[woob]

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Ontario+judge+declares+criminalization+unconstitut ional/4604951/story.html

TORONTO — Ontario is one step closer to the legalization of marijuana after the Ontario Superior Court struck down two key parts of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act that prohibit the possession and production of pot.


The court declared the rules that govern medical marijuana access and the prohibitions laid out in Sections 4 and 7 of the act "constitutionally invalid and of no force and effect" on Monday, effectively paving the way for legalization.


If the government does not respond within 90 days with a successful delay or re-regulation of marijuana, the drug will be legal to possess and produce in Ontario, where the decision is binding.


The ruling stemmed from the constitutional challenge of Matthew Mernagh, a man who relies on medical marijuana to ease pain brought on by fibromyalgia, scoliosis, seizures and depression.


The Ontario Court of Appeal had previously recognized that to deprive someone with a serious illness of medical marijuana if it relieves their pain is a violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. As a result of that, the federal government created the Marijuana Medical Access Regulations to let people legally get, possess and grow marijuana if they have a licence supported by a medical doctor.


Health Canada's medical marijuana program regulates and approves which growers patients can buy from and how much they're legally allowed to use for their treatment.


However, Justice Donald Taliano wrote in his decision on Monday that Mernagh — a well-known marijuana advocate who has been charged for possession and production of marijuana numerous times — has been unable to get a doctor to sign off on a medical marijuana licence.


"Doctors often have a great deal of difficulty with this and have in many cases blatantly outright refused to sign these forms," said Jacob Hunter, the policy director for the Vancouver-based Beyond Prohibition Foundation, which fights for the legalization of marijuana.


It has meant many Canadians waiting to be accepted into the medical marijuana program seek out medical marijuana without a licence, at times leading to possession and production-related arrests.


Mernagh's criminal charge is permanently stayed, Taliano wrote in his ruling, and he is granted a "personal exemption" to buy or produce marijuana during the 90 days given to the government in order to submit its challenge.


The decision is a huge win for legalization supporters and for medical marijuana patients.


"I think it represents a dramatic step forward for critically and chronically ill Canadians," B.C. lawyer and foundation executive director Kirk Tousaw said Tuesday night. "It is undoubtedly going to progress through the court system . . . but it's gratifying to see a court has accepted what so many thousand medical marijuana patients have been saying for years — that it's incredibly difficult if not impossible to access medical marijuana."


He compared the case to that of Henry Morgentaler, the abortion doctor and advocate whose constitutional win eventually led to the widespread legalization of abortion, one that "became legal without any real regulatory scheme surrounding it," Tousaw said.


Anti-drug action groups and others against the legalization of marijuana have said legalizing marijuana could lead to widespread use and increase crime rates.


Tousaw said that if unchallenged, the Ontario ruling could have a ripple effect across Canada. "I would argue that if marijuana is legal in Ontario, you can't realistically have it illegal in the rest of the country."

http://i.imgur.com/CXisB.jpg

TL;DR - Judge declares that the drug law infringes on Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms; gov't has 90 days to come up with new law or weed is fully legalized.

[Qmx323]

one can only hope

[Teh Doucher]

medical marijuana is, not the stuff that the rest of us buy illegally. i sure hope it doesnt get legalized and im an avid pot smoker....

[CRS]

medical marijuana is, not the stuff that the rest of us buy illegally. i sure hope it doesnt get legalized and im an avid pot smoker....

Curious to why you're against the legalization of pot other than the fact it will produce billions in revenue and make our universal health care and education system immensely better.

[Pok-Gai]

i sure hope it doesnt get legalized and im an avid pot smoker....

why do u say that?

[EmperorIS]

never had mj ... will try if its legal

[Culture_Vulture]

maybe they want people to be high and happy for the elections :lol

[xilley]

^ you would only try if its legal? it means you dont care what you actually take into your system
so just step it up and TRY IT !

420 is on the corner :troll:

[EmperorIS]

i'll try it if its legal because theres nothing holding me back from trying it .. its not that i don't care what goes in to my system... smoking and drinking is legal .. but i hardly do those

[Teh Doucher]

Curious to why you're against the legalization of pot other than the fact it will produce billions in revenue and make our universal health care and education system immensely better.

foreign trade. US being the big one.

