Atlantic Xpat

I don't get the obsession with Weed / Marijuana in Canada.

It's not something I've ever partaken of. It's not something I could ever conceive using - for multiple reasons less around legality and more around I don't like the bloody smell and I don't want to smoke anything, be it weed or tobacco.

I accept that it's use is endemic if not epidemic. I accept that it can bring relief to some from pain and other issues. Hell, I'll even accept that used appropriately and socially it's no different and possibly even better than alcohol.

But I am troubled by the amount of weed I smell around vehicles - even sitting in traffic it's no problem to establish who tokes and drives. And I'm troubled by the absence - if I have it right - of an easy test for police to administer to drivers to assess whether one is impaired. (a breathalyzer equivalent.)

Most of all, I don't understand why the Federal government feels the need to waste a moment of time, political capital and other resource on this. Are there not more pressing things to be getting on with? Plus the level of effort that provincial governments are going to have to go to in order to manage this provincially. It just seems a colossal waste, pandering to the stoner demographic or right on progressives. (With apologies to any social conservatives who like to get stoned).

I guess I'm just not (tragically) hip enough?

Danny B

THC oil cartridge and a vape pen will change your mind. No smell whatsoever.

I'm sure Stinkypup will be commenting soon, but I enjoy it more than getting drunk.

I can't wait to next July.

Ebonhawke

In this particular case, the Federal Government is wanting to move forwards with the legalization of marijuana because it was a very visible part of their election platform. Not moving forwards on at least some of the policies that the Liberals campaigned upon, leaves them open to criticism (both political and non-political) that they essentially abandoned their platform once they were elected.

I think the Feds realize that there are going to be some growing pains (sorry, bad pun) with introducing the legislation across Canada, including provincial elections that could result in a new party taking office that wants to go in a different direction than the one that the recently defeated party was taken. I think it's therefore likely that a number of provinces will not have cleared all the legislative and administrative hurdles before July 1, 2018.

I also think that, by providing the general framework for the legislation now, and leaving the decision about individual regulations to the provinces, it allows the Federal Government to deflect any issues regarding delays in roll-out, or issues arising from implementation firmly on the provinces when voters go to the polls in the next Federal election. Had they provided the framework say a year from now, then the opposition may find firmer ground in pointing out that any issues with the implementation were a result of a hasty process by the Liberals in order to 'check the box' on a campaign promise in 2015.

dbd33

I see that as being less of an issue than drinking and driving. People who drink and drive through their can or bottle out of the window or into the truck bed from which it bounces on to the road. This littering creates an unpleasant mess. The value of the returned bottles and cans doesn't adequately compensate verge owners for the bother of cleaning up. If someone throws a joint out of the window there's some risk of starting a fire but that's minor.

I'd prefer people smoked than drank while driving although, of course, it's not really a choice; someone smoking a joint likely has a beer in the other hand.

R I C H

I'm with Atlantic Xpat. I find it troubling that despite a multi-year $4.8 million investment with the Canadian Cancer Society for 'a joint tobacco cessation, awareness and outreach campaign...to help young adults quit smoking and stay smoke-free,' the government consider it's appropriate, and a suitable lifestyle choice to permit an alternative substance to smoke other than tobacco. That's pretty hypocritical.

The Government has invested more than $650 million to help Canadians quit smoking and to prevent Canadians from starting to smoke, and yet now wants to offer more smoking choices, which seems to be in direct conflict with messages to promote good health.

By it's own research, the government states that 'marijuana smoke is a mix of toxic substances. Marijuana smoke irritates the throat and lungs, causes coughing, and is associated with symptoms of bronchitis. Marijuana smoke also contains many of the same cancer-causing materials as tobacco smoke.' (https://www.canada.ca/en/health-cana...juana-use.html)

How on earth does it make sense to spend tens of millions of dollars to prevent smoking, only to legalize a product likely to put additional stresses on our health services? Is our society likely to be a better place because of legalization? Surely that's they key question to ask when legislation such as this is being considered. I just don't see it.

sharkus

Braaaaaahhhh! Chillll! Justin is hip and wants us all to be able to rock the weed whenever we want. Get in touch with your karmic center dude and chillax!


Sorry, could not resist.

