As of today, Cannabis is legal in Canada

3db

3db

Audioholic Slumlord
I don't know. Do you think availability was ever a problem or do you think the law stopped a significant population from using pot?

Regarding young people: eventually they turn into their parents. A little experimentation with the giggle bush and then onto Canadian Club and beers, eh?

Moderation for me is pure torture. That's for people who don't appreciate the splendor offered by external influence. Barring over indulgence, abstinence is the way forward but that is a distant second.

BTW, I have a mass spectrometer over here and in a selfless effort to help my community, I will test your weed for you and provide a certificate of purity for the chosen few. Ummm ... if you wanna make a donation for my scientific analysis ... no problem. Just send cash with the bud. The more bud you send the more scientific significance the spectro analysis will yield.
You're correct about the availability as not being an issue before legalization but because its legal now, I think the more timid people will come out of the wood work and try it. I forsee a big spike in its use which eventually reduce to a steady state once the novelity wears off. Whether the steady state will be higher than before legalization in steady state remains to be seen. I'm guessing a little higher but not much more.
 
Alex2507

Alex2507

Audioholic Slumlord
I think the more timid people will come out of the woord work and try it.
Who hasn't tried it? Like six 9 year olds? Everybody has tried it.

I think the concern is over bad etiquette at bus stops and of course the drivers like gn mentioned. I think those folks fall under the 5%-10% umbrella of let's say 'addiction challenged'. Again, I'm with them, but that population will put their addiction before health, safety etc. They've always been there but now decriminalization will make some of them bolder and bothersome. I bet public intoxication went way down during prohibition of alcohol.

It's like that song that says, "motherf^%&ers don't know how to act". However for those that do know how to act, this is a pretty cool time to be a pot head. The commercially available thc has become a wide selection. It's crazy what's out there. You think gummy bears targets kids? :D

Dan is right about the potency too. What's wild is when a conscientious grower further boosts the potency by like over infusing an oil or butter with the highest potency weed he can grow.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="
" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 
psbfan9

psbfan9

Audioholic Samurai
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/harry-anslinger-the-man-behind-the-marijuana-ban/

Cannabis prohibition steeped in racism.

Here is a story about the father, Harry Anslinger, of the DEA and his racist reasons for wanting to include cannabis in the same category as cocaine and heroin.

There was little scientific evidence that supported Anslinger’s claims. He contacted 30 scientists, according to Hari, and 29 told him cannabis was not a dangerous drug. But it was the theory of the single expert who agreed with him that he presented to the public — cannabis was an evil that should be banned — and the press ran with this sensationalized version.

Anslinger’s strategy was racial. He claimed that black people and Latinos were the primary users of marijuana, and it made them forget their place in the fabric of American society. He even went so far as to argue that jazz musicians were creating “Satanic” music all thanks to the influence of pot. This obsession eventually led to a sort of witch hunt against the legendary singer Billie Holiday, who struggled with heroin addiction; she lost her license to perform in New York cabarets and continued to be dogged by law enforcement until her death.

So as the nationwide attitude towards cannabis began to fall in line with Anslinger’s, he testified before Congress in hearings for the Marijuana Tax Act. His testimony centered around the ideas he had been pushing all along — including a provocative letter from a local newspaper editor in Colorado, saying “I wish I could show you what a small marihuana cigaret can do to one of our degenerate Spanish-speaking residents.”
 
psbfan9

psbfan9

Audioholic Samurai
Apologies for the double post.

But,

So I have 2 1/2 jobs. One is a small business that I started 12 years ago. In the other two, I deal with the public. I have short hair, bath daily, shave almost every day. I wear khakis and a collared shirt. I look like a classic nerd that only drinks milk. I'm not the stereotypical 'stoner', I hate that word, that you hear about in the news or see in movies.

While Cheech and Chong are funny, I think they hurt the cause as much as the help. I think many of you would be surprised to find out that your friends and neighbors use cannabis. Just because they don't look like a 'stoner,' I hate that word, doesn't mean d!ck.

We're amongst you. We are your friends and neighbors. We're productive members of society, but in most places, we are also criminals. And that is shameful.

And now this from the good folks at the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.

 
KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
Tax it and build me some better highways.
And put the money into accelerating the development of self-driving vehicles! I don't see driving while stoned as near the problem of drunk driving, but why not just take it completely off the table.
The only problem is I will miss driving and playing chicken with squirrels and possums (I never lose, but sometimes they don't either...of course that is when we get to see what they are really made of!).
 
D

Drunkpenguin

Audioholic Chief
Put me down for self driving cars too. I'll trust a malfunctioning computer over a human any day.
 
KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
Put me down for self driving cars too. I'll trust a malfunctioning computer over a human any day.
We just need to make sure the cars get very capable computers. That way when AI plans to eradicate the earth of flawed humans, they won't be willing to kamikaze crash us all at once and we can rightfully prolong our demise into extended suffering!
We also need to set up a network of manually controlled nukes to go off in the upper atmosphere to EMP those suckers! The important thing here is to make sure the AI doesn't know the plan...oh, wait, why won't backspace work?
Oh, damn!
Sorry guys, I think I just f*cked up.:(
 
Johnny2Bad

Johnny2Bad

Audioholic Chief
The Act to Legalize Cannibis in Canada also carries some other provisions people should be aware of. In combination with new Impaired Driving legistlation passed in tandem with the Cannibis legislation, it is much more difficult to immigrrate to Canada, be accepted as a refugee, or visit as a tourist.

The Cannibis Act makes illegal grow-ops or illegal distribution of cannibis an offense with a maximum penalty of 14 years, up from 7 years, in prison.

Also, giving cannibis to someone under the age of 18 also carries the 14 year maximum. Remember, there is no "time off for good behaviour" in Canada.

The revision to Impaired Driving legislation carries a maximum penalty of 10 years versus the old 5 years.

That means if you have had a DUI in the US, you are now considered guilty of "serious criminality" (any offense that if committed in Canada would carry a maximum penalty of 10 years or more). Although it is not absolutely impossible to visit Canada or remain in Canada as a refugee, landed immigrant or permanent resident, it is much more difficult. Don't expect to just show up at the border and enter; you need to apply for an exemption many months (I would suggest at least 6 months) before your planned visit. And in the majority of cases, your application will be rejected. There is no appeal.
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
The Act to Legalize Cannibis in Canada also carries some other provisions people should be aware of. In combination with new Impaired Driving legistlation passed in tandem with the Cannibis legislation, it is much more difficult to immigrrate to Canada, be accepted as a refugee, or visit as a tourist.

The Cannibis Act makes illegal grow-ops or illegal distribution of cannibis an offense with a maximum penalty of 14 years, up from 7 years, in prison.

Also, giving cannibis to someone under the age of 18 also carries the 14 year maximum. Remember, there is no "time off for good behaviour" in Canada.

The revision to Impaired Driving legislation carries a maximum penalty of 10 years versus the old 5 years.

That means if you have had a DUI in the US, you are now considered guilty of "serious criminality" (any offense that if committed in Canada would carry a maximum penalty of 10 years or more). Although it is not absolutely impossible to visit Canada or remain in Canada as a refugee, landed immigrant or permanent resident, it is much more difficult. Don't expect to just show up at the border and enter; you need to apply for an exemption many months (I would suggest at least 6 months) before your planned visit. And in the majority of cases, your application will be rejected. There is no appeal.
The dui thing (and varous other crimes preventing entry by US citizens) have long been in effect, back from when Bush was president in establishing Homeland Security and revision of rules on our side, which triggered some on your side.....
 
Johnny2Bad

Johnny2Bad

Audioholic Chief
The dui thing (and varous other crimes preventing entry by US citizens) have long been in effect, back from when Bush was president in establishing Homeland Security and revision of rules on our side, which triggered some on your side.....
The maximum penalty in Canada for Impaired Driving was 5 years, the maximum for drug offences was 7 years (trafficking, importing). That just meant you had to acquire a waiver at the border when you entered. With a career in the tourism industry (my company flew 50~65 passenger aircraft across the border every 4 days) I can tell you that not once did a US citizen with drug or alcohol convictions not get a waiver to enter Canada.

It never meant you were barred from entry and it never meant you could be deported. Even immigrants with Citizenship can have that citizenship revoked for certain causes; which includes "Serious Criminality" and lying on your immigration application; only those born in Canada are free from that issue.

The change to 10 years (or longer, the threshold is less than 10 years / more than 10 years) means you are essentially in the same category as a convicted murderer. Inadmissible.

Like in the US, Inadmissible does not mean there is no hope (in Canada you can appeal to the Minister of Immigration for a ministerial permit, in the US you can get Congress to pass a bill making you admissible). Just ask John Lennon how that works.

In both countries you can apply for a waiver. But plan on it taking a year before you have an answer, and there is no appeal procedure; waiver applications are permanent and final.
 
Last edited:
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
The maximum penalty in Canada for Impaired Driving was 5 years, the maximum for drug offences was 7 years (trafficking, importing). That just meant you had to acquire a waiver at the border when you entered. With a career in the tourism industry (my company flew 50~65 passenger aircraft across the border every 4 days) I can tell you that not once did a US citizen with drug or alcohol convictions not get a waiver to enter Canada.

It never meant you were barred from entry and it never meant you could be deported. Even immigrants with Citizenship can have that citizenship revoked for certain causes; which includes "Serious Criminality" and lying on your immigration application; only those born in Canada are free from that issue.