[twitchyzero]

Panda Love needs to be rebanned

[The_AK]

time to invest in lamps

[Vansterdam]

:fullofwin:

[Nightwalker]

Fuck yes, the law is ridiculous.

Probably won't happen, but every time something like this or the vote in California or something else goes on, it's a clear sign that the tides are changing.

[TheNewGirl]

I think it's kind of funny. I tell all my conservative anti-pot co workers that they should SUPPORT legalization as Legalization = Regulation + Taxes which both are to their benefit.

But they don't get it.

[ilvtofu]

Curious to why you're against the legalization of pot other than the fact it will produce billions in revenue and make our universal health care and education system immensely better.

:rolleyes: because legalizing pot is all rainbows and butterflies and all that will come out of it is a shitload of revenue...


I think it's kind of funny. I tell all my conservative anti-pot co workers that they should SUPPORT legalization as Legalization = Regulation + Taxes which both are to their benefit.

But they don't get it.

Just using driving as an example since this is RS, how many more people do you think will be driving on the road under the influence of weed? Regulations on responsible use help but bottom line is that good judgement doesn't always exist when people are under the influence and when you make it that much easier to get...

[Graeme S]

:rolleyes: because legalizing pot is all rainbows and butterflies and all that will come out of it is a shitload of revenue...

From what most people see/envision, legalization/regulation of pot will do wonders generally speaking.

No more destruction of residential spaces with grow-ops.
Fewer young kids getting ripped on a regular basis 'cause it's easier to get pot than booze.
Tax revenues from the government.
And so on and so forth. What are the arguments against?
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[Death2Theft]

http://money.cnn.com/2011/03/29/smallbusiness/marijuana_millionaires/index.htm

[TheNewGirl]

Just using driving as an example since this is RS, how many more people do you think will be driving on the road under the influence of weed? Regulations on responsible use help but bottom line is that good judgement doesn't always exist when people are under the influence and when you make it that much easier to get...

Actually, it WON'T be that much easier to get.

Right now I could walk to the other side of my building and any hour of any day have a joint for $5 when ever I like.

THAT is easy to get.

Having to go to the government regulated liquor store during business hours and produce id that proves I am indeed an adult and buy likely in restricted quantities means control over purchasing and supply.

This though will bleed enough above the board business off the drug trade to make it substancially less lucrative much as removal of alcohol prohibition did in the states back in the dark, dry ages. This will over time reduce the grow op industry AND put enforcement and crack down on grow ops into a different and frankly more effective enforcement under a food and consumable classification. They don't need warrants and crap to inspect for these things and rather thing time they levy HUGE penalties. This makes the cost > benefit for illegally growing, drives up the price on the black market to the point where people prefer legal channels and ultimately stamps it out with the exception of the practice of "booting for minors", just like we do for booze.

It also means that the police may actually get a definitive road side test to use to screen out and punish impaired and pot smoking drivers.

I see legalization as beginning to treat pot more like we do alcohol which IMO is a good thing all around.

[ilvtofu]

Actually, it WON'T be that much easier to get.

Right now I could walk to the other side of my building and any hour of any day have a joint for $5 when ever I like.

THAT is easy to get.

Having to go to the government regulated liquor store during business hours and produce id that proves I am indeed an adult and buy likely in restricted quantities means control over purchasing and supply.

This though will bleed enough above the board business off the drug trade to make it substancially less lucrative much as removal of alcohol prohibition did in the states back in the dark, dry ages. This will over time reduce the grow op industry AND put enforcement and crack down on grow ops into a different and frankly more effective enforcement under a food and consumable classification. They don't need warrants and crap to inspect for these things and rather thing time they levy HUGE penalties. This makes the cost > benefit for illegally growing, drives up the price on the black market to the point where people prefer legal channels and ultimately stamps it out with the exception of the practice of "booting for minors", just like we do for booze.

It also means that the police may actually get a definitive road side test to use to screen out and punish impaired and pot smoking drivers.

I see legalization as beginning to treat pot more like we do alcohol which IMO is a good thing all around.

