
Canada to introduce legislation to legalize recreational cannabis - sasvari
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/20/canada-legislation-decriminalize-recreational-cannabis-weed-marijuana
======
gerry_shaw
Canadian News Source [http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/philpott-un-marijuana-
legisl...](http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/philpott-un-marijuana-legislation-
legalize-1.3544554)

I love that they picked this day to make an announcement.

~~~
NovaS1X
It can't be a coincidence. I hope they pass the bill next year on this day.
I'll be booking work off and heading to the Art Gallery for that one.

~~~
corin_
They didn't pick the day because of 4/20 they picked it because of the UN
General Assembly Special Session on Drugs, where multiple countries raised
complaints about the current state of prohibition and Canada went one step
further by announcing this to the other nations.

------
lee
One thing that I am disappointed in is that I wish the Liberal government
first decriminalized marijuana.

For one thing, decriminalization is easy to do. Simply revoke the current
criminal laws. The bill would be passed quite quickly. Which would then buy
time to figure out a bill for legalization.

Why is this important? Despite popular belief, simple possession laws ARE
upheld in Canada, but the people charged are disproportionately minorities and
poor/homeless people. IIRC, there were 40 000+ criminal charges for simple
possession last year in Canada. That means thousands of citizens who are now
burdened with a criminal record, making job searches difficult and border
crossings into the US.

So while laws for legalizing pot are getting figured out in Parliament, more
people keep getting locked up for simple possession.

~~~
kobayashi
Yah, but if you decriminalize possession it's a boon for the (still) illegal
dealers and distributors. Is there any credible data to discredit my take on
this?

~~~
a3n
If we have to keep putting civilians in jail so that criminals don't benefit
for a brief time, I think that thought should be rethunk.

~~~
kobayashi
Well, as I mention in another comment [0], I'm uncertain as to whether the
prospective bill will actually pass, and thus the "interim" situation could
become the ongoing status quo. Additionally, such a situation would also
include all the geopolitical risks I mention in that other comment, too, and
could thus put the Canadian economy in peril.

I'm a supporter of legalization, but I think half-measures can lead to
avoidable, unforeseen negative consequences.

[0]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11538708](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11538708)

------
andrewstuart
In Australia "the Victorian government, is introducing laws in December to
allow families access to medicinal cannabis in exceptional circumstances. "

You have to be genuinely, deeply sick in Australia to be allowed to puff a
joint. It's like living in the 1950's. So strange that Australia follows the
world so quickly towards becoming more conservative and is so incredibly slow
to become less conservative, even when our cultural leader, the U.S.A. is
headed that way.

[http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/victorian-children-with-
ep...](http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/victorian-children-with-epilepsy-to-
take-part-in-medical-marijuana-trial-20160202-gmkate.html)

~~~
henrikschroder
Sweden is regularly prosecuting and convicting elderly people who buy or grow,
and use, to ease their pains and medical conditions. No consideration is taken
for the very sick, or their stories about how it allows them to live a decent
life.

Then again, with politicians like these:
[http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/07/sweden-
justice-...](http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/07/sweden-justice-
minister-spoof-marijuana-deaths-story)

~~~
staticelf
Yeah, she is clearly not intelligent like most ruling politicians in Sweden
right now.

------
brebla
How does this effect the supply chain? Let me re-phrase that, are we still
criminalizing the supply side? If so, we're just exporting our violence south
of the USA border.

~~~
martythemaniak
No, they have promised legalization. However there's virtually no chance of
this being a free-for-all.

What I expect the main features to be:

\- Certified and regulated producers, though not numerically limited

\- heavily-taxed.

\- no problems growing your own.

\- retail distribution depends on province. More liberal in BC, government-run
in Ontario.

