NDP leader Jagmeet Singh says drug addictions are social justice, not criminal justice, matters

Singh told about two thousand delegates attending the B.C. NDP convention on Saturday that Canada’s drug laws should reflect that drug addiction is a social justice issue and not a criminal justice matter. He called on the federal government to declare opioid addiction a national crisis.

Singh drew a standing ovation when he said the New Democrats would decriminalize personal possession of all drugs, not just marijuana.

  • Millie_Woods

    If drugs aren’t illegal, that means it’s OK to use them. I don’t know if this guy’s a socialist airhead or a dangerous creep.

    • jayme

      Or a shrewd, cynical individual motivated principally by ambition and lust for power, who coldly and clinically assesses the political/social climate and then acts accordingly?

      • Millie_Woods

        I can’t imagine there’s a lot of Canadians who want to legalize all drugs. But then I didn’t think a lot of people would vote for a substitute drama teacher.

  • Coming out of the gate with that, I’d say he eventually wants Justine’s job.

    • k1992

      I agree – he’s doing a good job of making JT look “moderate” (and therefore dull and unappealing to stupid Canadian voters). So how ridiculous and extreme can he go? “Just watch me” (to quote another horrible PM from years ago.)

  • CodexCoder

    Singh should be allowed to go on a police call to deal with a PCP user personally before he spouts off about drugs being a SJ issue. A PCP user feels no pain and is incredibly dangerous. Not all drugs are safe for private consumption.

    I offer this link as proof:


    • Linda1000

      And people bitch about falling-down drunk native Indians on the streets. I’d rather deal with a drunk any day.

  • “…New Democrats would decriminalize personal possession of all drugs, not just marijuana.”

    Just as I predicted. The next election would be a contest between the two Left-wing Parties to see who would go farther to the extreme Left. The Liberals won the last election because they went further Left than the already extreme Left NDP. Now the NDP is hoping to win the next election by going even further Left than the Liberals did. In fact the Liberals went so far Left in the last election that they not only banned members from “voting their conscience” on issues like abortion, but they banned them from holding pro-life ideas even in their personal private lives — they simply couldn’t be members of the caucus period, even if they held these beliefs privately. Amazingly, Liberal family members of mine who are staunchly Catholic and anti-abortion voted for them anyway!

    The Canadian animal is a stupid animal indeed, and methinks some day soon it will go the way of the dodo bird — permanent extinction.

    Meanwhile, it creates a huge vacuum for people who would be inclined to be centrist or centre-right — about 50% of the population. But there isn’t a Conservative in the country with half a brain, or more than one testicle, with the guts to take on the Left and “grab the bull by the horns” Trump-style — the only proven winning formula to defeat the fascist Left.

    • andycanuck

      Yes, my dad is another Liberal-voting, practicing Roman Catholic so I know what you mean. In the last Ontario election though he refused to vote for the lesbian… and instead voted for the NDP candidate!

      • Linda1000

        So how does your dad resolve being a practicing pro-life Catholic and at the same time voting Liberal pro-abortion? Just asking, as it doesn’t make sense?

        • andycanuck

          I can’t talk to him about it. He just mindlessly quotes the MSM that he believes every word of and ignores anything that disturbs his worldview.

          • Alain

            If it is of any help he is like the majority of Canadians who only get their news and information from the MSM. Then when a group of the same Canadians get together, it is the bubble effect or echo chamber. I know exactly how frustrating it is to try to bring truth and documented facts into the conversation, even more so when it is a family member. It would be great to have a solution of dealing with the situation, but I have not found one.

          • Trump’s renegotiation of NAFTA will be an opportunity. But Canadians have to specifically lobby for the changes. I’m referring to the fact that in the original deal Canada’s “Cultural Industries” were specifically excluded from U.S. competition — independent Media from the U.S. could not compete with Canadian statist MSM.

            Somebody has to get the message out to the Trump team that many Canadians want outside competition for our tightly controlled Media, and that it would be a tremendous step forward for free speech in this country — it could determine the entire future our country and whether or not we continue to be a free Nation, or simply a Northern version of Communist Cuba in America’s backyard.

