Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So, I have a question about Trudeau's need to legalize marijuana (we should never forget his brother's arrest and pending conviction for marijuana possession prior to his untimely death ... arrested, not convicted. This predisposed Trudeau to having a soft spot for marijuana use, but he can't see the difference between a son of the prime minister of Canada having a lofty lifestyle that includes pot smoking and a tragic accident at the bottom of the lake.
In any case, pot in Colorado is in the infancy of babies and everything looks good, all under control, and everyone is still looking for a roadside pot test.
Why are Canadians and Trudeau not looking at Amsterdam, where pot smoking has been legal for decades? Why does the Canadian government look at the easy answer of "one year of pot legalization in Colorado" rather than the real answer of "decades of pot legalization in Amsterdam".
The thing is that Amsterdam is without doubt a city of decay and the decay is a direct result of drugs. It's only a matter of time until Canada is a country of decay.
Is that what Canadians want? Is there anything they can still do given Justin Trudeau's personal position about his brother and use of marijuana. Are we all going down the tube because his brother was about to be given a prison sentence of drug possession (i.e.: trafficking).
Honestly, Lieneke, I don't think Canadians care much at all. Without resorting to google checking my facts, I'm pretty sure opinion polls have shown that.
So, I have a question about Trudeau's need to legalize marijuana (we should never forget his brother's arrest and pending conviction for marijuana possession prior to his untimely death ... arrested, not convicted. This predisposed Trudeau to having a soft spot for marijuana use, but he can't see the difference between a son of the prime minister of Canada having a lofty lifestyle that includes pot smoking and a tragic accident at the bottom of the lake.
In any case, pot in Colorado is in the infancy of babies and everything looks good, all under control, and everyone is still looking for a roadside pot test.
Why are Canadians and Trudeau not looking at Amsterdam, where pot smoking has been legal for decades? Why does the Canadian government look at the easy answer of "one year of pot legalization in Colorado" rather than the real answer of "decades of pot legalization in Amsterdam".
The thing is that Amsterdam is without doubt a city of decay and the decay is a direct result of drugs. It's only a matter of time until Canada is a country of decay.
Is that what Canadians want? Is there anything they can still do given Justin Trudeau's personal position about his brother and use of marijuana. Are we all going down the tube because his brother was about to be given a prison sentence of drug possession (i.e.: trafficking).
You need to get your facts straight. Pot is not legalized in the Netherlands... It is decriminalized. That is a huge difference. So why would Canada look at the Netherlands when they don't even have legislation for it? If pot were only decriminalized and not legalized (as Tom Mulcair wanted) THEN it would be appropriate to look at the Netherlands and how they do it. But not when they don't have any legislation for it and it isn't legalized, we have to start pretty much from scratch as this is brand new and only some states started legalizing it recreationally only recently.
Honestly, Lieneke, I don't think Canadians care much at all. Without resorting to google checking my facts, I'm pretty sure opinion polls have shown that.
Well, they should. Opinion polls are irrelevant. The question that needs to be looked at is : is legalized marijuana good for society.
The Canadians only look at the USA and Colorado to understand the implications of legalized pot. What does not the Canadian government look at cities where pot has been legalized for decades?
Do Canadians care about third generation society of legalized pot, or are they only interested in one year of "how to test drugged drivers" in the USA?
You need to get your facts straight. Pot is not legalized in the Netherlands... It is decriminalized.
That is a huge difference. So why would Canada look at the Netherlands when they don't even have legislation for it? If pot were only decriminalized and not legalized (as Tom Mulcair wanted) THEN it would be appropriate to look at the Netherlands and how they do it. But not when they don't have any legislation for it and it isn't legalized, we have to start pretty much from scratch as this is brand new and only some states started legalizing it recreationally only recently.
I have my facts straight, but thank you.
In the Netherlands it is legal to purchase marijuana and hash in personal use quantities. It is only legal to consume these drugs on your own property. However, tourists don't respect Dutch law and smoke these drugs all day and all night on every street corner in Amsterdam.
The problem is that police are busy dealing with murders and other real crimes that "smoking pot on the corner" is low priority. In that way, public drug use gets away from police, policy and society.
Who doesn't have legislation for what?
In Canada, pot is legal and decriminalized. Fast forward thirty years and tell me what you see. Is it Colorado or Amsterdam in the making?
In the Netherlands it is legal to purchase marijuana and hash in personal use quantities. It is only legal to consume these drugs on your own property. However, tourists don't respect Dutch law and smoke these drugs all day and all night on every street corner in Amsterdam.
The problem is that police are busy dealing with murders and other real crimes that "smoking pot on the corner" is low priority. In that way, public drug use gets away from police, policy and society.
Who doesn't have legislation for what?
In Canada, pot is legal and decriminalized. Fast forward thirty years and tell me what you see. Is it Colorado or Amsterdam in the making?
No it is not legal in the Netherlands. Look it up. It is decriminalized, not legal. Which means police don't care if you have some for personal use and if businesses sell it, doesn't make it legal. I have been to Amsterdam btw I know how it works. Therefore Canada should not look to the Netherlands as it is NOT legal there, it is decriminalized. They don't have legislation for it. While in Canada it will be legal. The Netherlands DON'T have legislation for marijuana. It is only decriminalized there which is why Canada should not be looking at it and following as it is not the same. So you really don't have your facts straight.
