Oh great. Costen is going to help with legalization.

VIANARCHRIS

VIANARCHRIS

Well-Known Member
I don't think it really matters to joe or jane pot smoker who is on the legalization committee. Legalization will have to include home grows in some form and multiple retailers in order to affect the black market. Anything else will be considered a failure and wouldn't meet their goal of being the 'model' for the world.
The people that should be concerned and demanding a say, are those interested in growing or selling commercially,everyone else can relax...imo
 
J

JungleStrikeGuy

Well-Known Member
VIANARCHRIS said:
I don't think it really matters to joe or jane pot smoker who is on the legalization committee. Legalization will have to include home grows in some form and multiple retailers in order to affect the black market. Anything else will be considered a failure and wouldn't meet their goal of being the 'model' for the world.
The people that should be concerned and demanding a say, are those interested in growing or selling commercially,everyone else can relax...imo
Click to expand...
LOL , seriously? It doesn't matter to the public who is making the 'regulatory framework'?

It's clear where legalization is going. If the LPC launched an appeal against Allard, they can tie that up for years and push through legalization with no home grows.

And if you're still on the 'no way LPC will appeal' train, they're appealing the class action for the privacy breach, so. This is absolutely, 100% not the time to 'relax'. We 'relaxed' during the MMPR consultations, remember how that worked out?
 
doingdishes

doingdishes

Well-Known Member
we'll know if they appeal Allard as they have until next Friday-Good Friday so it's a holiday-so they get the weekend and if they don't appeal by Mar 29 then we can relax a bit.
if they don't appeal, the Goldstars will then be up and that's for repeal!
that will be a good one
let's hope they don't appeal and we get to produce ourselves or have a DG....or buy from a LP....as long as we have choice
 
VIANARCHRIS

VIANARCHRIS

Well-Known Member
JungleStrikeGuy said:
LOL , seriously? It doesn't matter to the public who is making the 'regulatory framework'?

It's clear where legalization is going. If the LPC launched an appeal against Allard, they can tie that up for years and push through legalization with no home grows.

And if you're still on the 'no way LPC will appeal' train, they're appealing the class action for the privacy breach, so. This is absolutely, 100% not the time to 'relax'. We 'relaxed' during the MMPR consultations, remember how that worked out?
Click to expand...
They LPC has not and will not launch an appeal of the grow decision...they have no grounds to appeal and no public support to spend millions on fighting sick people's plants.The LPC also did not launch the appeal of the class action, that was done in August of 2015. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/medical-marijuana-class-action-against-health-canada-certified-by-federal-court-1.3171897
Well it is possible for them to push through legal with a ban on home grows, I don't see any sign that they will or any advantage for them if they do.
As for the MMPR consultations,you are using the actions of a prohibitionist government to predict the actions of a pro-legalization one...like comparing (Rona's adam's) apple to oranges. But going past that, where is the mmpr now? If the governments won't listen, the courts will...I'm relaxed!
 
Gquebed

Gquebed

Well-Known Member
VIANARCHRIS said:
They LPC has not and will not launch an appeal of the grow decision...they have no grounds to appeal and no public support to spend millions on fighting sick people's plants.The LPC also did not launch the appeal of the class action, that was done in August of 2015. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/medical-marijuana-class-action-against-health-canada-certified-by-federal-court-1.3171897
Well it is possible for them to push through legal with a ban on home grows, I don't see any sign that they will or any advantage for them if they do.
As for the MMPR consultations,you are using the actions of a prohibitionist government to predict the actions of a pro-legalization one...like comparing (Rona's adam's) apple to oranges. But going past that, where is the mmpr now? If the governments won't listen, the courts will...I'm relaxed!
Click to expand...
One thing should be obvious by now and that is that our Supreme Court has been on the weed side through it all. And what that says to me, given the average age on the supreme court, is that they are truly keeping personal bias out of their decisions in these matter and being true to the spirit of the law, which favours us merely from a logical stand point:

There is no logical argument to deny cananbis to those who need it for meds or those who simply want it for rec purposes, since any probable harm from it is evidently far less than many other similar things that are readily available to anyone.