            Mr. Trump, if you do anything re: NAFTA, then please insist that Canada’s “Cultural Industries” be open for competition, or no deal. Everyday Canadians will be forever grateful, because we are in the position right now where the future here seems hopelessly destined for repression of free speech and repression of a free Press. Both of the latter are in fact guaranteed under our Constitution but our Politicians ignore it and have created a Media monopoly.

            (Seems weird to appeal for help from an American politician but that’s how bad it’s gotten) 🙁

          • Linda1000

            I know quite a few people like that and so now I don’t talk about any political issues with them. It saves me a lot of frustration.

          • Clausewitz

            Linda, you may not want to talk politics with them, but I know from experience that everything they discuss will be filtered with a never ending spew of left wing nuttery. This is why I spend a lot more time up at my camp in Northern Ontario then hanging out with old colleagues since I’ve retired. Who needs the aggravation.

          • A Hamilton Guy

            Linda : I throw it up in their faces. Most don’t takes up the challenge,typical gutless sjw’s when you’re in their face.

    • A Hamilton Guy

      If I went to Mass on Sunday and asked who was there how they voted; 50% would say lieberal,25% would say NDP,, the rest Conservative. The dumb bastards.

  • Government sets drug prices and reaps tax revenues. Government oversees all recreational drug production, the black market will be illegal and severely prosecuted. The end result is a happily drugged welfare population that has to vote left to maintain their work-free addict lifestyle. Not everyone will fall into this group, but there will be enough to insure most elections result in the pro-drug candidate taking office.

    And the government makes money from it by having a portion of the welfare (which you pay for) returned to them in the form of taxes and licensing of distribution centers. An entirely new branch of government will be created to run the drug business.

  • ismiselemeas

    Drug addiction is a mental health issue, just like Jagmeet Singh.

  • PaxCan

    Doda consumption is a big thing with Punjabis. It is estimated at least a third of Punjab’s rural farmers use it.

    It’s essentially opium and therefore illegal in this country so it look likes Singh’s ethnic loyalties are pushing the issue here much like his support for self-determination in Quebec, and his refusal to denounce the martyr making of Talwinder Singh Parmar, is tied to his support of an independent Khalistan, I’m sure.


    All I see in Singh is another meddlesome Sikh in Canada making things worse for us.

    • A Hamilton Guy

      As soon as he got the job,he started calling racism about some point or another. Another pos.

      • PaxCan

        All Sikhs, and I mean all Sikhs including their Canadian born spawn, are Khalistanis in Canadian clothing.

        • DMB

          Also Bramptonistanis & Surreyistanis in Canadian clothing if you know what I mean!

  • Drunk by Noon ✓

    Does anyone else just not like this guy because he looks like a villain from Indiana Jones II Temple of Doom?

    • P_F

      He’s evil indeed, Any person who has compassion for terrorists & sympathy for their cause is evil. He’s no less evil than a terrorist himself.
      Moreover, culturally & ideologically sikhs are not very different from their mohammedan brothers, though they practice a completely different religion.

      • Drunk by Noon ✓

        The fact that he would not condemn the airliner bombings that killed hundreds told me all I needed to know about that clown.
        Also, I’m calling B.S. on that beard and turban get up.
        If you want to rule the Canadian people, at least have the decency to try to LOOK like your average Canadian. He can’t even manage that.
        Would Canada elect an Amish man that dressed as if he were from a different age? Then why this guy? Oh yeah, you need to prove you are not racists. Remember what that did for us with Obama? That’s a bad path to go down.