\- separate certifications for places "serving" (ie, pot cafes). Can't take it
home with you.

~~~
developer2
We'll have to see whether grow-at-home will be permitted. Here in Canada it is
illegal to operate a spirits distillery in your home. I wouldn't be surprised
if it is not legalized, as it opens up avenues for "criminal selling", ie:
people growing at home and selling it - bypassing taxation. And, let's be
honest, government revenue from taxation is the _real_ reason legalization is
even on the table.

It doesn't matter how grow-at-home laws will be written. There will always be
those people who will exceed the "personal plants limit" to grow and sell to
friends / the street. Especially if legally obtainable strains wind up being
very limited, or if the tax is too expensive.

The whole system including strain restrictions and pricing (+ taxation) is
going to be interesting to watch unfold. If officials think that your average
daily consumers - not the new people who will toke once legal, but those who
already consume daily - are going to tolerate an increase of _any_ amount for
the product... enjoy the black market that will continue to proliferate.

I do love the lackluster "legalization will keep weed out of kids' hands!" How
exactly does that way of thinking even begin to work? ;)

~~~
snowwindwaves
Here in British Columbia my friends who smoke prefer going to the dispensaries
that have opened over their old local drug dealer. It is more convenient to go
to a store with regular hours than to arrange a meeting. They also get to
choose exactly which strains they are buying instead of having to take what is
available. I think it is going to be very difficult to earn a decent income
only selling weed.

Edit; there was a house worth 1.5 million for sale nearby, a beautiful custom
home on a big lot, for sale for 400,000 because it had a grow op which is the
same as a meth lab in the eyes of the law. No bank will lend on the property,
the occupancy permit for the house is revoked, and the soil is considered
contaminated until proven otherwise. All for a bunch of plants! Many laws and
regulations will have to catch up for people to be able to legally grow at
home with no repercussions.

~~~
goatforce5
I was of the understanding that the problem with grow-op houses is they're
often riddled with mould and have unsafe electrical modifications:

[http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/12-signs-your-home-
was-...](http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/12-signs-your-home-was-a-
marijuana-grow-op-1.1340242)

~~~
snowwindwaves
A friend wanted to buy the ex grow op house and he couldn't find a way to ever
get a mortgage on it. And he works at a bank selling mortgages. So while some
houses may be trashed by grow ops they are all assumed to be trashed and there
is no way to remove the black mark from the property.

~~~
eru
Shouldn't that drop the price until someone can buy it outright? You know,
supply and demand? What's keeping the price up? Is the previous owner
unwilling to sell so low?

~~~
snowwindwaves
the 1.5 million dollar house was for sale for 400,000. I'd say the price did
drop. The bank had taken the house back from the owner because he was so far
underwater on it and it was the bank selling it at 400,000.

------
kobayashi
Very big hiccup that this policy might possibly run up against: the American
border. Given the 280,326,500,000 USD in exports that Canada sends to the US
[0], even a minor disruption at the border could wreak devastation on Canada's
economy. If an American administration even hinted at an increase in border
wait times due to newly enhanced searches as a result of legalization, any
Canadian federal government would have to think very hard about the pros vs
the cons of legalizing pot.

[0] [http://www.census.gov/foreign-
trade/balance/c1220.html#2015](http://www.census.gov/foreign-
trade/balance/c1220.html#2015)

~~~
grecy
What you say is true, though it would be a sad day when the future of what
Canadians want Canada to be is limited by the financial pressure of another
country.

Of course, to prevent this problem, Canada could just hint at slowing down or
limiting the 12410000000 barrels of oil it exports to the USA [1]

(see, two can play that game, and nobody wins)

[1] [http://business.financialpost.com/news/energy/canadian-
oil-e...](http://business.financialpost.com/news/energy/canadian-oil-exports-
to-u-s-reaches-highest-level-ever-as-shale-production-falls)

~~~
MustardTiger
>What you say is true, though it would be a sad day when the future of what
Canadians want Canada to be is limited by the financial pressure of another
country.

That day happened like 50 years ago and has been that way ever since. As much
as Canadians define themselves by being "not Americans", we're very heavily
influenced by the US.

~~~
kobayashi
Great username.

------
auntienomen
Glad to see this is full legalization being proposed.

Decriminalization is of little use to the chronically uncool.

~~~
cpncrunch
Does smoking pot make you cool?

~~~
auntienomen
No, the contrapositive. Being cool helps you access the trust networks through
which illegal supply flows.

~~~
cpncrunch
Not in my experience...it's just a matter of knowing where to look.

Not that I'm really interested in smoking pot any more. It's a bit too uncool
and boring.

~~~
auntienomen
Bully for you. Not all of us are down to hang out with old hippies, just to
purchase some weed. I'd rather have Amazon ship it.

