So What Now?

I don't think I'm wrong. Impaired driving will be an obstacle and will be the subject of court challenges for years. Any test will need to prove impairment and not simply indicate the presence of THC. I wake up with a higher thc level than the numbers I have heard tossed around. This part of legalization would have happened in much the same way regardless of who is in power...if you have some ideas, write some letters and let them be known.
I am serious about dispensaries being here to stay. The raids are not coming at the direction of Ottawa, they are local issues based on public complaints or biases of provincial and municipal governments. Vancouver PD only bust if there is proof of sales to youth, and the city has licensed them. Other cities are doing the same and even small towns like Port Alberni have licensed one. It just reinforces my opinion of provincial and municipal governments attempting to form their own system of mj distribution and taxation ahead of legalization. Dispensaries will be a player in any new system unless a province bans it themselves. Saskatchewan and Alberta are not necessarily the most progressive provinces...
The LPC said they would begin the process right away...which they did. I'm not sure where Blair said he was basing legalization on the mmpr (link?) but considering the mmpr has been struck down as unconstitutional, I think plans might have changed, if that was indeed the intent. I have heard nothing about banning homegrows and I am fairly certain in my analysis of why they will have no justifiable reason to ban them. It remains an unknown, but I'd put money on it.
I cringed when they named Blair as a candidate in the election, and again when they named him to head up this file. Regardless, he is tasked with chairing a committee to develop 'the system the rest of the world will emulate'...he is only one voice...we have many. The one thing they will avoid at all costs is a constitutional challenge on limiting freedoms by banning growing a plant the courts have already said poses no risk, and whose product is infinitely less dangerous than legal home brews.
We'll see what happens and I'm sure there will be things we don't like, but it's to be expected with a change like this. Like anything else, we advocate for the changes we want and eventually we reach a place everyone can live in.
I'll be the first one to turn on the LPC if they come out with anything that doesn't allow dispensaries and home grows...but I prefer to wait until I've been wronged before I react, and that hasn't happened. Glass half full vs. glass half empty? Anyway, let's watch it play out and jump in when we need to...I don't think there is any worries...
Peace

Had the impaired conversation with my GP last week.
I mentioned that being impaired is a fine line when talking about MJ, comparing reg people to patients.
What a patient might take with ZERO EFFECT..may floor a regular person for days!
He agreed but could only say that he hoped people who burn did not drive.
I said that drinking will see a person drive because their judgement is clouded.....but being fried usually keeps you from getting behind the wheel.

The exact quote from Trudeau is that he would 'legalize marijuana right away'. I will be very surprised if it happens during the current mandate.

The LPC might legalize perfectly, but the signs so far are not good. The fact that they won't say whether they'll appeal Allard (this should have been a no hesitation, we will respect the court's decision) is a huge red flag. Philpott made some vague statement about respecting the court's decision, but that doesn't really mean anything unless we get a statement from the justice minister.

The senate (I realize these are senate liberals) put a committee together that was heavily tilted towards law enforcement / big rehab, and only after public outcry did they include people from the other side (1 person). That should also be a huge red flag, along with Trudeau's list of people he will consult. Law enforcement, addictions 'experts', etc. No patients or dispensary owners.

The provinces will very likely receive the lion's share of regulation, which is going to be an event bigger mess. I'm sure Brad Wall, the current mini-Harper will stymie that process. I've attempted to contact ministers related to cannabis (justice and health) and have never gotten a response. When I asked Libby Davies from the NDP about things, she responded within minutes. If the LPC can't take a few minutes to respond to basic questions from patients, I really have to question whose best interests they have in mind.

We'll see what happens. But so far, the LPC has given the voters it's accountable to nothing to suggest optimism. Trudeau continuing to enforce and arrest people while he himself admits he broke the law is unmitigated hypocrisy.

JungleStrikeGuy said:

The exact quote from Trudeau is that he would 'legalize marijuana right away'. I will be very surprised if it happens during the current mandate.

The LPC might legalize perfectly, but the signs so far are not good. The fact that they won't say whether they'll appeal Allard (this should have been a no hesitation, we will respect the court's decision) is a huge red flag. Philpott made some vague statement about respecting the court's decision, but that doesn't really mean anything unless we get a statement from the justice minister.

The senate (I realize these are senate liberals) put a committee together that was heavily tilted towards law enforcement / big rehab, and only after public outcry did they include people from the other side (1 person). That should also be a huge red flag, along with Trudeau's list of people he will consult. Law enforcement, addictions 'experts', etc. No patients or dispensary owners.

The provinces will very likely receive the lion's share of regulation, which is going to be an event bigger mess. I'm sure Brad Wall, the current mini-Harper will stymie that process. I've attempted to contact ministers related to cannabis (justice and health) and have never gotten a response. When I asked Libby Davies from the NDP about things, she responded within minutes. If the LPC can't take a few minutes to respond to basic questions from patients, I really have to question whose best interests they have in mind.