        • DMB

          Not all Sikhs wear the turban or even have a beard or untrimmed beard. Some don’t wear the turban while others wear the turban but trim their beards. I have even seen one wear a baseball hat to try to blend in with other Canadians. The untrimmed beard and turban are not a requirement merely and obligation one they don’t have to follow in public only in their temples. The untrimmed beard and turban is about making a statement on how different they are and why they need to be treated differently (preferably better) than the rest of us

          • Drunk by Noon ✓

            That’s what I have eventually come to understand as well.
            The whole turban and beard thing is just social signaling on their part to other Sikhs on just how pious they are.
            Well, they can be as pious as they want, but what I resent is the relentless demands for their accommodation that others would never receive.
            The part that I REALLY resent is that they were the wedge for Islamic veils and a myriad other assaults on our culture.
            Sure they are not as bad as Muslims, but their view is us is almost as unflattering. If Sikh culture were that wonderful, their homeland would be a paradise, but guess what, it isn’t.

  • P_F

    With so many east indians punjabis involved in drug trade across ‘kanedah’ of course this turbaned version of obama would decriminalize all drugs. It’s identity politics in 21st century ‘kanedah’, he has to do something for his fellow punjabis.

    • Alain

      They are also well known for voter fraud and corruption including framing ICBC, health care and insurance companies. Not saying all are the same, but they are over represented in those areas in BC at least.

  • tom_billesley

    If they’re going to decriminalize personal possession of drugs, will they be decriminalizing the ownership of a still ?

    • Alain

      Actually what they are talking about is not what I consider decriminalisation of drugs, because that would totally remove the government from the picture. No, they want another cash cow as they already have with alcohol.

    • DavidinNorthBurnaby

      Now that sounds good.

      • Linda1000

        I tried moonshine once as I got a bottle as a gift. It really burns when swallowed, not very pleasant or maybe it’s an acquired taste.

        • DavidinNorthBurnaby

          Definitely an acquired taste.

  • felis gracilis

    There are already plenty of reasons to avoid the Dippers like the plague. Now we have one more.
    Addiction is a “social justice” issue is just more “progressive” BS. More like social mayhem being preached by this post-modernist fool.

    • Alain

      Indeed. This is saying that the addict is not responsible for his or her actions, and that some type of discrimination, oppression or whatever from society forced them to become addicts.

  • People tend to use drugs because they believe it helps them cope with terrible things that happened to them.

    By legalising drugs, one only reinforces those feelings and the destructive drug use.

    Is that social justice?

    • Drunk by Noon ✓

      It creates a new dependent class, and perhaps the ultimate dependent class when you think about it.
      First you legalize the drugs under the guise that they have some kind of medicinal purpose, but their real use for 99.9% of the population is still recreational, but you make it widely available under the guise of medicinal use but with no real bars of entry. Anyone in California can get a medicinal marijuana card if they SAY they have migraines.
      Then you offer to pay for or subsidize this “medicine” as a government entitlement, like welfare.
      Just think if you added all the marijuana users and opioid addicts together, they would be a sizable and most dedicated of any of the voting blocs.

      • Exile1981

        Actually its a form of genocide. Nearly 10% of the natives on the reserve near me are regular meth users. they recently caught a guy bring 50lbs onto the res.

        If you decriminalize it you’ll take away the only weapon to force them into rehab.

        They already think they will loose a generation to meth, how much worse will it be if the government says its ok to try it.

        • Linda1000

          Wow, that’s bad and that reserve is not at all isolated.

      • Interesting.

        But consider that drug users are unreliable. If the Liberals, NDP, ect are depending on the dependent, they may find themselves disappointed on a regular basis.

    • DMB

      Drugs should be treated in two ways. The dealers should be treated solely in a criminal faction while the addicts in a medical condition with a caveat that they must seek rehabilitation until they are completely off of drugs. Failure to do that will result in prison time. Social Justice does not fit into the equation in anyway make Jagmeet completely wrong on this issue. Making drug use a social justice issue sounds like he wants to legitimize drug use as if it was a “hip and trendy” thing to do or basically normalize it. Drug addicts should never be seen as normal people but as sick people with a disease.

      • Exactly but with one exception.

        Drug use is a choice. Addiction is a medical problem because of it.

  • DavidinNorthBurnaby

    Jagmeet is a funny name. It sounds like something you’d buy at the deli. And I suppose he smells bad, wogs always do.