[Dayseed]

Canada won't dare to legalize, or even decriminalize marijuana, until the United States gets on that boat first. The border is sticky enough as is, let's not give the Americans reason to delay even more cross-border traffic looking at Americans or Canadians heading south with joints in their socks.

Sorry pot-smokers, I say your best efforts are south of the border, not north.

[DerbyX]

Why is it that when we talk about legalizing drugs and gun control people say that as long as we are next to the US our laws must compliment theirs?

We are a sovereign country. If we want to legalize drugs or outlaw guns then they have no say in the matter. If they want to pull any border shenanigans then we can always slow down trade to them in response. They won't be so quick to pull such things if their people start loosing jobs and they start paying more for goods.

[Dayseed]

DerbyX wrote:

Why is it that when we talk about legalizing drugs and gun control people say that as long as we are next to the US our laws must compliment theirs?

We are a sovereign country. If we want to legalize drugs or outlaw guns then they have no say in the matter. If they want to pull any border shenanigans then we can always slow down trade to them in response. They won't be so quick to pull such things if their people start loosing jobs and they start paying more for goods.

I agree with your point in principle, but I also believe the reality is that when you're next to the giant, you can't ignore its farts. I think a trade-war pissing match with people on both sides losing jobs over marijuana legalization is silly.

[DerbyX]

Dayseed wrote:

DerbyX wrote:

Why is it that when we talk about legalizing drugs and gun control people say that as long as we are next to the US our laws must compliment theirs?

We are a sovereign country. If we want to legalize drugs or outlaw guns then they have no say in the matter. If they want to pull any border shenanigans then we can always slow down trade to them in response. They won't be so quick to pull such things if their people start loosing jobs and they start paying more for goods.

I agree with your point in principle, but I also believe the reality is that when you're next to the giant, you can't ignore its farts. I think a trade-war pissing match with people on both sides losing jobs over marijuana legalization is silly.

I'm not sure there would be though. I don't think it would be any worse then it is now. We have had Harper for 3 years now and he isn't trying to legalize drugs or making our own border security weaker yet the US has ramped up their border security. They can't do much worse without seeing an impact on their economy and why would they do that?

[Dayseed]

Personally, I'd think they'd do it because their response to marijuana is irrational with which to begin. Ours isn't much better, just historic. It would be wonderful if we lived in a world where nobody fucked themselves up with any chemical period, but we don't, and arguments of why marijuana is illegal versus why alcohol is illegal are hard to make without them being irrational. Pot really isn't addictive, alcohol is. I've never had a stoned relative ruin a family event like a drunk one has (well, I've never had a stoned relative, but I'm pretty sure a toked-up grandma would be worth seeing at least once...)

The bottom line is, your arguments for the legalization of marijuana are rational considering alcohol is legal. I don't want to see the government endorse another way people can fuck themselves up, but I'm just one voice and if Canada wants it, hey, Canada gets it. That's a democracy. But since marijuana is still illegal despite their being rational arguments to legalize it, or even decriminalize it, there must be irrational reasons keeping it illegal.

It's those irrational reasons I turn to when saying the Americans could get really silly at the border over legalized marijuana in Canada. They're tightening the border anyway and it's hurting trade and not a single terrorist has marched into their country from Canada. That's not rational either, but they're doing it.

So, I go back to the when the giant farts...

[ridenrain]

There are a few US States that always seem to be on the verge of decriminalizing or legalizing pot so I think we would be stupid to move before they did. This also has escalated because Canada now is smuggling harder and harder drugs into the US and these are not viewed as benign or harmless as pot.

[DerbyX]

Dayseed wrote:

Personally, I'd think they'd do it because their response to marijuana is irrational with which to begin. Ours isn't much better, just historic. It would be wonderful if we lived in a world where nobody fucked themselves up with any chemical period, but we don't, and arguments of why marijuana is illegal versus why alcohol is illegal are hard to make without them being irrational. Pot really isn't addictive, alcohol is. I've never had a stoned relative ruin a family event like a drunk one has (well, I've never had a stoned relative, but I'm pretty sure a toked-up grandma would be worth seeing at least once...)

The bottom line is, your arguments for the legalization of marijuana are rational considering alcohol is legal. I don't want to see the government endorse another way people can fuck themselves up, but I'm just one voice and if Canada wants it, hey, Canada gets it. That's a democracy. But since marijuana is still illegal despite their being rational arguments to legalize it, or even decriminalize it, there must be irrational reasons keeping it illegal.

It's those irrational reasons I turn to when saying the Americans could get really silly at the border over legalized marijuana in Canada. They're tightening the border anyway and it's hurting trade and not a single terrorist has marched into their country from Canada. That's not rational either, but they're doing it.

