Should marijuana be legalized and regulated?

[Guest *Ste***cque**]

This was a campaign promise by our newly elected Prime Minister. Is it a good idea or bad idea?

 

Consider just a few points. Tobacco is legal and regulated. Alcohol is legal and regulated. Both cause problems for the user and society. Organized crime flourishes wherever we restrict vices from consenting adults.

 

Should marijuana be legalized AND regulated?

[Boomer 33202]

With Mr Trudeau's pledge I think that part of the debate is over, the train has left the station. What is left to debate how the law is to be structured and implemented i.e. age restrictions, taxation. Will it be a federal excise tax like cigarettes, or through provincially regulation similar to booze.

[Studio 110 by Sophia 150333]

One of my concerns about total legalizations of marijuana is that if the government begins to grow and package it as they do with cigarettes they will turn into a cancer causing product that tobacco is now. Look at tobacco before the government got their hands on it, before the formaldehyde, benzene and 50 other bad bad chemicals. Tobacco on its own, in it's natural form is not cancer causing. They only add these in so that they can stock pile them in warehouses to be kept for years on end till finally sold to the public. They would end up doing the same to marijuana if given the chance and then rather being a cure for cancer it will be the cause of it.

I think we should leave it as medicinal use only for the legalizations.

[Guest]

minor correction...tobacco is it's natural form, when lit and inhaled absolutely is a cancer causing agent. It is definitely less carcinogenic without all the toxic additives, but it is carcinogenic nonetheless.

for clarity, without too much detail, I am a medical specialist in this area so I know what I'm talking about.

 

to the OP question...legalize it? sure, why not. I'd be happy if it was either decriminalized or legalized. Either of those options is better than what we have now.

[mrgreen760 37785]

Decriminalized vs legalization in my view for the simple reason government will most likely screw it up. Set the rules and let the market forces figure it out. Some folks with a script for medical pot shun the govt product because it's much costlier and the quality isn't nearly as good.

 

Peace

MG

[drlove 37204]

Organized crime flourishes wherever we restrict vices from consenting adults.

 

As a non smoker, I'll respectfully stay out of the fray. However, Judging from Justin's recent comments, it would seem that Trudeau has already made up his mind on the issue. Now without trying to hijack this thread, I just want to draw everyone's attention to the above qoute. In that respect, it would seem Trudeau is on the right path.

 

Why then, when it comes to an issue like sex for money, does everyone seem to balk? (ourselves excluded, of course). It's really the same issue, isn't it? We're consenting adults, and the SCC would seem to agree with the aforementioned quote as well. That is why they struck down the old laws, in an effort to pave the way for those who work in this field to be safe. There is an article which mentions that the Liberals are committed to repealing bill C-36, yet I've also heard Trudeau say in an interview in 2014 that he 'considers prostitution a form of violence against women.' How ironic... the real violence will come as a result of our current law. All I'm saying is, if he's so gung ho about the marijuana issue, then he should feel the same about scrapping C-36. That's all... (my rant for the day).

[MightyPen 67414]

Why then, when it comes to an issue like sex for money, does everyone seem to balk?

I think the key difference is that, in the mind of most of the public, all sex work is automatically a kind of degradation and violence inflicted upon an unwilling or just desperate provider.

 

With drinking or smoking (or smoking), to whatever extent that there is harm, it's pretty much one person harming themselves. People have an easier time dispensing with prohibition when it's a matter of one person and their own bottle/cigarette/whatever.

 

But when you have view of sex work I described above, then the argument that defeated prohibition doesn't work. It's not someone and their bottle, it's someone and their victim. Who would want to accommodate THAT?

 

And you know, I *totally* understand and sympathize with people who think that way. They're working with the only (dubious) information that they have. Who wouldn't feel as they do, if you believed the same thing?

 

The only solution is to provide the public with more positive models of sex work and sex workers. Once people can wrap their heads around the idea that perfectly healthy women can choose such work, and that those women are their neighbours and colleagues and (gasp) even daughters, then the reflexive recoil will subside. And of course, there aren't just female sex workers.

 

(Incidentally, who else has seen the one-season TV show "Terriers"? I just re-watched it a couple of weeks ago, and one episode features a great, funny, respectful, and sympathetic part for a trans streetwalker. EVERYONE should watch Terriers.)