From what most people see/envision, legalization/regulation of pot will do wonders generally speaking.

No more destruction of residential spaces with grow-ops.
Fewer young kids getting ripped on a regular basis 'cause it's easier to get pot than booze.
Tax revenues from the government.
And so on and so forth. What are the arguments against?
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

That's why most people are not in the government, because they can only think about one side of the argument. The economic benefits make sense but you have to think of the adverse social effects of making weed easily obtainable/easier to obtain.

Keep in mind that the cost of growing weed is still relatively low and dealers can always lower their margins, so if you think that just because marijuana is legal gangs and drug dealers will disappear think again. Similar to selling ipods, there will be ipods from the apple store for $300+tax, used ipods for $250 tax free off craigslist, and stolen ipods for $200 tax free and there are buyers for every market which is why people will inevitably steal things regardless of regulation. There will be a reduction in black market marijuana but it won't disappear, mainly because the quantities will likely have to be regulated so any more demand will have to be filled by the black market. And, unlike a bottle of grey goose or a chateau lafite rothschild, weed is relatively easy to produce.

Treating pot more like alcohol will spout more pothead anonymous groups and driver's license suspensions, that IMO is a bad thing. As far as booting weed for minors go it's really not that hard at all. Throughout high school I always had friends that were legal and whom we mutually trusted without ever having to worry about the authorities, same would apply for reselling legal marijuana illegally.

[RESN]

I don't think the quantities would be regulated to the point where "the black market" would need to help supply the demand. At a marijuana dispensary you can go in there and choose what you want, there isn't only going to be one strain for you. You are going to have MANY choices. Your average joe pot smoker is not going to go in buying a pound for personal use. There is just no point in that. The most you'd probably buy is an ounce, and that is just because you're too lazy to go back.

Yes weed is relatively easy to produce but it's not going to be made overnight. If the black market can keep their supply open, why can't the government? Having medical marijuana dispensaries would just make the market of weed a whole lot cleaner. No having to worry about laced, sprayed, bad weed.

Liquor is legalized isn't it? And since booting is so easy, wouldn't alcohol be a problem too. From my experience you can wait outside a liquor store and ask any fitting middle aged or college person granted you give them a extra $5. There are liquor services out there delivering and selling alcohol illegally to kids after hours too, and those guys definitely aren't going to tell the authorities after. So what should we do about this? You can never take away the "black market" but like you said, we can reduce this.

[TheNewGirl]

That's why most people are not in the government, because they can only think about one side of the argument. The economic benefits make sense but you have to think of the adverse social effects of making weed easily obtainable/easier to obtain.


If you think the "government" looks at this issue in any terms beyond "if I touch this subject I'll lose votes" you're on crack.

We have seen in other places how delegalization and legalization greatly reduces the social stigma that leads to the blackmarket and related culture and actually lowers problematic drug use amongst the general population.

Look at what happened when the alcohol prohibition in the states was repealed, or for a better analogue, look at what Portugal which had previously some of the HIGHEST drug crime rates in Europe but upon their change in approach to dealing with drug use now have some of the lowest drug crime related rates in Europe (They decriminalized pot, cocaine, heroine and LSD for personal use), as well as a huge reduction in all the crap that comes with drug use (HIV, overdose, and so on and so forth).

All our medical and sociological and historical evidence says that with vices prohibition = black market = crime.

While tolerance = rehabilitation = lower drug use = lower drug related crime rates.

I know the Puritanical American Media has sold the whole vice = ultimate evil mentality very hard to us Canadians, we're far far away from places where they do things differently but there are places where they don't continue trying the same things over and over and over again insisting eventually they'll succeed which is really, ultimately, been our approach to drugs and crime here in North America.

[CRS]

foreign trade. US being the big one.

That's why most people are not in the government, because they can only think about one side of the argument. The economic benefits make sense but you have to think of the adverse social effects of making weed easily obtainable/easier to obtain.

