Government to reintroduce pot decriminalization bill

[-ff-]

So what do you guys think about this whole decriminialization issue?

Personally, I think its crap.

Decriminalization is a way for the government to look like its being progressive and laxening its position on pot, while actually practically increasing its enforcement powers. How so? Well, at present possesion is illegal, and the punishment is criminal. Most cops and judges know that this is pretty rediculous, so the reality is that if you are caught with weed, the cops will just take it away and tell you to get lost. Enforcing the law as it stands is a complete waste of resources, so unless you have a shitload on you, they arent going to actually arrest you, or even take your name. Now consider under the decriminalized system. Cops search you and find an eigth. Now, instead of losing your ganja and being sent on your way, you lose your weed and are handed a ticket for up to four hundred dollars. I dont know about you, but most pot smokers I know can't afford that kind of a ticket. And you can be sure that with a cash-cow like that, the police will be more than happy to hand out these tickets as often as possible. Decriminalization, then, for all intents and purposes amounts to re-criminalization.

Just something to think about as the debate on this issue heats up.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...nal/TopStories

[e_BoY]

agreed. dman sneaky government

[Hot Karl]

agreed and agreed

[clevich]

i read in the paper that they are also allowing a drug test to be administered for marijuana use for impared driving. sounds crappy.

[wum]

that's strange. what part is being allowed thanks to the de-criminalization? This is really counterproductive. prohibition only stokes organized crime like in 1930's Chicago, and that's much more concerning than the people who are just getting high at cafes or whatnot.

[shortstopmax]

yeah, thats great and all decriminalization...whoopwhoop...im not gonna be happy till ur allowed to sit the fuck outside blazing and its 100% ok....mebbe thats never gonna happen, so i just do it anyways

[wundergirl]

i think you guys are missing the point.



the issue behind the decriminalization of marijuana is the fact that a substantial portion of canadians have criminal records for possession. the bill is progressive (whether it makes things more convenient for you or not) because it will give canadian citizens an opportunity to be granted amnesty for prior marijuana-related convictions.
furthermore, if they're going to decriminalize it i am in full support of the governments desire to effectively control it. there should be some kind of test for impaired driving, why the hell would you complain about something like that? and i'm willing to accept the fact that there will be fines handed out for public use in exchange for the right to legally have it in my home.

it's about small steps towards what we want. it's never going to be an unregulated substance, so we have to be willing to comprimise in order to get something that works for everyone.

[sidekick]

Originally Posted by clevich

i read in the paper that they are also allowing a drug test to be administered for marijuana use for impared driving. sounds crappy.

yeah, that bill will hopefully not be passed because if you think about it...it's pretty fucking stupid.

it will mean that they cops need more money to be trained to detect various drugs in the system (checking for dilated pupils, speech impediments, etc...) if they believe that you are imparied by drugs they can take you to the station and make you take a urine sample to confirm/disconfirm their suspicions.

now, some drugs stay in the system for awhile even after the effects have worn off. it's a complete invasion of privacy.

i doubt the bill will get through.

[-ff-]

Originally Posted by wundergirl

i think you guys are missing the point.



the issue behind the decriminalization of marijuana is the fact that a substantial portion of canadians have criminal records for possession. the bill is progressive (whether it makes things more convenient for you or not) because it will give canadian citizens an opportunity to be granted amnesty for prior marijuana-related convictions.
furthermore, if they're going to decriminalize it i am in full support of the governments desire to effectively control it. there should be some kind of test for impaired driving, why the hell would you complain about something like that? and i'm willing to accept the fact that there will be fines handed out for public use in exchange for the right to legally have it in my home.

it's about small steps towards what we want. it's never going to be an unregulated substance, so we have to be willing to comprimise in order to get something that works for everyone.

I see what you mean, but I think you are buying the sell. Yes, this is good for the people who already have records for pot related crimes. But is this progressive for the average smoker? No it isnt. This is a new, essentially harsher, enforcement tool for police. Nobody these days will get a criminal record for possession of the amounts they are talking about (less than 15 grams). Nobody. If they tried to take you to trial for it, the judge would throw it out. BUT, with the new laws in place it will take the cop two seconds to write you out a ticket, and he will. Four hundred dollars is a major penalty. This law, essentially, is a step back towards prohibition, not forwards, away from it.

[wundergirl]

Originally Posted by -ff-

I see what you mean, but I think you are buying the sell. Yes, this is good for the people who already have records for pot related crimes. But is this progressive for the average smoker? No it isnt. This is a new, essentially harsher, enforcement tool for police. Nobody these days will get a criminal record for possession of the amounts they are talking about (less than 15 grams). Nobody. If they tried to take you to trial for it, the judge would throw it out. BUT, with the new laws in place it will take the cop two seconds to write you out a ticket, and he will. Four hundred dollars is a major penalty. This law, essentially, is a step back towards prohibition, not forwards, away from it.

i am not buying into any sell. i smoke every day, and feel it should be my right to decide. i've put alot of thought into my opinion....

