Canada will legalize pot, after arresting a bunch of people for pot offences first: Neil Macdonald

Discussion in 'Canadian Patients' started by gb123, Apr 19, 2017.


    gb123 Well-Known Member

    Why? Our ministers can't really explain :lol:

    "Too many Canadians," declares the Liberal Party of Canada on its website, "end up with criminal records for possessing small amounts" of marijuana.

    Enforcement of cannabis law, it continues, "traps too many Canadians in the criminal justice system for minor, non-violent offenses."

    Well said. Courageous, even. Huzzah.

    So. What's the government's solution?

    Well, it intends to continue arresting, prosecuting and criminalizing Canadians who commit this minor and non-violent offence, at least for another year or so. Young Canadians are particularly vulnerable to arrest.

    Canada intends to continue arresting, prosecuting and criminalizing Canadians who commit this minor and non-violent offence. (Adrian Wyld/Canadian Press)

    Why keep criminalizing? Good question, and the CBC's Carol Off asked it during an interview with Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould, after the government revealed its legislative plans last week.

    In response, the minister delivered this clanging non-sequitur:

    "Well, we're working on delivering our campaign promise to legalize cannabis, strictly regulate and restrict access to it with the ultimate objective to keep it out of the hands of children and the proceeds out of the hands of criminals. . . "

    So Off asked again: Why another year?

    Wilson-Raybould's reply: "Well, we first of all, I completely respect the parliamentary process and will certainly monitor this piece of legislation as it as it moves through."

    If that sounds like gibberish, it's because it is.

    Wilson-Raybould has not explained why the government intends to keep on criminalizing Canadians so unfairly. (Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press)

    True to form, this government has written down a series of talking points, in this case, trying to make it sound like it's cracking down on pot rather than legalizing it. And Justin Trudeau's ministers are sticking to the messaging from party central like a child reciting Dr. Seuss.

    Not once in that As It Happens interview did Wilson-Raybould explain why the government intends to keep on criminalizing Canadians so unfairly (see the Liberal party's website statement) for another year.

    Instead, literally every second time she opened her mouth, she re-spouted the line about "strictly legalizing and restricting access." Off asked eight questions. Four times, Wilson-Raybould robotically reverted to the same phrase.

    'Not a free-for-all'
    Meanwhile, Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale, a parliamentary lifer who mastered the art of repetitive dronetalk sometime back in the last millennium, was out peddling more or less the same line, but with an added warning: Not only will the government continue to criminalize Canadians for what it considers a trifling offence, enforcement will be vigorous.

    "Existing laws prohibiting possession and use of cannabis remain in place, and they need to be respected," Goodale declared. "This must be an orderly transition. It is not a free-for-all."

    Why the government cannot simply decide to invoke prosecutorial and police discretion, and cease enforcing the cannabis laws it considers unjust, was not explained. Why that would necessarily be a "free for all" also went unexplained.

    And Goodale went even further. All those Canadians who were prosecuted successfully in the past for this trifling, minor, non-violent offence will continue to bear the burden of a criminal record, even though this government says such prosecutions were wrong and is moving, albeit slowly, to strike down the law.

    Goodale was explicit: there will be no blanket pardon. Again, no explanation. He was too busy administering stern warnings about continued enforcement, and, of course, "strictly regulating and restricting access" once the law is finally changed.

    All of this is to satisfy conservative Canadians who, even though they probably can't explain it, continue to believe smoking pot should be a crime.

    'Addicted to prohibition'
    Craig Jones, director of the Canadian chapter of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, says that "after 50 years of intense propaganda, we are essentially addicted to prohibition. It's the only way we know."

    Jones points out that cannabis was criminalized by fiat in 1923, with no discussion or debate in parliament. Interestingly, he says, the first actual arrest for possession wasn't until 1947.

    That's probably because several generations ago, Canadians regarded cannabis as an innocuous herb with some medicinal value, not a drug that turns good children into fiends.

    "Your average family doctor a century ago probably knew a great deal more about the therapeutic value of cannabis than a doctor today."

    As for the government's strange desire to keep arresting and prosecuting Canadians for possession, Jones says: "It's hard to extricate yourself from a policy error."

    Crossing the border
    But back to Off's interview with the justice minister. She raised another excellent question: Once cannabis is legal in Canada, what should Canadians answer when asked by U.S. border agents whether they've ever used it?

    Because admitting it at the border can result in being barred from entering the U.S. for life, even though many states have now decriminalized cannabis, and eight states have outright legalized it.

    Wilson-Raybould could have said something sensible, like: "The government of Canada will press the Trump administration to understand that after legalization in Canada, millions of Canadians will be placed in an impossible situation at the border, and we need a clear understanding between our nations."