Keep in mind that the cost of growing weed is still relatively low and dealers can always lower their margins, so if you think that just because marijuana is legal gangs and drug dealers will disappear think again. Similar to selling ipods, there will be ipods from the apple store for $300+tax, used ipods for $250 tax free off craigslist, and stolen ipods for $200 tax free and there are buyers for every market which is why people will inevitably steal things regardless of regulation. There will be a reduction in black market marijuana but it won't disappear, mainly because the quantities will likely have to be regulated so any more demand will have to be filled by the black market. And, unlike a bottle of grey goose or a chateau lafite rothschild, weed is relatively easy to produce.

Treating pot more like alcohol will spout more pothead anonymous groups and driver's license suspensions, that IMO is a bad thing. As far as booting weed for minors go it's really not that hard at all. Throughout high school I always had friends that were legal and whom we mutually trusted without ever having to worry about the authorities, same would apply for reselling legal marijuana illegally.

You're kidding, right?

All your points are utterly ridiculous. Thank god you're not in the government because you can't even see what is in front of you.

1. Making it easier to access. Yeah, because right now weed is SOOOO hard to get a hold of. Hell, I bet I can walk any two blocks in Vancouver and either find a dealer or someone who can point me in the right direction.

2. Dealers are in it for the money. With decreased margins, they will not likely be in business for very long seeing as the risks associated with it are still high.

3. Because everything you listed there isn't already happening. Driving under the influence encompasses more than just drinking and driving. It is under the influence of any drug.

Lastly, good luck with the booting idea. It sure works out well for alcohol too doesn't it?

:rolleyes:

[Nightwalker]

They decriminalized pot, cocaine, heroine and LSD for personal use

Actually it was all drugs. It's been working there for a decade.

"In July 2001, Portugal became the first European country to formalize decriminalization of drug possession for personal use, when they introduced Law 30/2000. The law decriminalized the use, possession and acquisition of all types of illicit substances for personal use, defined as being up to ten days supply of that substance. This was in line with the de facto Portuguese drug policy before the reform. Drug addicts were then to be aggressively targeted with therapy or community service rather than fines or waivers."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal

[Drow]

The only way i can see the legalization of marijuana to be most economically profitable for the government, and to discourage the black market for marijuana is if they mass produced weed to the point where its cheaper than what dealers can offer you. The dealers would have to cut down their profits in order to stay competitive and i doubt anybody could mass produce it to that point other than the government. Doubt that would happen though, since the gov't would probably tax the shit outta it.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[TheKingdom2000]

The people who do not support the legalization of Marijuana are ignorant.
They simply ignore the facts and studies. Alcohol and Tobacco are 10000000x times worse.

And i'm sure legalizing it would make it cheaper... unless the govt taxes the shit out of it, then it may be more? Another benefit I see is that you can be pretty confident in the product you're getting. The quality should be consistent and you would know exactly what you're getting.

[TheNewGirl]

The only way i can see the legalization of marijuana to be most economically profitable for the government, and to discourage the black market for marijuana is if they mass produced weed to the point where its cheaper than what dealers can offer you. The dealers would have to cut down their profits in order to stay competitive and i doubt anybody could mass produce it to that point other than the government. Doubt that would happen though, since the gov't would probably tax the shit outta it.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

Actually, most people will pay more to obtain something legally. Other wise we'd all have stills in our basements.

MX> It /would/ be taxed the shit out of, I have absolutely no doubt.

But that said, it's kinda hypocritical, we legally allow people to kill themselves (and everyone around them) with cigarettes. We don't have a problem with alcohol or caffine (though we seem to like to pretend these aren't drugs).

Would any of the anti drug legalization people be in favor of banning caffine, alcohol and nicotine?

[Sandman]

ilvtofu, just curious, have you ever tried weed before?

[Jsunu]

Actually, most people will pay more to obtain something legally. Other wise we'd all have stills in our basements.

MX> It /would/ be taxed the shit out of, I have absolutely no doubt.

But that said, it's kinda hypocritical, we legally allow people to kill themselves (and everyone around them) with cigarettes. We don't have a problem with alcohol or caffine (though we seem to like to pretend these aren't drugs).

Would any of the anti drug legalization people be in favor of banning caffine, alcohol and nicotine?

The truth is that drug laws are really arbitrary and really depend on the political/commercial climate. Not too long ago opiates were legal but market factors caused it to be controlled and eventually deemed illegal.