So i am totally relaxed about all of this now too even though i am one of those who fell through the cracks....
 
J

JungleStrikeGuy

Well-Known Member
VIANARCHRIS said:
They LPC has not and will not launch an appeal of the grow decision
Click to expand...
That's funny, because they won't answer the question of whether they will appeal or not, asked by both constitutents and the NDP in question period. So there's still every possibility they will. The LPC didn't launch the appeal of the class action, correct, but it's an appeal they should drop and settle out of court with MMAR people. So that's even one more thing to hold the LPC to account on.

As far as grounds to appeal, many didn't think the Crown had any grounds to appeal Taliano's decision in Mernagh. It's a roll of the dice, and there are several portions of Phelan's judgement like accepting anecdotal evidence re strains that could reasonably be listed as grounds for appeal.

My caution to you, and everyone else has nothing to do with a prohibitionist CPC government or a supposedly progressive LPC government. Now that the important decisions, both in who will decide and what legalization looks like, are being made, it's lunacy to say now's the time to relax. Bill Maher probably said it best, legalization is a long, long way from a done deal.

A court decision and the practical realization of the decision are two very different things. The govt still has 6 months, and the possibility of time extensions. It's possible for them to put another regime in place that is not constitutionally viable, and tie this up until 2030. People are still getting arrested, losing their property, going without medication, etc. The Allard verdict doesn't mean everything is solved and it's time to sit back.
 
J

JungleStrikeGuy

Well-Known Member
Gquebed said:
One thing should be obvious by now and that is that our Supreme Court has been on the weed side through it all
There is no logical argument to deny cananbis to those who need it for meds or those who simply want it for rec purposes, since any probable harm from it is evidently far less than many other similar things that are readily available to anyone
Click to expand...
The Supreme Court has heard 2 major cannabis cases (feel free to let me know if I'm missing any here), R v Malmo Levine tried the 'no harm / less harm' to get around rec laws, and that failed. So I wouldn't bet on the 'no harm' thing as far as legal viability.

R v Smith was a very good precedent, centered around arbitrary restrictions not being valid for medically approved patients. That does not immediately transfer to recreational (although provides a good starting point for sure).
 
OGEvilgenius

OGEvilgenius

Well-Known Member
Gquebed said:
One thing should be obvious by now and that is that our Supreme Court has been on the weed side through it all. And what that says to me, given the average age on the supreme court, is that they are truly keeping personal bias out of their decisions in these matter and being true to the spirit of the law, which favours us merely from a logical stand point:

There is no logical argument to deny cananbis to those who need it for meds or those who simply want it for rec purposes, since any probable harm from it is evidently far less than many other similar things that are readily available to anyone.

So i am totally relaxed about all of this now too even though i am one of those who fell through the cracks....
Click to expand...
The Supreme Court has not been on our side through all of this. Malmo Levine and Mernagh... both horrible decisions.
 
VIANARCHRIS

VIANARCHRIS

Well-Known Member
JungleStrikeGuy said:
That's funny, because they won't answer the question of whether they will appeal or not, asked by both constitutents and the NDP in question period. So there's still every possibility they will. The LPC didn't launch the appeal of the class action, correct, but it's an appeal they should drop and settle out of court with MMAR people. So that's even one more thing to hold the LPC to account on.

As far as grounds to appeal, many didn't think the Crown had any grounds to appeal Taliano's decision in Mernagh. It's a roll of the dice, and there are several portions of Phelan's judgement like accepting anecdotal evidence re strains that could reasonably be listed as grounds for appeal.

My caution to you, and everyone else has nothing to do with a prohibitionist CPC government or a supposedly progressive LPC government. Now that the important decisions, both in who will decide and what legalization looks like, are being made, it's lunacy to say now's the time to relax. Bill Maher probably said it best, legalization is a long, long way from a done deal.