I too don't "get" why it's such a big deal, and why it needs to be done. Am I missing something in that the government is going to get revenue in the form of taxation for doing this? if so, ok, that'd make some sense. If not, umm, sorry, you're missing out of getting extra cash in the coffers, and so why bother doing this? Trying to appease potential voters perhaps?

I also agree about being in control of a vehicle while under the influence. This applies to commercial as well as private vehicles. The standard of driving is poor enough without having people driving while high.

As for a drug breathalyzer, I did a quick search, found this: Police testing roadside devices to detect drugs | Globalnews.ca

Seems like it may be possible to do roadside testing for it. Not sure on accuracy (didn't read the whole article)

I don't and haven't smoked weed, though may have got high from second hand smoke - if that is possible - at various times when others around me have indulged. I don't have a problem with it, providing you're not about to operate a motorized vehicle.

R I C H

Those that do partake, do you declare that to US immigration when you travel across the border and risk being banned from the country, or do you just lie?

Stinkypup

Yes, you know my thoughts

I think sometimes you post to goad people to respond. Both actions are abhorrent and both cause accidents due to impairment, as you well know

Oink

I'm also concerned with driving under the influence but as for legalization, I say bring it on. Anything that gives you a competitive advance in the game of life is fine with me.

Although I have a contradictory opinion when it comes to fishing. I don't allow smoking on the boat, not because I'm philosophically opposed to its consumption, rather after a few puffs and couple of beers people start to sound like homeless people and having to be a boat for eight hours with people who just mumble gibberish (yeah yeah I know) is extremely annoying.

Atlantic Xpat

So it's quite the most pointless and wasteful pandering to the electorate on what is either a marginal issue, or to take Rich's point, one that is misguided and confused (as though politicians were on something when they thought of it...) if not downright detrimental to health.

Perhaps the Liberals (who I confess I voted for) need to have some wins to make up for their deep hypocrisy on other issues: https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...P=share_btn_tw In any event, it's the bandwidth of government that this plan will consume that bugs me the most, both federally and locally. Newfoundland has some pressing and deep issues for the government to try and solve. Worrying about how to sell/regulate pot shouldn't be one of them.

I'm generally a fan of your humour dbd, but not in this instance.

dbd33

It may be the case that such actions are dangerous but they're not abhorrent to me. Having a beer while cruising in the truck is common practice here. More so in hunting season. As an immigrant I feel obliged to accept that this is the local culture as brawls outside pubs is ours. I have no feelings either way about the moral aspect of the matter; if people crash they crash. I do however get fed up with the endless stream of beer cans and whisky bottles so drivers smoking joints is preferable to me.

dbd33

That's not humour. Drinking and driving is normal here, literally drinking and driving, not driving after drinking. I don't care for it because of the attendant littering and, to the extent that smoking weed is a substitution, I applaud that.

Having lived and travelled extensively with various stoners I can't say I see legalization as a pressing issue, the availability of weed even in remote parts of Newfoundland and Texas is a miracle of distributive efficiency. The arguments I see for legalization apply equally to cigarettes; freedom of choice, tax revenue, so I agree that the government is being hypocritical in trying to suppress one but not the other.

sharkus

Interesting point. If filling out an I-94, then I *think* (haven't filled one out for a very long time), it only mentioned you doing the yes / no thing if you were a drug addict or abuser. Or in a separate question, if you'd ever been arrested or convicted of various crimes, and one of those was relating to "controlled substances".

As for esta, no idea if that has something requiring if you partake of the weed.

withabix

What I don't get is this 'Charter Rights thing' in Canada where they seem to have to prove that you are 'intoxicated' by the substance whilst driving, rather than the European version where there is a breath-alcohol/breath-THC limit, confirmed back at the station by a blood test, that is defined, and being above it means that you lose your driving licence for a minimum of 12 months, starting pretty much immediately.

It sounds like they are moving towards the 'European' version, which, if so, means that Trudeau will have done his first worthwhile thing.

I don't really have a problem with legalisation (apart from the odour issue) as long as they resolve the driving issues FIRST, because it will reduce Hells Angels' revenues (and they might start shooting each other a bit more in their Darwinistic way) but if they are going to legalise, then the limits for driving should be zero detectible THC.

BristolUK

Much as people in Texas shooting each other is the culture, just as long as they pick up their shell casings and sweep up the blood.