We'll see what happens. But so far, the LPC has given the voters it's accountable to nothing to suggest optimism. Trudeau continuing to enforce and arrest people while he himself admits he broke the law is unmitigated hypocrisy.

Click to expand...

They don't know how to make it work. JT just thought he did.
They didn't foresee Phelan making such a decision that he did.

It's theoretically blown the Market wide open...
The Law is getting left out(We're going legal after all ) and so are the Feds.
Patients and PEOPLE HAVE RIGHTS! in spite of what Harpstein may have accomplished in taking them all away!

I think you misread the quote..."During a campaign stop in B.C.'s Lower Mainland, Justin Trudeau said a Liberal government would start work "right away" on reforming the country's marijuana laws." http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/09/30/justin-trudeau-pot-marijuana_n_8223548.html
...the work has started. It's a little more complicated than flipping a switch. 90 years of prohibition has guaranteed this will be a complicated issue, especially for the non-users or supporters.
He also says in the same article that it could happen in the first two years. I get you are not a fan of the liberals, but I'm not into another discussion on politics. I just don't see an evil conspiracy brewing to fuck over pot smokers. To what end?
You continue to be the pessimist and I'll be the optimist and we'll see whose prediction more closely resembles the reality when it happens. It makes for interesting debate!

I dont see any reason not to take JT at his word, of starting right away to legalize. I mean, he has already. He has hired a credible spokes-person (the cop, which was a pr move to mollify the right wingnuts) and Im sure he has got people working on gathering the info required to write legislation that will stand to test and scrutiny.

That wont happen overnight. There is so much to consider...never mind the colossal task of just coming up with a system of distribution and the such. Legalization will take YEARS just to gather the info required to write those laws.

So no... it likely wont get done in this mandate. But at least the process has started. Or at least the discussion has started and that in itself is a HUGE achievement.

gb123 said:

Had the impaired conversation with my GP last week.
I mentioned that being impaired is a fine line when talking about MJ, comparing reg people to patients.
What a patient might take with ZERO EFFECT..may floor a regular person for days!
He agreed but could only say that he hoped people who burn did not drive.
I said that drinking will see a person drive because their judgement is clouded.....but being fried usually keeps you from getting behind the wheel.

Click to expand...

I think people that toke n drive are probably safer than most folks think.
How impaired is a person driving with a fentenayl patch on or machine operators all perked up to be at work risking more people's lives than their own.
Legality doesn't change people's morals there will always be people who toke n drive same as dumb asses that drink n drive or don't wear seat belts.
That's where everyone's thoughts need to change.

I'd also love to hear why everyone thinks 6 plants is the magic number?
Seems kinda arbitrary to me since some folks can't get the same meds out of 100 plants that someone who knows what their doing could get out of two.
Just curious to the logic behind #6

torontoke said:

I think people that toke n drive are probably safer than most folks think.
How impaired is a person driving with a fentenayl patch on or machine operators all perked up to be at work risking more people's lives than their own.
Legality doesn't change people's morals there will always be people who toke n drive same as dumb asses that drink n drive or don't wear seat belts.
That's where everyone's thoughts need to change.

I'd also love to hear why everyone thinks 6 plants is the magic number?
Seems kinda arbitrary to me since some folks can't get the same meds out of 100 plants that someone who knows what their doing could get out of two.
Just curious to the logic behind #6

Click to expand...

My thoughts are they will have to put a limit on plant numbers for recreational use in order to stem the black market. 6 is the number in some other legalized jurisdictions like Colorado. 6 plants could keep a rec user and a few friends in weed. The number is purely speculative, just a starting point, I guess. It is arbitrary considering the yield one can get if they know what they are doing, but it sounds good to the masses.

The worlds askew.

The Terry Parker case gave us the right to our meds so they can't take that away.
we then had another that gave us our right to grow and my brain won't kick in to which case that was...then we had Sfetkopolous that gave us our right to more than 1 garden per DG.
our grow and possess rights have been very established
if i'm wrong on Sfetkopolous being that one- sorry. coffee hasn't kicked in yet

doingdishes said:

The Terry Parker case gave us the right to our meds so they can't take that away.
we then had another that gave us our right to grow and my brain won't kick in to which case that was...then we had Sfetkopolous that gave us our right to more than 1 garden per DG.
our grow and possess rights have been very established
if i'm wrong on Sfetkopolous being that one- sorry. coffee hasn't kicked in yet

Click to expand...

How do we get dicked around next? square footage of canopy? plant counts? possession limits? atleast we got our gardens back.

no we didn't get "our gardens back"

the same people who were injunctified are still ok..the rest still are STILL not..and none of us know wtf is gonna happen

quote:then we had Sfetkopolous that gave us our right to more than 1 garden per DG.

>the object was to have more than one garden per dg..they hated to do it so they gave us one more..

the ones who actually play by the rules ...do

but next thing in bc there coops with a zillion licenses attached..

I don't begrudge them bending the rules but the real dg's who don't..did not bend them

we want in and we are the "mom and pops" who will not screw people 's lives around..either emotionally or financially

bigmanc said:

How do we get dicked around next? square footage of canopy? plant counts? possession limits? atleast we got our gardens back.

