NO PITY FOR GROW-OP PROPERTY OWNERS

Editor, The News:

This is in regards to the article "Inspection likened to visit by
Gestapo, Mafia" (The News, May 6, page A13).

I cannot sympathize with comments regarding the closure of a grow-op house.

If they want to have a grow-op, then they should be aware of all the
risks -- not just being arrested, but also mould and fire.

Our laws are to protect taxpayers, and to my knowledge grow-operators
do not pay taxes, so they should not expect to be able to carry on
without the occasional inspection.

As well, owners of these properties have an obligation to make
regular inspections. I have a feeling that a lot are just looking the
other way to make sure they get their cut, and then pleading
ignorance when they get caught.

When one of these properties goes up for sale, it should be
advertised that it was a grow-op -- along with any renovations that
were done -- to protect potential buyers.

My son was killed three years ago in a fire from a grow-op that he
had been working in.

The person he had been working for told me that he had run that
operation without a problem for five years -- in a home he rented --
before my son went to work for him. (My son took over the house two
years prior, so the operation had been there at least seven years.)

The owners of the house told me they had bought it four years prior
to my son's death and had no idea there was a grow-op there, and then
got upset with me when I saw it advertised as a recently "completely
renovated" house, with no mention of the fire or grow-op that had
been there before.

(I had e-mailed the real estate agent asking if she told potential
buyers the history, and never received a response from her.)

If you do the math, then obviously when my son moved in there was a
well-established grow-op in the house.

As the tenants of grow-ops are often working for someone else, and do
not make a huge amount of money for taking all the risks, someone
should be held accountable. (My son made 20 per cent of what the
grow-op yielded, and I am guessing that this must be standard.)

So the bulk of the profits from grow-ops go to fund organized crime,
with the workers often getting roped into something that looks like a
good deal for them at first but often turns into a nightmare or worse.

So I am sorry if my heart does not go out to the poor landlords who
suffer the indignities of 24-hour-notice searches, or the privacy
rights of grow-op workers, but I think that even the 24-hour notice
is too much. That just gives time to dismantle the operation.

B. J. Long