Canada.

  3. Nice to see that our northern brothers are idiots too. Keep it up, Canucks, soon you will have two million people in prison too.

  4. Ricky needs to get his life together. He needs to start growing dope again.

    1. somebody has to take care of all these raakins

      1. A dope trailer is no place for a kitty.

    2. I haven’t decided if it is a good or bad thing that TPB now is the major factor in my mental image of Canadians. Probably good.

  5. rapes a toddler or forces a five-year-old to have sex with an animal

    You stay classy, The Province. That paper makes the Daily Mail look like serious, non-sensationalist journalism. Blech.

    And, this is not a defense of mandatory minimums, but British Columbians are right sick of grow-ops popping up in rental properties and bringing all the Hell’s Angels, sketchiness, scary guard dogs, etc. to their neighborhoods. Some unwitting landlords don’t even know it’s going on right away. Obviously all prohibition-related problems, just giving a little background.

    1. It wasn’t forced. I like ponies.

    2. But, as an aside, thanks for not having pictures and alt-text with this entry.

  6. “forces a five-year-old to have sex with an animal”

    Is there a word for this? And more importantly, why the need for a law against it?

    1. Unlike in Canada, there is no law against it, but there is a Federally Mandated Medical Billing Code.

  7. It’s not that apeshit amazing yet — we have to institute the death penalty for drug offenses to make ourselves real, first-class mother-fucking Gs, homies. Then those Canadians will REALLY feel the awesomeness emanating from the south!

    Fucking drug laws. What a fucking abomination unto mankind.

  8. If I read that right, a person can get 1-14 years for raping toddlers, forcing a 5 year old to have sex with animal, and growing 201+ marijuana plants.

    I’m disturbed that 14 is the max for raping toddlers and forcing preteen beastiality.

    1. I read it wrong. Apparently there is no minimum for a minimum under 1 year for raping toddlers. That’s surprisingly disturbing.

      1. That was going to be my comment. Canada has no mandatory minimum for sexual abuse of children?

  9. While I think the time far out weighs the crime as I don’t think it should be a crime in the first place, what is wrong with having the same amount of punishment be the same for the same crime? To me this would remove the human element and get rid of the Judges allowing for different sentences depending on race, gender, “he looks dangerous, or even “I had a fight with my wife last night so this chick is going to pay.”

    1. Remove the human element? I think you may be better off taking the face-to-face decision of an individual judge and/or jury over the generic one you’ll get from a roomful of high-minded, corrupt, and ultimately self-serving legislators. If nothing else, at least a bad judge has to factor into his thought process the very real possibility of individual reprisal.

      1. I have far, far more faith in judges than legislators. Not to say that judges can’t be self-serving asshats, but at least they’re closer to the particulars of a case than legislators passing some one-size-fits-all bill. I think there’s a Hayekian angle here.

        Oh, and not having to pander to voters makes a huge difference.

    2. qwerty, we’ve been trying it your way.

      And what we get is a one-way ratchet of fabulously absurd sentences and little-dick legislators vie for the title of “Hardest On Crime.”

  10. Thank you Canada for helping to consolidate MJ production in the US!

    1. Buy American, support your local prison guards.

  11. I think Canada showed us it could be “mindlessly draconian” when it extradited Marc Emery and Steve Kubby.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.