So, I go back to the when the giant farts...

I guess we will disagree on the US response then. Personally I think that we should lead the way rather then follow the US. We might even be the catalyst for US states to follow suit and legalize it. The idea that we can't decide such aspects of choice and freedom in our country because of what another country will think just rankles me no matter how gassy those farts may be.

[Scape]

Right now marijuana is considered a schedule 1 drug under the controlled substances act, right up there with heroin and PCP. It should be a schedule 2 drug so the transition from a law enforcement issue to a health issue can commence.

Quote:

Schedule II controlled substances

"Placement on schedules; findings required

Except.... The findings required for each of the schedules are as follows:

Schedule II.—

(A) The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.

(B) The drug or other substance has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States or a currently accepted medical use with severe restrictions.

(C) Abuse of the drug or other substances may lead to severe psychological or physical dependence." [9]

Oxycodone, cocaine and opium are schedule II. Can anyone make a credible argument why MJ is not listed with them?

[DerbyX]

Seems a lot of people are moving to that end

[Dayseed]

Scape wrote:

Right now marijuana is considered a schedule 1 drug under the controlled substances act, right up there with heroin and PCP. It should be a schedule 2 drug so the transition from a law enforcement issue to a health issue can commence.

Quote:

Schedule II controlled substances

"Placement on schedules; findings required

Except.... The findings required for each of the schedules are as follows:

Schedule II.—

(A) The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.

(B) The drug or other substance has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States or a currently accepted medical use with severe restrictions.

(C) Abuse of the drug or other substances may lead to severe psychological or physical dependence." [9]

Oxycodone, cocaine and opium are schedule II. Can anyone make a credible argument why MJ is not listed with them?

That's not Canadian. In Canada, marijuana is schedule II under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act; meth, coke and heroin are all Schedule I.

[Dayseed]

Scape wrote:

Oxycodone, cocaine and opium are schedule II. Can anyone make a credible argument why MJ is not listed with them?

MJ isn't with them because he's dead. Sniff, went out like Elvis he did...

[Dayseed]

DerbyX wrote:

I guess we will disagree on the US response then. Personally I think that we should lead the way rather then follow the US. We might even be the catalyst for US states to follow suit and legalize it. The idea that we can't decide such aspects of choice and freedom in our country because of what another country will think just rankles me no matter how gassy those farts may be.

Unfortunately, what will rankle you more is that the Americans would give Canada all of 11 seconds consideration before going ahead and doing as they pleased no matter our response.

I think it stinks too, but I go for the pragmatic response.

[Scape]

Dayseed wrote:

Quote:

Oxycodone, cocaine and opium are schedule II. Can anyone make a credible argument why MJ is not listed with them?

That's not Canadian. In Canada, marijuana is schedule II under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act; meth, coke and heroin are all Schedule I.

Giant farts you say? Their policy has effect on our rule of law. State by state the law is changing but the policy itself is not one based on science but rather dogma. The shift from schedule I to II underscores that as unsustainable as the drug has not changed but culture and society norms have. Frankly, the argument against is simply inconsistent.

[can-aid-ian]

ridenrain wrote:

herbie wrote:

Quote:

.Only about half a percent of the total prison population was there for marijuana possession

Don't see any Straw Man here. See a quote that half a percent of prisoners are there for simple possession. How many wouldn't be there if the LCB was doing the distribution?

It's indeed a straw man. Go read through the minimun sentences thread and tell me that the "progressive" side isn't painting the illusion that everyone who smokes pot will be in jail. Here's a US study on those horrible US jails and it shows that only a fraction of a percent went to jail because they simply smoked pot.
Face it.. it's not about the pot, it's about the organized crime that supplies it. If those lazy stoners got off their lazy asses and grew their own, this wouldn't be a problem.

The problem with growing your own for personal use, is that you increase your chances of being caught 100 times, and the crown will not be looking for a possession charge they will hit you not only for the growing of the plant, but then it is a seperate charge if you take a single leaf off, they get you for cultivation, and since you have a plant or two they will then go for distribution charges. So the safest way right now is to go to that illegal black market. It has nothing to do with being lazy.

[can-aid-ian]

Dayseed wrote:

Canada won't dare to legalize, or even decriminalize marijuana, until the United States gets on that boat first. The border is sticky enough as is, let's not give the Americans reason to delay even more cross-border traffic looking at Americans or Canadians heading south with joints in their socks.

Sorry pot-smokers, I say your best efforts are south of the border, not north.

Unfortunately he is right. Jean Chretian looked into legalizing marijuana near the end of his term, and was greetet by the American drug czar who basically stated that all trade would seize to exist.