 

At the same time, of course, we DO need to be vigilant about providing supportive services so that nobody can be pressed into sex work or feel like it's their only option. But it doesn't take special sex-work rules to accomplish that; just good social services, period.

[VedaSloan 119179]

Decriminalize it.

 

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/portugal-drug-decriminalization/

[spud271 47779]

If Trudeau wants to decriminalize it, legalize it or regulate it...I'm good with whatever direction he wishes to take it. I think Canadians as a whole are ready for this to occur.

[Guest *Ste***cque**]

Decriminalization is a half measure in my mind. It removes penalties for personal possession or use but it does not remove the criminal element on the supply side. Yes, it does free up some policing costs to fight the real enemy but probably with similar success as in the past.

 

Legalizing it takes it out of the hands of the criminal element. The government doesn't have to get into the marijuana business. License private enterprise to provide the product, similar to cigarette makers or beer/wine producers. Government can tax the shit out of it and use the money as needed.

 

I don't know why we insist on fighting a war we can't ever win on drugs. The profit is too immense that no matter how many heads you cut off the monster, there is always another to take its place. The illegal drug industry is an indestructible Hydra.

[waterat 20911]

It is to our benefit to cash in on the tax revenue stream here.

 

I, for one, would simply be growing my own (and using, not selling) so I hope that doesn't get caught up in the regulation game!

[Amelia Fox 9064]

Regulated no!

Why so you politicians can raise the prices up...

Please!

 

Legal yes..

You'll tax the shit out of it, and we somehow will pay in the long run.. However no more people will be criminally charged for canibus..

[blacklabdog 3049]

at the very least Decriminalize possession. Waste of police resources having them worry about possession (driving high is another issue)

Cannabis IMO should be classed the same as alcohol as it has a pretty similar effect on you so I am in favor of treating it like booze; having sale regulated and reaping the tax benefits

 

I am ll for tax revenue collected helping to eliminate deficit Justin will create in next 3+ years LOL

 

Seriously, I think use will go up just due to easier access like in American states where its legal. I just worry that legalzing it and controlling supply flies in the face in what ON Liberals are doing allowing grocery stores to sell alcohol. Not sure if I'd want them to do the same w/weed

[KittyMoore 160]

We just need to look at places where legalisation has already happened to see it is a generally good idea... Portugal legalised everything and saw improvement in addiction and crime statistics.

 

In Washington and Oregon, US, you can buy locally produced weed legally in specialty shops, and it's cheaper than buying it on the streets. Dealers are going out of business. And the gov. taxes it too!

[Guest a**4*]

When pot becomes legal it is cheaper to grow it than to buy if you know how to grow and take care of it for personal use only

[Ice4fun 78407]

Let me first say that I have never used Marijuana And don't really have any interest in starting so from a purely personal perspective I don't really have a compelling interest one way or the other.

 

Given the level of political debate on this topic I can't see this becoming a simple legalization... if I was to guess it will become a regulated product with specific restrictions including age of usage and of course it will be taxable with potentially the same aggressive tax treatment as cigarettes and alcohol (HST, Excise Tax and Excise Duty).

 

The long term benefits will be no longer criminal record for possession, freeing up LE resources for real crimes, tax revenue for governments, taking the business out of the hands of criminals.

 

As for when this should happen.... I hope Mr Trudeau has many more important issues in his first 100 days.

 

Just my Opinion

[Brad 49548]

I'm not a user of it myself, but I'm all for legalizing it. All the evidence certainly points that it's no more--and likely less--damaging them tobacco or alcohol.

 

I don't have much new to add but agree it's going to be used regardless and it makes a lot more sense for it to be somewhat controlled and the tax dollars going towards useful measures rather than funneling the money to crime. Whatever you think of the government's ability to handle it, I don't think people realize how much $$$ ends up in organized crime from having it illegal.

 

Most of the stories I've read out of Colorado and other areas that have tried it seem positive.

[Exotic Touch Danielle 31728]

Don't use it don't care for it....not for it but not against it!

More important issues at hand

Sorry just my two cents

[Jabba 18389]

Tongue in cheek here:

Our friends in the U.S. border services will have good reason to mistrust our drug-addled society. Hope you like random body cavity exams.

[cinelli 22184]

Lots of people have been murdered in B C over the large scale grow ops. There is a LOT of money involved and gangsters are going to protect that.