    Government tables marijuana legislation
    The National

    00:00 02:23

    Government tables marijuana legislation 2:23

    Instead, somewhat weirdly, she started talking about what a great job Ralph Goodale is doing keeping Canada's border safe, then strongly advised anyone crossing into the United States to tell the truth if asked about pot use. Then said she looks forward to "continuing conversations" with Jeff Sessions, her extreme-law-and-order American counterpart.

    Now, it could be that Wilson-Raybould was subversively advising Canadians that if every one of us who has ever smoked pot starts declaring it at the border, it would jam traffic to a halt and the Americans, in the interest of continued commerce, would likely stop asking the damned question.

    But, given that she's a minister in Justin Trudeau's cabinet, that's unlikely. What she probably meant to say was that marijuana would be strictly regulated and access restricted.

    Because, of course, this can't just be a free for all.

    This column is part of CBC's Opinion section. For more information about this section, please read this editor's blog and our FAQ.

    willieboy likes this.

    Mr.Head Well-Known Member

    do you think you could find one positive thing to say tomorrow for 4/20 :)

    all this doom and gloom about this new bill is depressing as fuck, it's a step in the right direction, expecting anything more than baby steps was delusional.

    as a P.s. Thanks assholes at 4/20 rallies with 1lb bags handing it out to kids for our personal carry laws. YAY civil disobedience without common sense has cost us all.
    R.Raider likes this.

    CalyxCrusher Well-Known Member

    Step in the right direction? Hahahahaba. You know its not April fools right?
    GrowRock likes this.

    Mr.Head Well-Known Member

    and what were you expecting legal weed without any restrictions?

    This was obviously going to happen this way, the LP's paid millions of dollars for the rights to sell weed, the government doesn't want to be sued for billions of dollars in lost revenue so they are going to protect the LP's interests which are also their own. Expect this to be like the alcohol industry where we won't see other people get in for a while, it will certainly be at an accelerated pace compared to alcohol, but it will still take time.

    Are the plant #'s and personal carry amounts great? No. They aren't.

    It's the best we could hope for, the fact they are even considering letting people grow plants, even with ridiculous restrictions surprises me. So in that respect, as someone trying to remain slightly optimistic that after 20 years of smoking maybe we're headed the right way.

    There's plenty of negatives, a lot to do with law enforcement, hopefully we can get them to change their minds on sending people to jail, I feel that they need to get these punishments in line with those of tobacco. This sort of thing will take time, they are clearly a ridiculous over compensating "think of the children" punishment.

    They are trying to squash all the old go-to fear mongering tactics in their bill, the "think of the children", the "pot stores on every corner, the "idiots walking around with lbs in the street handing it out without checking ID" Which happens every year in every major city on 4/20 and it's an embarrassment to responsible adults and precisely why we can't have nice things.

    As someone who's not looking to make money off of this change, this barely has any negative effects on me at all.

    I don't sell weed. Maybe that's where a lot of your guys issues lie, I can definitely see an argument from that angle my whole stance on that is wait it out, these LP's have proven incompetent at producing medicine. What do you think is going to happen when their behaviour is monitored less? They send out 1-2 batches of moldy weed and we're golden.

    No judge is going to put someone in jail for offering an option to buy Cannabis that isn't covered in mold. Private industry usually takes over due to government incompetence.

    I just feel it's a little too early for doom saying, criticism is fine, but some of the tone of the posts on here are like the apocalypse is coming. This is better than it was for a lot of people in a lot of ways, the other ways need some work.
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2017
    racerboy71 likes this.

    GrowRock Well-Known Member

    It does affect everyone who uses cannabis due to the bs drugged driving laws they are pushing for.... anyone who uses cannabis and gets pulled over is going to be over there stupid .02 nanagram siliva test and be charged with impared driving.... prohibition 2.0
    WHATFG, gb123 and CalyxCrusher like this.

    Mr.Head Well-Known Member

    and there's still time for that to change. This hasn't even gone into effect yet.

    Maybe I'm naive. But this bill was as much of a press release as it was a bill. I expect many changes to be made before it actually goes into effect.

    Just because it's in a bill doesn't mean it will hold up in court either, i haven't looked into but if what you say is accurate there's no chance of it holding up. The science has to be there for it to hold up in court without a shadow of a doubt.

    The good thing about being Canadian is we can generally trust our judicial system to treat us pretty fairly when it comes to ridiculous laws the government passes for political points, they proved that with Harper's shit, and if they have to I am sure they will prove it again with his stupid 14 year sentences and impaired driving changes, as well as plant heights and counts and etc.etc.etc.

    there's several portions of the bill that needs work. I'm definitely not saying it's perfect, it could have been way better while still having the same media effect and public perception.

    Edit: If this bill remains the same from now until it goes into effect I'll be very disappointed. I'm trying to remain positive and hope this was just a bunch of pandering to the USA and the Conservative Canadian crowd to say "our regulation is strong" while quietly dialing back some of the obvious drastic punishments to something more reasonable/
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2017
    GrowRock likes this.

    CalyxCrusher Well-Known Member

    Now if that isnt the stupidest assumption of the day i dont know what is.....