[Nightwalker]

I have no doubt even taxed to shit that legal weed would be cheaper than blackmarket now. Why would it be any more expensive than tobacco to produce?

[Infiniti]

There is one matter of contention that hasnt been brought up yet, that being the distinction between "legalization" and "decriminalization"...The former being illegal in the UN charter.

[woob]

I have no doubt even taxed to shit that legal weed would be cheaper than blackmarket now. Why would it be any more expensive than tobacco to produce?

how much is blackmarket weed now? Cuz in Cali weed is like $20 a gram, legally.

[Skyline350gt]

blazing is chill as fcuk.

[bloodmack]

I think if we legalize it, it will become another cigarette. We will smoke it out of filters and it will be produced by big companies who put addictive additives in it so they can keep you coming. Just like tobacco turned into.

I wouldn't mind smoking it in public to be legal and having to acquire a growers license to grow it.

EDIT: I smoke almost everyday after work.

[Great68]

The only way i can see the legalization of marijuana to be most economically profitable for the government, and to discourage the black market for marijuana is if they mass produced weed to the point where its cheaper than what dealers can offer you. The dealers would have to cut down their profits in order to stay competitive and i doubt anybody could mass produce it to that point other than the government. Doubt that would happen though, since the gov't would probably tax the shit outta it.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

Myself, I'd gladly pay more to buy it legally from the government/licensed suppliers than from the black market.

I hate buying anything from the black market.

[ilvtofu]

ilvtofu, just curious, have you ever tried weed before?

http://www.frumsatire.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/dog_i_dunno_lol.jpg

[2 n r]

^That would mean either "no" or "I tried it once and tripped the fuck out, scurred and will never do it again"
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

[AAnthony]

-----

[$_$]

how much is blackmarket weed now? Cuz in Cali weed is like $20 a gram, legally.

Grey market weed from "grey market dispensary" right now is $7-$10 a gram, same as black market prices.

For "true medicinal users" (defined by having federal cards which require you to go through a specialist recommendation as well as hella lot of paperwork), I'm sure the cost of actually buying the weed is actually cheaper, especially if you didn't apply for the permit to grow, you can be paired with a grower that grows your medicine specifically for you.

For anyone that are interested, the forms that are required can be found in health canada's website here: (this is what the judge was talking about when he was saying that the current program does not work)

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/marihuana/how-comment/applicant-demandeur/index-eng.php

Health Canada is currently taking longer to process applications due to an increase in the number of applications and a lack of government funding. They should acknowledge receipt of the application within 3-5 weeks of receiving it and will indicate if any of the required information is missing. Applications from patients with terminal conditions will be given priority for processing.

Processing time for the application will vary depending on the nature of the applicant's medical condition, and whether all of the necessary information has been received, this can take up to 7 months.

Applicants who are approved will be notified in writing. Many doctors/health professionals may insist that you have previously tried all the mainstream drugs and pharmaceuticals first, for your medical condition, before prescribing marijuana. But that doesn't mean you are required to take them.

[asahai69]

10 a gram for decent to good kush

[BNR32_Coupe]

I think if we legalize it, it will become another cigarette. We will smoke it out of filters and it will be produced by big companies who put addictive additives in it so they can keep you coming. Just like tobacco turned into.

I wouldn't mind smoking it in public to be legal and having to acquire a growers license to grow it.

EDIT: I smoke almost everyday after work.

dont think thats why they put additives. the additives are there to stabilize the growth of mold in the cigarettes. the additives, which are poisonous to us, are also poisonous to mold.

the nicotine is the stuff that gets you addicted. if you have a brand of cigarette with a high amount of nicotine, you'll be addicted more as your tolerance is heightened. you could potentially get MORE addicted to organic brand of cigarettes, which would give your body pure, un-compromised nicotine.

because the unit price for weed is much higher than cigarettes, the government isnt likely to put as much additives in it than companies do with cigarettes. the reason being is that the unit cost per weed is high enough to warrant lower inventories of safety stock, thus requiring no additives.

tl;dr at $5/joint, you can allocate some costs to foregone inventory (due to expiration), so you dont need additives

[woob]

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/marihuana/how-comment/applicant-demandeur/index-eng.php[/url]

lolwut is the proper spelling "Marihuana"?