Click to expand...

we affirmed that we have the right to produce our own meds. we have a had a couple cases where we had the same fight already.
once we have "a right" it's tough to "put it back in the box'
i wonder what they new regime will look like. if they go by what Remo said "he can produce the same with 6 plants as he can with 600" then we're screwed and will have to back to court.
once you have dialed it in and don't grow trees, you will need more than 6 period.
they have zero evidence that there was diverting of meds so what justification can they use? it was proven that the MMPR was brought in on false truths and fear mongering...otherwise there would be proof that came out in court but instead all their evidence of this crumbled upon cross examination. that made me laugh

OLD MOTHER SATIVA said:

no we didn't get "our gardens back"

the same people who were injunctified are still ok..the rest still are STILL not..and none of us know wtf is gonna happen

quote:then we had Sfetkopolous that gave us our right to more than 1 garden per DG.

>the object was to have more than one garden per dg..they hated to do it so they gave us one more..

the ones who actually play by the rules ...do

but next thing in bc there coops with a zillion licenses attached..

I don't begrudge them bending the rules but the real dg's who don't..did not bend them

Click to expand...

Those who were left out in the cold in this decision, like me, will be included again within six months. That is in the supreme court decision. The way i understand it JT has six months to fix that old HC business.

Legalization is another issue entirely.

doingdishes said:

we affirmed that we have the right to produce our own meds. we have a had a couple cases where we had the same fight already.
once we have "a right" it's tough to "put it back in the box'
i wonder what they new regime will look like. if they go by what Remo said "he can produce the same with 6 plants as he can with 600" then we're screwed and will have to back to court.
once you have dialed it in and don't grow trees, you will need more than 6 period.
they have zero evidence that there was diverting of meds so what justification can they use? it was proven that the MMPR was brought in on false truths and fear mongering...otherwise there would be proof that came out in court but instead all their evidence of this crumbled upon cross examination. that made me laugh

Click to expand...

awesome post

gb123 said:

They don't know how to make it work. JT just thought he did.
They didn't foresee Phelan making such a decision that he did.

It's theoretically blown the Market wide open...
The Law is getting left out(We're going legal after all ) and so are the Feds.
Patients and PEOPLE HAVE RIGHTS! in spite of what Harpstein may have accomplished in taking them all away!

Click to expand...

oh JT" KNOWS" how to make it work..his 2013 video with Stephen Stairs showed that

its just will he do what he said in the video BEFORE he was elected

the more restrictions normal people have ..the more he is catering to organized crime

I seen in a conroy video about the decision he's hoping for a hybrid mmpr/mmar, witch would be super easy and common territory for the mmar script holders. If after 30days they don't appeal i believe they are going back to vary the injunction.

Gquebed said:

I dont see any reason not to take JT at his word, of starting right away to legalize. I mean, he has already. He has hired a credible spokes-person (the cop, which was a pr move to mollify the right wingnuts) and Im sure he has got people working on gathering the info required to write legislation that will stand to test and scrutiny.

That wont happen overnight. There is so much to consider...never mind the colossal task of just coming up with a system of distribution and the such. Legalization will take YEARS just to gather the info required to write those laws.

So no... it likely wont get done in this mandate. But at least the process has started. Or at least the discussion has started and that in itself is a HUGE achievement.

Click to expand...

The quotes I had read from Trudeau were likely abridged as I see the exact words were 'starting' to legalize right away, so I'll concede that point. I'm looking for the story where Blair is quoted as praising the MMPR.

However, 'gathering info' doesn't take years. Giving him leeway to drag this out into his next mandate (if he gets one) just floors me, and I think it's funny everyone jumped on the NDP for saying they'll 'study' legalization when Trudeau is doing exactly the same thing (and making sure the people responsible for prohibition are doing the 'studying'.

To VIANACHRIS, if you don't want to get into a 'discussion on politics', you shouldn't comment on legalization then because this is inherently political. My comments have nothing to do with whether I like the liberals or not (no one was a bigger fan of JT until he started making questionable decisions like supporting TPP), but what the LPC has done thus far. If they do legalization properly, great.

I never said there was any 'evil conspiracy', however ignoring red flags and betting the farm on appeasement is going to increase the chances of legalization being an even bigger mess than the MMPR and I-502 combined. You should hold the government to account on what they say they will do vs what they've done (JT's already flip flopped on the F-35 purchase), regardless of whether the conservatives, liberals, NDP or whoever else is in power.

OLD MOTHER SATIVA said:

oh JT" KNOWS" how to make it work..his 2013 video with Stephen Stairs showed that

its just will he do what he said in the video BEFORE he was elected

the more restrictions normal people have ..the more he is catering to organized crime

Click to expand...

Yep. Again, the LPC not unequivocally stating they will not appeal the decision to a straight yes or no questions is very, very concerning. Especially given he told Stairs he thought patients should be able to grow.