i have never read any statement form the government trying to claim their intent was to make life easier for the average smoker. your ticket issues are petty and ridiculous compared to the problems caused by having a criminal record and drug charges. don't take it out into public, why is that so hard? the "average smoker" has alot of growing up to do if he thinks that the law should protect his desire to be able to walk down the streets blazin. it's a substance, an intoxicant. why would you expect it to be legal to carry it around? booze isn't like that. the ticketing process would essentially be the same as it is for liquor - and i agree wholeheartedly that it should be. in fact, i feel that pot should be completely regulated and steps should be taken to keep it out of the hands of minors, but thats another story. like i said, it's about small steps. i'd love to have a cafe where i could go to blaze away my saturday, but we're going to have to change the minds of alot of people who have been otherwise (mis)educated. in order to cut previously convicted smokers some slack and decriminalize it, the government must appease the minds of other non-smoking voters by essentially proving their control. this is a transitionary period for canada, not the end all and be all of marijuana legislation.


sidekick - police should absolutely be trained to detect all types of intoxication behind the wheel, weed is no different. as a taxpayer these are the kinds of places i expect my money to go! the only people this should be a problem for are the ones who drive while intoxicated.

[-ff-]

Originally Posted by wundergirl

i have never read any statement form the government trying to claim their intent was to make life easier for the average smoker. your ticket issues are petty and ridiculous compared to the problems caused by having a criminal record and drug charges. don't take it out into public, why is that so hard? the "average smoker" has alot of growing up to do if he thinks that the law should protect his desire to be able to walk down the streets blazin. it's a substance, an intoxicant. why would you expect it to be legal to carry it around? booze isn't like that. the ticketing process would essentially be the same as it is for liquor - and i agree wholeheartedly that it should be. in fact, i feel that pot should be completely regulated and steps should be taken to keep it out of the hands of minors, but thats another story. like i said, it's about small steps. i'd love to have a cafe where i could go to blaze away my saturday, but we're going to have to change the minds of alot of people who have been otherwise (mis)educated. in order to cut previously convicted smokers some slack and decriminalize it, the government must appease the minds of other non-smoking voters by essentially proving their control. this is a transitionary period for canada, not the end all and be all of marijuana legislation.

I don't doubt that you've put a lot of thought into your opinion - I've read a lot of your posts on this board and they are consistently reasoned and intelligent. I totally agree with you on the benifit of giving amnesty for people whose lives have been damaged by pot related drug offenses. That said, I respectfully disagree with you on where this move is going. Decriminalization is not being brought in to help these people, but in order to give police the power to actually enfroce current laws.

I'm not saying that we should be able to walk down the street blazing any more than I think we should be able to drink beer on a street corner (though, I do think a beer or a bud on the beach or similar situations should be allowed, and I do think the situation is a litte different for pot than alcohol in the sense that pot does not induce people to be violent, whereas alcohol does.) However, I DO think that I should be able to 'carry it around' the same way that I am allowed to carry alcohol around (say, in my bag) without fear of the police. Why is it so hard not to take it out in public? Well, for starters, I've got to get it into my home for 'private consumption' in the first place. If for some reason (and it happens occasionally) I am stopped by the police, right now, having some on me will not get me into any trouble. Under the new laws (and I know I sound like broken record here), it will. Second of all, I do think that there are some situations where smoking in public is, frankly, either called for or impossible to avoid. if I'm out at the fireworks or some similarly festive occasion, I might just want so have a smoke to enhance the experience. You can bet that the police will be out in force handing out tickets there. If I'm going to a movie with friends, I might just want to smoke a joint before I go in - I don't want to have a huge fine hanging over my head every time I do. Attitudes (in vancouver at least) have changed enough already that this kind of behavior is generally sanctioned by most of the public - hell, half our parents generation already smoke pot themselves.

Should pot be regulated? Sure. If the governent was serious about regulating it in a realistic way that took the power out of the hands of organized crime, and was willing to tax it to help fund things like health care and promote responsible use. But that's not what's happening here - users are being punished. Should pot be kept away from minors? Maybe - but I'm not so sure. I think that is an issue that parents need to take up with their kids themselves. I think it is generally a good thing that we dont sell alcohol to kids, but that doesn't stop them from getting it, and dealing with that reality is a parental responsibility. I think it would be pretty hypocritical of me to say that teenegers must be kept away from pot and alcohol, though, because I did both of those things when I was a teen, and I'm glad I did. Some of my favorite memories of highschool were those that involved pot or liquor. Why on earth should I get to say that the next generation of kids should be denied that? Should pot and alcohol be used responsibly by youth? Dammned straight - but that is NOT something that government regulation will ever be able to do. Prohibitive regulation of pot will have about as much effect as prohibitive regulation of alcohol. Responisble use is something that parents and educators need to take up.

Anyway, thats my piece. I'm not trying to attack you or anything, because I can see what your point is, and I think there is merit in what you are saying. I just happen to disagree, and am worried that if this bill goes through, I'm going to have to start worrying about police again when I have weed with me - something I don't have to do now.

[TrYpTaMiNe]

i really really really hope that it stays illegal, reasons? the way theyll tax the shit, and i dunno, just more better, i love pot, and i hate the governmment, so fuckem,

[BrownThug]

samrt kid.