[Great68]

Treating pot more like alcohol will spout more pothead anonymous groups and driver's license suspensions, that IMO is a bad thing. As far as booting weed for minors go it's really not that hard at all. Throughout high school I always had friends that were legal and whom we mutually trusted without ever having to worry about the authorities, same would apply for reselling legal marijuana illegally.

There's a certain demographic which may abuse marijuana but that same demographic is also likely to abuse other substances whether they are legal or illegal.

Then there's a demographic which includes people like me, people who go to work, make good money, afford nice things, pay their taxes and live otherwise law-abiding lives who enjoy occasionally using marijuana in their personal time. These people want to be able to do what they enjoy without feeling like criminals.

I have not personally experienced ANYONE in my circle of friends to have ever shown ANY of the stereotypical social problems of marijuana. In fact, one of my best friends who is a HEAVY pot smoker makes more fucking money than me in his job and he didn't even graduate high school!!! While he hated high school and playing by traditional education system rules, he's incredibly intelligent and highly motivated, which is exactly the OPPOSITE of the stereotypical side-effects associated with marijuana.

A few years ago, right after I had moved to Victoria I was out for a walk with the wife at a local park. While we were out on our walk, I hear the flick of a lighter and then smell the distinctive pot smoke. I look over to the direction it was coming from, expecting to see a bunch of kids. It wasn't kids, it was a little old grandma, on the park bench, puffing on a joint! She must have been at least in her late 70's. I thought to myself, what a shame it is that according to our stupid laws this old lady could potentially be arrested, charged, given a criminal record and even do jail time.

[$_$]

lolwut is the proper spelling "Marihuana"?

That's the legal spelling for Canada.

[RESN]

A few years ago, right after I had moved to Victoria I was out for a walk with the wife at a local park. While we were out on our walk, I hear the flick of a lighter and then smell the distinctive pot smoke. I look over to the direction it was coming from, expecting to see a bunch of kids. It wasn't kids, it was a little old grandma, on the park bench, puffing on a joint! She must have been at least in her late 70's. I thought to myself, what a shame it is that according to our stupid laws this old lady could potentially be arrested, charged, given a criminal record and even do jail time.

http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lj78k05Guc1qielqfo1_500.jpg

[CRS]

http://www.frumsatire.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/dog_i_dunno_lol.jpg

So any real response to the replies posed for you?

[melloman]

:fullofwin:

Global BC | B.C. municipal leaders vote in favour of decriminalizing marijuana (http://www.globaltvbc.com/bc%20municipal%20leaders%20vote%20in%20favour%20of %20decriminalizing%20marijuana/6442722709/story.html)

Getting closer to legalization.

[El Bastardo]

If weed is legalized, obviously workplaces will continue to be able to do drug testing.. but I wonder what the legality of discriminating against those who use a (newly legalized) drug will be.

Thoughts?

[SumAznGuy]

If weed is legalized, obviously workplaces will continue to be able to do drug testing.. but I wonder what the legality of discriminating against those who use a (newly legalized) drug will be.

Thoughts?

My guess is same as drinking or being drunk at work.

[inv4zn]

Yup.

It probably won't change much as it is now. As long as you don't show up under the influence, it should be alright?

[- kT]

i'd like to add my opinion on this matter:

FUCK YEAH
Posted via RS Mobile

[Gridlock]

First, the conservative gov't has declared that there would be no change to the existing drug laws, so I would expect to have a new law in place that meets the requirements of the court ruling.

Second, we have a pretty much decriminalized system in place here in Vancouver anyway. A guy in my building is a stoner, and he gets stopped by the police, asked his business, he tells them he has to go for a walk because his landlord won't let him light up inside and off he goes.

To switch to a legal system, I see the following:

1. Decrim use

Basically what we have...small amounts of personal use pot aren't being charged.

2. Legal cafes, illegal everywhere else.

Solves the casual user being criminal issue, does nothing for illicit supply.

3. Full legalization

Now you need to devote a lot of effort to deciding who gets to grow and creating a regulatory frame work for them, strengthening the laws surrounding personal grow, as in if you want to use pot, you MUST buy from gov't approved growers**, and then a whole set of laws on where you can use, where you can't, driving offences and so on.