    "I don't sell weed. Maybe that's where a lot of your guys issues lie"


    Mr.Head Well-Known Member

    great level of discussion in here. Acting like a child sure proves your point...

    I'm unsubbing from this sub-forum, all this sub-forum is about is whining and scare mongering. It was the same shit when Harper was PM,same shit different day.

    Yall trying your best to Alex Jones the shit outta everything you possibly can around here.

    I'll bow out and yall can go back to being your circle jerk of ridiculousness. What's next zesty response like "Don't let the door hit you on the way out"... You people act like you live in nazi fucking germany.

    gb123 Well-Known Member

    Just plain ole legal no jail meds!

    but its NoT that way at all with their proposal
    its worthless if you ask me.
    they have made their point and it shows what they truly want and believable is true!
    Its time to fight once again using the same ole arguments the sick used only because we now have been forced to, once again!!!! .

    and win it hands down once and for all people!

    gb123 Well-Known Member

    calling people children who disagree with your mixed ideals??

    please spare us .. (:

    Mr.Head Well-Known Member

    No. That's not what I did at all, and you can clearly see it in the first line of the post. For clarity I was calling someone a child because they are unwilling to discuss things and basically comment "well you're wrong Neener".

    This isn't about Meds. This is about rec. Med patients don't have retarded plant limits or height restrictions.

    Edit: we all benefit from discussion if there isn't going to be any then there's absolutely no benefit... so then what's the point?

    WHATFG Well-Known Member

    LPs bought into the medical game....legalization was not on the table.
    R.Raider, gb123 and Mr.Head like this.

    kDude Well-Known Member

    o_O so why the hell are you complaining about others taking a stance?
    the time to react with negative feedback is now.. not after it's passed hoping it'll change.

    it's not about if i grow/sell/plan to profit off this.. it's about those bigwigs basically being handed an industry to have a full monopoly on. i think that's such BS, and i will never buy from them. i hope others don't either.. but with them having the monopoly; that's impossible, and sadly they're going to succeed and become big marijuana.

    WHATFG Well-Known Member

    Except for those patients that can't find a doctor to give them what they need...and paying one is not an option.
    gb123 likes this.

    WHATFG Well-Known Member

    ....and the BM goes on....
    cannadan and gb123 like this.

    Mr.Head Well-Known Member

    Yes. The conservative's basically made legalization any other way impossible. Lets not forget there's a whole bunch of our own MP's across the country invested into LP's. The buy in was way too high for this to happen any other way, those people invested millions, while I may think they are shit at there jobs I would certainly want to be protected if that was my money or I'd be suing.

    This is going to be my approach, the same approach I've had for years. I will not buy from them. I will continue to tell others their product is inferior. They aren't going to last IMO at least. They WILL send out moldy product, most likely 2nd tier shit they couldn't push on Med. Patients and then they will crash and burn. Anyone can grow mold free Cannabis at home.

    Their monopoly won't last long. They have proven incompetent.

    and I'm not trying to complain about others taking a stance I just feel there's a tone being set and it's very negative while none of the positives are being discussed.

    So this system will help those people have access to the medication they need.
    GroErr likes this.

    WHATFG Well-Known Member

    Only if they need 4 plants under 100cm's worth of meds...I think people, or more precisely patients, should keep moving forward with whatever works for them, given the medical program is temporary. Government likes to scare people, and that's what this piece of legislation does....they will keep cannabis out of the hands of minors like they do alcohol and tobacco...they won't.
    GroErr, GrowRock, gb123 and 1 other person like this.

    Mr.Head Well-Known Member

    SCROG is my plan and it's going to be the only way to grow up here to stay legal anyways..

    Are there width limits do you know? You can put a pretty big screen over a 5 gallon and keep it over(**UNDER DERP) 100cms and have it banging with buds.

    Vegetation time is going to suck ass.

    I mean shit even 12/12 from seed will put you over 100cms. This is one of those things that's unrealistic and is going to have to change... A lot of this stuff doesn't seem like it would hold up in court if it was challenged by a semi competent lawyer.

    4-5 gallons scrog nets and blumats in an organic no till, or even rolling raised beds if the rooms available. After the nets are full that's basically a no worry grow.
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2017
    GroErr likes this.

    Mr.Head Well-Known Member

    I'm just sayin it's time for celebration, while things need to change can we not celebrate that we're getting there at least? I was a little over aggressive with my approach. smoked some bongs and chilled out.

    baby steps.
    GroErr and R.Raider like this.

    gb123 Well-Known Member

    the fact of why yer here again?
    Are you a person who has fought for MMAR?
    MMAR is the ONLY way for legalization(and we shall force that) but they choose to be fool s about
    we;ll just force them back to where WE have OUR rights and they can suck wind
    its THAT simple really..more BS from cheap seats who feel what they think or feel is gong to happen..
    it wont.. :)

Share This Page