~~~
sleepychu
With Prime Same-Day by drone!

(And more seriously, from a reputable and regulated supplier)

------
OSButler
I'm curious if all those decriminalizations and legalizations in various
states & countries are having an impact on Netherlands' tourism.

~~~
foldor
I wouldn't be surprised if it had close to zero impact. As much as people like
to talk about Amsterdam's legal marijuana laws, I'm skeptical many people
visited that country only because of that. Marijuana isn't exactly hard to get
and smoke in private in the places these laws are being enacted in.

~~~
TillE
"Marijuana" isn't one thing. Dutch coffeeshops are fairly unique in their
offering a tasting menu of dozens of varieties of marijuana.

But yes, the actual number of cannabis connoisseur tourists is tiny.

~~~
cr1895
>"Marijuana" isn't one thing. Dutch coffeeshops are fairly unique in their
offering a tasting menu of dozens of varieties of marijuana.

Hardly unique and recently greatly outshone by the offerings in states in the
US where it's legal.

------
bayesian_horse
Probably now Trump wants to build a wall at the border to Canada too.

------
nickysielicki
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Convention_on_Narcotic_...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Convention_on_Narcotic_Drugs)

How do they get out of this? I've read that this is a big holdup in US federal
drug law reform.

~~~
joesmo
UN is meeting one of the next couple of months to hopefully start to get rid
of all that idiocy. Hard to justify the US's position now with 4 states and DC
legalizing it and many countries have been waiting some time to get rid of
these stupid treaties and the war on drugs that's literally killing some of
them as we speak.

~~~
k-mcgrady
>> "UN is meeting one of the next couple of months to hopefully start to get
rid of all that idiocy"

I think that meeting it yesterday, today, and tomorrow - hence the timing of
this announcement.

~~~
corin_
Not only is it this week, but we already know that the outcome document is not
going to see any real change to the current state of prohibition - the only
sign of progress was a number of countries saying they want to explore
different approaches and Canada saying they'll be doing this anyway.

~~~
joesmo
I'd say that __is __real progress. Canada going ahead with it despite the
treaty is a big "FUCK YOU" to the treaty, the US, and all the horrible shit
the treaty stands for, shit the US forced down the throats of the world like
everything else.

~~~
corin_
It's not a big fuck you to the US given the US already has plenty of places
with legal weed and their logic is "we're not technically breaking the UN
treaty because it's the states not the federal government allowing weed". US
may be responsible for the treaty but they're not exactly its biggest
supporter now.

------
agumonkey
Is there any study on the reduction of young consumers (rebel/taboo
incentives) and reclaimed resources for police forces (less time dealing with
petty to medium weed issues) ?

~~~
baudehlo
I haven't seen any yet, but Colorado is being studied very closely.

------
asd
Perhaps it's now time to look at investing in some of the existing Canadian
medicinal cannabis producers. Like cannabis or not, it's here to stay and
becoming more legitimized with each passing day. The question is, who's going
to supply it? It's going to be regulated and knowing Canada, it will be
regulated thoroughly.

------
tn13
There is nothing great about smoking weed but something seriously bad about
jailing people for smoking, possessing or growing. That is the reason why I
support marijuana legalization but I dont think Canada wants to decriminalize
Marijuana.

~~~
johnpowell
It has been legal in Oregon since last summer. Walking the streets of downtown
Portland you wouldn't know the law changed. Really, there is absolutely zero
difference that I can see.

------
adnam
what about Canada's responsibilities under certain international treaties to
prohibit the production and supply of drugs?

~~~
llamataboot
ehhh, most of the UN wants to really talk about a different approach than
prohibition, historically it's been Russia, China, a few smaller countries and
the US that has taken a hardline on it. Now the US is starting to back away.
Will be interesting to see if anything new comes out of hte next UN drugs
summit.

~~~
k-mcgrady
UK is probably going to keep a hardline on it. Government shuts down any
potential discussions on it here.

~~~
adnam
Complete nonsense. The British government does not shut down discussion
whether potential or actual.

------
schwap
Other news sources[1] are reporting it as "legalize", not decriminalize.

[1][http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/04/20/canada-marijuana-
leg...](http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/04/20/canada-marijuana-
legaliza_n_9738222.html?ncid=tweetlnkcahpmg00000002)

~~~
ufmace
Interesting, the linked article called it decriminalize, but the text sounded
more like full legalization to me. If you have the political support to fully
legalize, why take half measures?

~~~
schwap
From what I understand, legalization is a lot more complicated in relation to
international drug treaties that Canada is a part of.