Let's split hair for a moment because that seems to be important. In the NL, pot has been available legally for a few decades. In Canada, it is illegal. Canada plans to make pot available and to manufacture and distribute pot legally in a billion dollar thing. So, eh. Drugs from Canada will be clean - that's a plus.
Anyway.
The reason I think that Canada should look to the NL rather than some USA state is because legal use of drugs in some USA states is no more than one year old, but in the NL it is decades old. When Canada debates how to assess drivers who may be under the influence of drugs, or learning, should the country look to one year use or decades long use for examples of what it means to Canada.
Trudeau apparently prefers to look at one year use and USA examples. Is that a good idea given that there are available longer terms examples of societal drug abuse?
Let's split hair for a moment because that seems to be important. In the NL, pot has been available legally for a few decades. In Canada, it is illegal. Canada plans to make pot available and to manufacture and distribute pot legally in a billion dollar thing. So, eh. Drugs from Canada will be clean - that's a plus.
Anyway.
The reason I think that Canada should look to the NL rather than some USA state is because legal use of drugs in some USA states is no more than one year old, but in the NL it is decades old. When Canada debates how to assess drivers who may be under the influence of drugs, or learning, should the country look to one year use or decades long use for examples of what it means to Canada.
Trudeau apparently prefers to look at one year use and USA examples. Is that a good idea given that there are available longer terms examples of societal drug abuse?
What I was trying to say is because the states has actual legislation, and they are legalizing it, it is better to look at them for our purposes for legalization as in the NL pot is not technically legalized, only decriminalized. If Trudeau decided to decriminalize it instead (as the NDP wanted to do) then it would be much faster and we would be able to freely smoke weed much earlier like within the first year. If we took the decriminalization route then it would make sense to look at the Netherlands and open up Amsterdam style coffee shops, etc. I would actually prefer it that way as people would not be arrested all this time and the government doesn't have to get their dirty hands on the weed money and huge regulations and plans don't have to be rolled out. If it was decriminalized and not legal like in the Netherlands, it would make no difference for people doing it recreationally, people are still able to freely smoke in shops and it would have been a better approach as less resources would be used. But since we want to go the legalization route, it makes more sense to look at Colorado and the states as they did legalization too and they have legislation for it (while NL doesn't besides the details of decriminalization). So that's why Canada is looking at the states as we share the common concept of legislation. I do think it would be fine to get some inspiration from the Netherlands though, but not follow them directly because they are completely different laws and concepts and approach. Having said that, the states really need to get their act together because federally weed is still illegal there which doesn't make sense (as some states already legalized it). The U.S. federal government should legalize it on a federal level like Canada is doing.
No it is not legal in the Netherlands. Look it up. It is decriminalized, not legal. Which means police don't care if you have some for personal use and if businesses sell it, doesn't make it legal. I have been to Amsterdam btw I know how it works. Therefore Canada should not look to the Netherlands as it is NOT legal there, it is decriminalized. They don't have legislation for it. While in Canada it will be legal. The Netherlands DON'T have legislation for marijuana. It is only decriminalized there which is why Canada should not be looking at it and following as it is not the same. So you really don't have your facts straight.
There's your proof. It is NOT legal, there is no legislation for it, it is only decriminalized.
How much time should we give to disputing the meaning of people smoking pot on the street? Could we please skip the linguistics and look at the point?
In the NL, purchasing pot has been going on for a couple of decades. In Canada, it's going to start in the Summer, 2018. While Trudeau, the justice department, and safety officers figure this out, if we're looking for an example for legal and social policy ... why are we looking at the 1 year example in Colorado rather than the 30 year example in Amsterdam. Is Amsterdam and drugs kind of a dirty word that the Canadian government can't look at when legalizing marijuana in Canada?
Shouldn't Canada think more carefully about who we are, what we believe, what we value, why we think this and whether it wouldn't be a good idea to look at the long term environment rather than the short term environment?
What I was trying to say is because the states has actual legislation, and they are legalizing it, it is better to look at them for our purposes for legalization as in the NL pot is not technically legalized, only decriminalized. If Trudeau decided to decriminalize it instead (as the NDP wanted to do) then it would be much faster and we would be able to freely smoke weed much earlier like within the first year. If we took the decriminalization route then it would make sense to look at the Netherlands and open up Amsterdam style coffee shops, etc. I would actually prefer it that way as people would not be arrested all this time and the government doesn't have to get their dirty hands on the weed money and huge regulations and plans don't have to be rolled out. If it was decriminalized and not legal like in the Netherlands, it would make no difference for people doing it recreationally, people are still able to freely smoke in shops and it would have been a better approach as less resources would be used. But since we want to go the legalization route, it makes more sense to look at Colorado and the states as they did legalization too and they have legislation for it (while NL doesn't besides the details of decriminalization). So that's why Canada is looking at the states as we share the common concept of legislation. I do think it would be fine to get some inspiration from the Netherlands though, but not follow them directly because they are completely different laws and concepts and approach. Having said that, the states really need to get their act together because federally weed is still illegal there which doesn't make sense (as some states already legalized it). The U.S. federal government should legalize it on a federal level like Canada is doing.
Could you please break that into paragraphs ... I would love to respond, but that sort of tirage with endless connected sentences ... what are you trying to say.
What is the point?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
