Troy McClure SF-
** I’m all for medical (and recreational marijuana… but using pot for asthma? How the hell does that work?**
Apparently there is some evidence that THC acts as a bronchio dilator, of course to be good for an asthmatic you would want to take it in some way other than smoking it(e.g. ingesting or inhaler).
There is a problem if the government does not lay out some method for legitimate distribution. Only the possession laws are defunct not the trafficking ones. If it is de-facto decriminalized then consumption is sure to raise at least some but the only distribution networks are criminal. Some sort of cafe system as in Holland is required but more formal and complete to totally remove the criminal element.
This of course would require the government take some actual positive action rather than passively letting laws be struck down. Justice Minister Cauchon said in December that he would have new legislation by April but I wouldn’t look for anything addressing the distribution issue. It would be too close to total legalization which is still verbotten under present managment. I bet he goes to get rid of possesion charges but “toughens up” on trafficking to throw law&order types a bone(despite the fact that this stance will be completly hypocritical- if it’s ok to possess then why is it not ok for me to buy it from someone).
I’m still having trouble believing it’s happening.
Well, it was the judicious use of “uncertain terms” that I should have stressed more. It was the drug czar making specious claims and unfounded threats. I didn’t mean to imply we had some stance on the issue as a nation, but rather that we haven’t exactly shown that we can in any way handle the situation intelligently.
My reading of “trade sanctions” should be considered strawman at best. Apologies.
Now that I think about it, he probably meant inspections.
The question of decriminalization is being considered in a variety of forums. For example, just before Christmas a House of Commons Committee issued a report on the federal drug strategy which recommended decriminalizing marijuana for personal use.
“Decriminalizing” in this context is understood to mean that possession for personal use would still be an offence under federal law, but it wouldn’t be prosecuted as a criminal offence, more as a regulatory offence, with a ticket, and no criminal record.
The federal Minister of Justice has announced that he will be looking into it, with a view to intoducing legislation this spring.
There’s also been several court cases that have held parts of the current laws invalid, but I wouldn’t say they go so far as Malthus stated. The most recent case was a decision the Provincial Court in Ontario. That decision is under appeal, and it’s not binding on the courts in other provinces. As well, it was a pretty technical decision, as I understand it, saying that the federal government could not fix a problem in the current law by a regulation, only by a law passed by Parliament.
Why should the US retaliate? If pot ever becomes totally legal in Canada (it is not as of yet), it will have nothing to do with America. A retaliation requires an injury or aggressive instigation of some sort does it not? I think Canada should go all the way and make it totally legal. Any time a substance is illegal it becomes much more dangerous because the government can’t regulate quality. During the prohibition people went blind or were killed from poorly made alcohol. People are dying now because the government won’t legalize and regulate ecstacy. If water was illegal it would be far more dangerous. Legal pot would also allow an age limit to be placed on its purchase to help keep minors away. So the Americans should be happy, not only at the prospect of clean, government regulated pot going through its borders, but because they are neighbours with a morally advanced nation.
Vast hordes of Americans will suddenly move to Canada, start buying up all the good weed and bogart it! Then we’ll demand that they build Jack In The Boxes and Waffle Houses so that we can have some place to eat at 3 AM when we’re stoned out of our gourds. Finally, we’ll start bitching about how cold the place is.
I agree with pretty much all of this, with this minor amendment - the secision striking down the law was actually the earlier decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal (still not binding on the provinces, but very persuasive) - which is not under appeal.
The issue is whether the corrective action taken by the government was sufficent to answer the Appeal Court’s concerns. The recent provincial court decision states that it is not. If upheld on appeal, the law will be effectively unconstitutional. There is of course nothing preventing the introduction of a new law, which effectively meets the constitutional concerns of the Court - at which point, pot will be illegal again.
The interesting thing is that of course growing pot is a reasonably large Canadian industry. The current situation is that growing is still illegal. I think the most sensible action would be to legalize growing, and regulate and tax it.
There is no evidence I have seen that the health effects of pot are any worse than alchohol. Most Canadians are either in favour of legalization or not strongly opposed to it. Legalizing the drug will cut into the profits of organized crime - it will simply become a business like any other. In addition, it will increase tax revenue. Is there any downside?
The problem is, if the stuff is legalized without any massive problems, it will cast doubt on the utility of the current “war on drugs”. Those who support that “war” will naturally not be thrilled to see themselves proved wrong.
In addition, it will of course make pot easier to obtain in the US.
Since MDMA may cause significant damage to the serotogenic pathways of the brain, it seems unlikely that the drug could be legalized according to current FDA and medical-ethics rules.
That’s only Quebec’s motto, and it’s been de facto legal in parts of Montreal for ages. At least, I’ve never known anyone arrested for smoking it in public, except at a political protest. I walk through a cloud of the stuff sometimes coming out of the subway at night.
Are people under the impression that there isn’t already a tremendous amount of Canadian pot already going into the US? I mean Vancouver is probably one of the more pot-intensive places outside Amsterdam.
That’s why we have 7-11’s, Mac’s, Denny’s, Humpty’s and 24 hour Tim Hortons and Albert’s.
Really? I’m sure that there are already plenty of criminal elements as a result of not legalizing it.
Supporting organized crime? No way. Most pot you can find here comes either from the basement of the growers directly or from BC. I actually have a bag of Hemp seeds in my cupboard, but they probably aren’t viable.
Then we’ll demand that they build Jack In The Boxes and Waffle Houses so that we can have some place to eat at 3 AM when we’re stoned out of our gourds. Finally, we’ll start bitching about how cold the place is. 