~~~
ufmace
Could be. I wonder if they would be the first to fully legalize on a national
level? I can't think of any other country that has.

~~~
biot
Portugal:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal)

Since July 2001, all drugs are legal subject to personal consumption limits.

~~~
ufmace
Looks like decriminalization to me, which matches up with what I heard.
Meaning that personal users don't get thrown in jail, but the supply chain is
still illegal, and nobody would dare try to set up a legitimate business for
production or distribution. So all of the profits of the trade go to criminal
gangs and street violence instead of either legitimate, tax-paying companies
or the Government itself.

------
the_duck
A well-timed announcement for April 20th. ;)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/420_(cannabis_culture)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/420_\(cannabis_culture\))

~~~
r00fus
Yes, absolutely brilliant.

~~~
oldmanjay
Can something this obvious be brilliant?

~~~
r00fus
[http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=brilliant&def...](http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=brilliant&defid=4256078)

------
hasenj
I'm a little bit worried about this, actually.

I've been to Vancouver and it wasn't a very pretty sight.

The amount of homelessness and crime is 10 times more what I've seen anywhere
else in North America.

There's an entire section (several blocks) in the Downtown area that's full of
homeless people and the streets smell like urine.

Shops even in areas far away from downtown put posters on their windows saying
they don't hold cash overnight. i.e. please thieves don't break in at night
because you will not find any cash.

At the same time, Marijuana seemed like it was very easy to obtain, and _for
free_ too! There plenty of shops that give it away for free "for medical
purposes". Some of them even advertise that they have a doctor who will
prescribe it for you in case you don't already have a prescription!

I know correlation is not necessarily causation but easy access to Marijuana
was the only significant difference between Vancouver and all the other cities
I've visited in North America.

~~~
chrissnell
I've been to Vancouver, too, and I've seen the street you're talking about.
Drove down it with my family and it was shocking. Massive piles of trash
everywhere, grocery carts, garbage bag "luggage", mobs of people. It was sad
and quite shocking if you've never seen it before. Nothing I've seen in SF or
LA compares to this.

But...I don't think marijuana caused that. I think it has a lot more to do
with a permissive city than pot. Recreational pot is legal in my city (Tacoma,
WA) and we don't have this issue. In fact, we have almost no problems with pot
at all. My only complaint about the entire thing is the tacky advertising and
storefronts that the pot industry uses to attract clients. The market is
oversaturated and shop owners are desperate to survive and are resorting to
decorating normally seen at used car lots and Liberty Tax outlets.

~~~
hasenj
I had to _walk_ through it with my family. It's difficult to describe the
shock we experienced.

The reason I think it's linked to Marijuana is how easy it was to obtain. If
these homeless people can get access to it, they probably wouldn't bother
working to improve their lives. They can have an "awesome life" in their minds
if they get to smoke pot. At least that's my impression of what Marijuana does
to people. It makes you feel relaxed and completely care free.

Maybe I'm wrong, and I hope someone can challenge my perspectives, but I think
the rest of the world also thinks this way. That's why all countries ban drugs
even though they don't ban Alcohol.

~~~
ooooo00000
You're really misinformed on this topic.

> _The reason I think it 's linked to Marijuana is how easy it was to obtain_

Marijuana is easy to obtain just about everywhere on the planet. I knew around
20 drug dealers at one point in the US. I buy weed here in Cambodia from an
old grandma. It's easy if you're looking.

> _If these homeless people can get access to it, they probably wouldn 't
> bother working to improve their lives. They can have an "awesome life" in
> their minds if they get to smoke pot._

Do you have some strong evidence that a homeless person's sole desire in life
is to easy access to marijuana? Because if not it comes across as a sweeping,
irrational judgement against a diverse group of people.

> _That 's why all countries ban drugs even though they don't ban Alcohol._

Many countries ban marijuana because the US used its leverage to compel those
countries to do so.