 

People should be able to grow on a small scale, maybe 20 plants or less.

 

This would take millions of dollars out of organised crime and reduce gang violence. Also the big growers use lots of pesticides to protect their crops. Small growers would be producing less toxic pot.

[Phaedrus 209521]

Legalize, and tax.

 

I'd be quite happy to see a revenue stream for the government from weed, and that could then be used to reduce taxes elsewhere, or provide more services. Remember also to account for the time and money that would be saved on law enforcement, prosecutions and imprisonment (far less than in some other countries, but still, not negligible).

 

Legalization will also allow businesses to grow and thrive, and the end of prohibition will mean the profit margins will become unacceptably low for the criminal elements, so they'll move onto something else.

 

We'd certainly end up with a lot of low-quality stuff grown with a lot of chemicals... but I'm sure we'd also get smaller growers selling a high-quality product, and enthusiastic amateurs growing their own. It'll end up like food and booze and other consumables; there'll be something to suit all budgets and tastes.

[VedaSloan 119179]

Decriminalization is a half measure in my mind. It removes penalties for personal possession or use but it does not remove the criminal element on the supply side. Yes, it does free up some policing costs to fight the real enemy but probably with similar success as in the past.

 

Legalizing it takes it out of the hands of the criminal element. The government doesn't have to get into the marijuana business. License private enterprise to provide the product, similar to cigarette makers or beer/wine producers. Government can tax the shit out of it and use the money as needed.

 

I don't know why we insist on fighting a war we can't ever win on drugs. The profit is too immense that no matter how many heads you cut off the monster, there is always another to take its place. The illegal drug industry is an indestructible Hydra.

 

See, this is the issue I have. We've spent years criminalizing weed and now we want to make a buck off it---but guess what? Black people are still going to be arrested at higher rates than whites for the same bullshit. Also, it seems pretty hypocritcal to say, well now that it's legal it's okay for the state to make money off of it, but you "criminal" types, fuck you.

 

For instance, Colorado is requiring criminal background checks with the purpose of excluding anyone with a Controlled Substance Felony Conviction from being licensed to sell marijuana. As the drug war has saddled the black community with a disproportionate number of drug convictions, this will unfairly exclude blacks from the legal drug trade.

 

Criminalizing weed has destroyed communities and families and I bet none of that delicious revenue is going to go to social services, better schools, etc.

 

http://libertychat.com/2014/08/sorry-drug-legalization-doesnt-solve-racism/

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/mar/25/colorado-marijuana-legalization-racial-disparity-drug-arrests

http://www.alternet.org/drugs/michelle-alexander-white-men-get-rich-legal-pot-black-men-stay-prison

[Guest *Ste***cque**]

Thanks for your comments, Berlin. No one suggested "you criminal types, fuck you" so ease up on the hyperbole.

 

Racism is another issue altogether and should not be tolerated in any environment, criminal or otherwise.

 

I still stand by the rest of my post. Besides, we're going to need additional tax revenue now that Mr. Trudeau is in power. :)

[VedaSloan 119179]

Thanks for your comments, Berlin. No one suggested "you criminal types, fuck you" so ease up on the hyperbole.

 

Racism is another issue altogether and should not be tolerated in any environment, criminal or otherwise.

 

I still stand by the rest of my post. Besides, we're going to need additional tax revenue now that Mr. Trudeau is in power. :)

 

I was referring to the state in a more general sense, although you did imply the same--when you said legalization would take care of the "criminal element." What exactly do you think happens to the criminal element? It certainly isn't tea parties and cupcakes.

 

My point was that racism is inextricable from legalization. If you're going to talk about legalization, you have to talk about racism. They are not separate issues.

 

Anyway, we can agree to disagree.

[Guest *Ste***cque**]

We'll have to disagree then but to clarify, I said "Legalizing it takes it out of the hands of the criminal element." to "imply" that the supply side of the illegal drug business must also be addressed. No "fucking" of anyone was implied. :)

 

Racism is pervasive in all walks of life but that doesn't mean I can't specifically address marijuana as a topic without mentioning Racism, unless you are implying that only Black people sell marijuana?

 

Obviously Racism is a concern but it doesn't require one to include it in every debate that focuses on singular issues. That sounds like deflection.

 

I don't mean to start an argument but you are misinterpreting my earlier post.