Okay, I thought you meant you never heard of anyone being charged because you didn’t know anyone who smoked it, so it couldn’t be a problem. My mistake and apologies.
I take back the “conservative reasoning” comment as I applied it to you, but there was a reason for it. I’m in the heart of the heavily conservative prairies and there’s still a carryover among a lot of people here of the social stigma against pot as a street drug, as if it’s on the same level as heroin. I know several people who are dead set against pot for that reason, even though they’ve never tried it themselves, and even though they have no problem with alcohol. That’s the way it’s always been and, therefore, the way it should always be, period (that’s how I mistakenly interpreted your post). And you’ll never guess which way they lean politically;). Still, while the police continue to enforce the laws to a certain extent, I get the impression that the laws against pot are more of a nuisance for them and for the legal system as a whole.
That doesn’t sound very likely to me. If you have less than 30 g of marijuana on you, it’s purely a summary matter:
[QUOTE=Controlled Drugs and Substances Act] 4(5) Every person who contravenes subsection (1) where the subject-matter of the offence is a substance included in Schedule II in an amount that does not exceed the amount set out for that substance in Schedule VIII is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction and liable to a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or to both.
[/QUOTE]
So if you’re charged with some minor offences, and have less than 30 g of pot on you, that’s just one more minor offence.
Full disclosure: I and my buddy came “this close” to the pro PGA tour.
He was a golfer; I was his caddy. At the age of 16, Buddy was shooting 75 (i.e. 3 over par) on full-length 18-hole courses. As I said, I was his caddy, and caddied for him in tournaments. He won more than a few before he was 18.
Then he discovered marijuana, hash, hot knives, bongs, and the rest. As a friend, I was along for the ride; as his caddy, I was witness to his collapse. His golf suffered poorly and badly, and I got tired of hearing, “Duuuuude–what’s with that bad shot?” Yeah, it sounds cliche, but he did say that. He still wasn’t yet 18.
“Spoons, I’m going to spark up a joint while I look for my ball in the forest. Don’t tell the referee, OK?” And I’d holler to the referee, “He’s still looking, okay?”
Yes, I put up with this. I was his caddy after all. But I hated it. I hated my buddy giving up a shot at Q-School and likely the Pro Tour because of marijuana. In the end, I hated my buddy. Drugs ruled his life. I have since forgiven him, and we have made up. But still, what might have come of his golf skills…?
[QUOTE=Statistics Canada]
In recent years, the way in which police deal with youth accused of drug offences has changed. Historically, youth were more likely to be charged by police rather than cleared by other means, such as police discretion or a referral to a diversionary program. However, in 2002, for the first time, the number of youth accused of a drug offence who were cleared by other means surpassed the number of youth charged, and has remained well above ever since (Chart 5). In 2007, 62% of youth accused of a drug-related incident were cleared by means other than the laying of a formal charge compared to 42% a decade ago.
This change in police charging practices coincides with the implementation of the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) which came into effect on April 1st, 2003. One of the key objectives of the YCJA was to divert youth who commit non-violent crimes away from the court system and to increase the use of extrajudicial measures, such as cautions or community program referrals (Department of Justice Canada, n.d.).
[/QUOTE]