A court decision and the practical realization of the decision are two very different things. The govt still has 6 months, and the possibility of time extensions. It's possible for them to put another regime in place that is not constitutionally viable, and tie this up until 2030. People are still getting arrested, losing their property, going without medication, etc. The Allard verdict doesn't mean everything is solved and it's time to sit back.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying it can't go bad, just that I don't anticipate it. First, we need to separate medical from recreational in this discussion. The court decisions you quote are for mmj and were part of a process that changed public awareness, acceptance and attitude toward weed. We didn't win every battle, but things have changed in 15 years. An appeal of the latest decision would not make any sense and would be a huge black mark on the LPC with legalization imminent, and a promise to make Canada a model for other countries who want to legalize. The whole world is well aware of the legalization promise and is watching us. I'm sure there are going to be things we go WTF about and demand changes...these are politicians, they never get anything right the first time. I would have done things different, starting with a moratorium on pot arrests starting on day 1, but I still think we are in a far better place now than we were with any other post-1920 government.
I don't get your fear of them fucking up legalization, when there has been no details of what that will even look like. I do not see a system that does not allow one to grow.
You seem intelligent and make some good points, find a way to be part of the process.
Maybe I'm just getting old, but after 38 years of fighting prohibition, I am feeling relaxed and optimistic about where we are headed. I'm not asleep...just relaxed! lol
 
WHATFG

WHATFG

Well-Known Member
As long as they have the same people making the decisions, there are going to be problems...start with blair, now this guy, and the others no one knows about yet...the experts framing the model...hahaha...I think med patients have won a battle, but legalization is still a pipe dream.
 
Gquebed

Gquebed

Well-Known Member
OGEvilgenius said:
The Supreme Court has not been on our side through all of this. Malmo Levine and Mernagh... both horrible decisions.
Click to expand...
Those are both decisions i think were 100% spot on. Hate me for it if you like, but.... my confidence remains high in the supreme court. We may not always like their decisions, but the decisions, in my opinion, havent missed yet.
 
TheRealDman

TheRealDman

Well-Known Member
I think we'll have a better idea how all this (med/rec) will play out, on 4/20 (ironic date) @ the UN.

Canada's Rep's just got a "standing ovation" during a recent speech stating the WOD, does not/has not worked....and Canada is moving to a pubic health approach. The gauntlet has been thrown down by Canada. I read that there are rumblings for Obama to make the US pitch for the same changes himself next month....again on 4/20.
 
OGEvilgenius

OGEvilgenius

Well-Known Member
Gquebed said:
Those are both decisions i think were 100% spot on. Hate me for it if you like, but.... my confidence remains high in the supreme court. We may not always like their decisions, but the decisions, in my opinion, havent missed yet.
Click to expand...
No, they were awful. The Mernagh decision essentially said we have no right to what goes in our bodies and that doctors are the ultimate arbitrators. They also screwed the pooch in suggesting that there hasn't been active coordinated efforts by medical groups to keep a legitimate medicine out of the hands of patients who need it - and there's a tonne of evidence to prove as much. The lawyers for Mernagh were bad at bringing this evidence to the court.
 
VIANARCHRIS

VIANARCHRIS

Well-Known Member
I don't think the Mernagh decision was wrong...just not what we wanted. Cannabis was ( and still is...temporarily) a scheduled drug and until that changes, the courts had no choice but to treat it the same as other medications. You don't get oxy's, percs or even penicillin without going through a Dr. With legalization comes the freedom to self medicate without Dr. approval.
 
T

TheDizzyBizzy

Well-Known Member
JungleStrikeGuy said:
LOL , seriously? It doesn't matter to the public who is making the 'regulatory framework'?

It's clear where legalization is going. If the LPC launched an appeal against Allard, they can tie that up for years and push through legalization with no home grows.

And if you're still on the 'no way LPC will appeal' train, they're appealing the class action for the privacy breach, so. This is absolutely, 100% not the time to 'relax'. We 'relaxed' during the MMPR consultations, remember how that worked out?
Click to expand...
There's no use reasoning with Chris. He apologizes for the Liberal's Prohibition 2.0 like a rig pig apologizes for Harper.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top