Printable View
Today is Oct 17, 2018, not 4-20, but you might be forgiven for your confusion, as recreational pot becomes legal in Canada.
Retailing, in Ontario, won't start until April, but online sales are legal [[through a regulated channel), as is small amount possession and growth.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opin...ple-for-other/
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/cann...nd-labrador-2/
https://www.freep.com/story/news/201...me/1646140002/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-ifjIAoleI
Personal freedom prevails ! Now it's time for the citizens of Michigan to speak on this issue. Just like legal gambling a generation ago, nothing motivates a Republican more than lost revenue. Think of the current dilemma of the State of New York...now surrounded by Canada to the North, and Vermont, Maine, and New Hempshire to the East. It's a matter of time. Don't bogart that joint Jeff Sessions...We'll roll another one just like the last.
Regardless how you feel about legal pot, the rollout in Canada has been terrible. The Federal gov't passes the law then quickly passes the buck to the provinces, who in turn pass some of the issues to the municipalities. There are different rules for where you can purchase it, use it and the biggest issue, how driving high is enforced.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfo...rcmp-1.4866044Quote:
Originally Posted by 401don
Sounds like they're on top of things to me. Passing the buck to the Provinces isn't much different than how the U.S. currently handles alcohol consumption and sales on a State-by-State basis. As an example, you can't buy beer or liquor in Indiana or South Carolina on a Sunday. Same with the provisions for the sale of weed. Colorado, Oregon, and Washington, all handle dispensing and packaging differently. You also can't transport Washington weed to Oregon.
Let's just hope our own Michigan Legislators handle the logistics of legalization of recreational weed better than they've handled the now 9 year and counting roll-out of medical weed. So much for 'the will of the people'.
Had to laugh out loud at my own nephew who is deeply concerned about a growing operation that was approved a couple miles from his Grand Rapids home. He's worried about the 'effects on his children'. He told me this while sipping on some jesus juice he produced in his own basement. The hypocrisy just astounds me.
What's wrong with that? The Feds pass a guiding law. They let the States [[Provinces) pass their own details on how it will work in their jurisdiction. And then some minor regulations are handled locally. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by 401don
The alternative would be to force a one-size-fits-all law down the throats of everyone. I prefer distributed decision making.
Having said that, I will take exception to the general requirement that distribution and sales are mostly controlled by the government. Most provinces are either using their existing Liquor Control Boards, or are creating a parallel Cannabis Control Boards. One look at their liquor monopoly's miserable sales operations and extreme taxation and unionized [[meaning expensive and dispassionate3) labour tells me that they are more concerned with control and revenue than really 'protecting children' from weed.
A shout-out to Doug Ford here. Rather than create an insufficient number of gov't weed stores, he's letting the private market sell. Bravo. Distribution and production remain under the iron glove. But its at least directionally correct to allow some private participation.
The stated goal of 'protecting children' is a weak excuse for creating a gov't monopoly. We do a decent job of controlling underage drinking and smoking [[tobacco). No reason to think that we can't have boutique farming, competitive distribution, and exciting private retail more like Starbucks and less like the Sec'y of State or the unemployment office.
Bravo Canada and Trudeau for at least getting this done. Treated weed as a Class 1 controlled substance is absurd.
[[And for the record, moving weed across the border is illegal both ways. Canada is maintaining is prohibition of crossing the border with cannibis. So one cannot buy some locally grown legal weed in Washington State and drive across to British Columbia where it would be legal to possess and smoke.)
Note: all this is as I understand things -- open to hearing more accurate details.
All provinces from Ontario to the west are allowing private retail sales.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch
So, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and BC.
Quebec and the Atlantic provinces [[New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island are all selling through state-owned retail channels exclusively).
The exception to this in the far east of Canada is Newfoundland which also has private retail in the mix.
So 6/10 provinces are allowing private retail sales.
Though in most provinces these are not fully up and running as governments sort out the rules.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/marij...know-1.4862207
I guess my beef is not so much how the role out took place but how quickly. There's a lot of discussion in the media from provinces, municipalities and various levels of law enforcement about not having adequate time and consultation before the law took effect. I have a friend who trains police officers in field testing drivers for marijuana and he tells me they are not ready by a long shot. Probably a lot of cases will get thrown out of court.
So does the pot leaf replace the maple leaf now?
How exactly are they going to keep distribution under an iron glove when they could not even stop tons of the stuff coming in the ports in the past?
SAttachment 36745Quote:
o does the pot leaf replace the maple leaf now?