I think for that reason alone, you won't see it anytime soon. You'd have to re-write half the criminal code, plus city by-laws.

**I wouldn't support any legislation that didn't put a death grip on personal growing, and in that case, you'll have a lot of pot users disappointed with their new supply.

[Hondaracer]

That's why most people are not in the government, because they can only think about one side of the argument. The economic benefits make sense but you have to think of the adverse social effects of making weed easily obtainable/easier to obtain.

Keep in mind that the cost of growing weed is still relatively low and dealers can always lower their margins, so if you think that just because marijuana is legal gangs and drug dealers will disappear think again. Similar to selling ipods, there will be ipods from the apple store for $300+tax, used ipods for $250 tax free off craigslist, and stolen ipods for $200 tax free and there are buyers for every market which is why people will inevitably steal things regardless of regulation. There will be a reduction in black market marijuana but it won't disappear, mainly because the quantities will likely have to be regulated so any more demand will have to be filled by the black market. And, unlike a bottle of grey goose or a chateau lafite rothschild, weed is relatively easy to produce.

Treating pot more like alcohol will spout more pothead anonymous groups and driver's license suspensions, that IMO is a bad thing. As far as booting weed for minors go it's really not that hard at all. Throughout high school I always had friends that were legal and whom we mutually trusted without ever having to worry about the authorities, same would apply for reselling legal marijuana illegally.

large groups of people will be getting out of illegally growing weed if it becomes legal, there's barely money in it as it is.

[dlo]

i am just happy with the decriminalization, too much to think about actually legalizing it... gonna be the issues with quality, quantity, etc etc lol will be a problem for sure.. aint that easy as people think it is

[El Bastardo]

Yup.

It probably won't change much as it is now. As long as you don't show up under the influence, it should be alright?


This raises an interesting point. Some workplaces have 'codes of conduct' which they require their employees to follow. I do believe that these codes of conduct may come in conflict with legalized marijuana.

(I'm not certain but) there are probably workplaces out there that allow for marijuana to show up in drug testing if its used for medical reasons. For recreational users, these courtesies are not likely to apply.

This puts the workplace in a unique situation because can they discriminate based on a person's personal conduct outside of the workplace with respect to the (hypothetically) recently legalized use of marijuana?

I'd say they probably can and despite pushback, it will still be something they can fire people for doing.

[Graeme S]

I think what they're going to need is a type of test which determines how much THC is in one's bloodstream at a certain point in time. Quick-acting pot tests (urine? Blood?) are going to have to show up pretty soon.

[inv4zn]

This raises an interesting point. Some workplaces have 'codes of conduct' which they require their employees to follow. I do believe that these codes of conduct may come in conflict with legalized marijuana.

(I'm not certain but) there are probably workplaces out there that allow for marijuana to show up in drug testing if its used for medical reasons. For recreational users, these courtesies are not likely to apply.

This puts the workplace in a unique situation because can they discriminate based on a person's personal conduct outside of the workplace with respect to the (hypothetically) recently legalized use of marijuana?

I'd say they probably can and despite pushback, it will still be something they can fire people for doing.

I'd like to assume that whatever industry one works at, if it's professional enough to do drug testing and set guidelines for workers, said worker is professional enough to adhere to it.

Probably not the same, but like how some workers are expected to work 12 hour shifts, even though they may want to sleep. If your job requires to you to not have any THC levels, then you should lay off of it until you're on holidays for an extended period of time.

I will also venture a guess and say that even though the "law" may decriminalize it, many companies will not change their policies (at least for a while) because of the stereotypes and images that follow weed i.e. stoners.

[Vansterdam]

I would like to see the thc content level in my blood as well. :fullofwin:
Posted via RS Mobile

[Phozy]

^Must be over 9000

[MindBomber]

**I wouldn't support any legislation that didn't put a death grip on personal growing, and in that case, you'll have a lot of pot users disappointed with their new supply.

That's the first time I've ever heard of someone placing that condition on supporting legalization, would you mind explaing the reasoning behind it?
Posted via RS Mobile