You're way behind the curve Richard. :)
I will laugh ten years down the road when everyone looks back wondering what all the hand wringing was about. :)
I believe you are correct, Jimaz. Very few people are alive today to recall it, but there was some similar anxiety about the repeal of Prohibition in 1933. As a result, different states passed some very restrictive laws about alcohol, with Michigan's being some of the most stringent. [[A "control state," legally speaking.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimaz
The social ramifications were interesting. To see people drinking alcohol in public was especially disturbing to some people. But as time went on, the benefits were clear: Organized crime lost a valuable concession, alcohol became safer, and drink lost the cachet of "forbidden fruit."
I think it's interesting from a historical perspective how much influence Canada has had on our area and the U.S. in general when it comes to alcohol, gambling, and now weed. We didn't have Detroit casinos until Windsor took the lead. Canada and the river between us supplied half our nation with liquor during prohibition. Now they're about to push us through the door of legal weed. Say what you will, but Canada going legal nation-wide yesterday is about as big of a pro-campaign ad for Michigan's upcoming legalization vote as one could possibly hope to achieve.
Having been stripped searched next to a State Police cruiser during daylight on Rochester Rd. in 1971 at age 16 and one day, for a Felony drug possession for one crotched joint, under the John Sinclair law, maybe I could laugh now. :mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimaz
Ha -------------------Ha.
I here that, but I'm just no more interested or enlightened about walking into a wall of second-hand weed smoke than tobacco smoke.
I think in some circles/ settings it's going to remain poor etiquette to be reeking of weed on ones clothing and person [[just as smelling booze is).
I suppose a 'vodka' [[less smell) alternate will come out? Or is out? Vaping and eating the marijuana.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Detroitnerd
Nixon. you still fill me with joy.
Or maybe the smell from McDonald's? $1.00 burgers stick on my clothes when I walk around the block. And designer dogs from the last 200 years. Frichons, ??? C'mon. You fucked up evolution. No wait, there is no evolution, we are only 5000 years old. :confused::confused:Quote:
I suppose a 'vodka' [[less smell) alternate will come out?Or is out?Vaping and eating the marijuana.
I grew up in Minnesota and in the 70s it was decriminalized already,you could have up to 1/4 lb on you for personal consumption as long as you did not have any baggies or scales on you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimaz
If the police found it on you they would usually just dump it out on the ground,they were not bothered about it.
A friend of mines father who was a creative plumber at the time started a company called US bongs in his basement and did quite well.
They declared a war on drugs,stopped the flow of weed and pushed everybody over to cocaine and it all went to hell from there.
Edibles: gummies, brownies, cookies, etc. And oil, spray, wax, etc...Quote:
Originally Posted by Zacha341
December 17, 1989 at about 4:00pm. Quit smoking weed and quit smoking cigarettes, haven’t had a puff of anything since then. One of the best things I’ve ever done.
Also, I was famous for being able to roll a beautiful TIGHT one paper joint. Don’t think I could do it now, not sure I still have the finger dexterity to pull it off.
Just because you can go into Canada, and get seriously stoned,
does not - mean the USA side has to let you back into the country.
Pretty sure some border agent will be tossing folks in the clink,
to ""sober up"" and think about their actions in a FOREIGN COUNTRY.
Roadside saliva-testing devices were authorized by Bill C-46, a massive overhaul of Canada’s impaired driving laws that passed in June. Police can lay criminal charges based solely on a driver’s level of THC in the blood, without having to further prove impairment.
If you're a U.S. citizen? LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by O3H
Really, wow. Ignorance of the law and then a bit.
They do indeed have to let you back into the United States, no ifs, ands or buts.
The US has no extra-territorial laws concerning drug use in a foreign country, FFS. Possession/importation yes.Quote:
Pretty sure some border agent will be tossing folks in the clink,
to ""sober up"" and think about their actions in a FOREIGN COUNTRY.
Yes, if you drive impaired then you could be penalized under US laws in respect of that.
Just as you would be in Canada.
US Customs and Border Patrol actually released press statements on all of this, all you had to do was google.
They held a presser for US and CDN media.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlrjjmrpDss
They stated very simply that possession and importation remain offences and are subject to seizure and an a fine not less than $500, with greater penalties for larger amounts.
However, simple use while in Canada is not an offence nor a reason for denying entry.
Though, if you weren't a US citizen, you may be denied entry if suspected of being an addict.
Well that leaves a wide open door,denied entry if they suspect that you are an addict.
They can tell anybody that they are an addict,how do you prove them wrong?
In respect of non-Americans they have wide ranging discretion on who to admit, as they always did.Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard
But they have no discretion in admitting US citizens.