The change to 10 years (or longer, the threshold is less than 10 years / more than 10 years) means you are essentially in the same category as a convicted murderer. Inadmissible.

Like in the US, Inadmissible does not mean there is no hope (in Canada you can appeal to the Minister of Immigration for a ministerial permit, in the US you can get Congress to pass a bill making you admissible). Just ask John Lennon how that works.

In both countries you can apply for a waiver. But plan on it taking a year before you have an answer, and there is no appeal procedure; waiver applications are permanent and final.
My understanding on the dui thing (or any other crime here in the US that was considered more serious in Canada, such as a misdemeanor here that was felony there like dui) was that if you didn't make advance arrangements you would be turned away at the border, you could fairly easily do this through a lawyer and paying of course. No personal experience but do believe someone I know was turned away, but it's been many years and I don't remember who that was. Maybe it's not the best information but I had looked into this at one point, while passenger/personal crossings aren't my old trade, I'm a former US Customs broker and was asked about this and from what I looked into with my agents in Canada, had verification.

I definitely had one friend who was turned away several years back for a theft as a minor that wasn't even supposed to be on the books any more (but computer still had it); his buddies dumped him and his bike at the border and he came here instead of Whistler (we also have good mountain biking) and I knew he was supposed to be in Whistler and we had a nice conversation about it.

Was the waiver offered the whole time as you passed thru Customs since what 2002, I think it was around then when it went into effect? Customs officers often have much leeway in what they choose to enforce, too.
 
psbfan9

psbfan9

Audioholic Samurai
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/pot-stocks-break-post-legalization-133855311.html

Cannabis Short Sellers Made Over $450 Million in Two Days

Cannabis short sellers made over $450 million on the first two days of the week, cutting nearly a third off their year-to-date losses, according to data from financial analytics firm S3 Partners.

Pot stocks fell for six consecutive trading days beginning Oct. 16, the day before Canada legalized recreational marijuana. The BI Canada Cannabis Competitive Peers index tumbled 21 percent from then through Tuesday’s close, and the Horizons Marijuana Life Sciences Index ETF, the largest pot exchange-traded fund, lost 20 percent to its lowest level in two months.

Several Canadian provinces have been struggling with supply shortages. About 46 percent of pot products were sold out based on a survey of online retailers in five provinces, Cowen analyst Vivien Azer said in a note published Tuesday.

The Ontario Cannabis Store, the government-run website that’s currently the only way to buy marijuana in Canada’s most populous province, said late Tuesday that it has processed more than 100,000 orders since Oct. 17 but warned of longer-than-expected delivery times due to high demand and rotating strikes at Canada Post.

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/pot-stocks-break-post-legalization-133855311.html
 
Johnny2Bad

Johnny2Bad

Audioholic Chief
My understanding on the dui thing (or any other crime here in the US that was considered more serious in Canada, such as a misdemeanor here that was felony there like dui) was that if you didn't make advance arrangements you would be turned away at the border, you could fairly easily do this through a lawyer and paying of course. No personal experience but do believe someone I know was turned away, but it's been many years and I don't remember who that was. Maybe it's not the best information but I had looked into this at one point, while passenger/personal crossings aren't my old trade, I'm a former US Customs broker and was asked about this and from what I looked into with my agents in Canada, had verification.

I definitely had one friend who was turned away several years back for a theft as a minor that wasn't even supposed to be on the books any more (but computer still had it); his buddies dumped him and his bike at the border and he came here instead of Whistler (we also have good mountain biking) and I knew he was supposed to be in Whistler and we had a nice conversation about it.

Was the waiver offered the whole time as you passed thru Customs since what 2002, I think it was around then when it went into effect? Customs officers often have much leeway in what they choose to enforce, too.
Both Homeland Security and Canada Border Agency have access to each other's national crime databases, and if you attempt to cross the border, that data will be accessed and form part of a permanent record on you. If that record is later expunged or removed, that won't be reflected in the information the border agents have on you ... in hoth countries policy is to never delete data, period.

So (this is just an example) let's say you were caught smoking pot in Canada, with a partly smoked joint in your hand when arrested. That is enough to lay a charge; in fact pipe residue is enough to lay a charge in Canada. So you go before the judge, you are a first time offender, he gives you an Absolute Discharge, which is an option for non-indictable offfenses in Canada (the Crown has the option of proceeding by Summary Conviction or Indictment, which requires a Preliminary Hearing).

Note that in Canada every offense is a Criminal Offense ... there is no such thing as a misdeanor theft, for example. In the US, all Criminal Code convictions are considered "equivalent to felony" as far as deciding admissibility to the US.So shoplifting is a felony conviction to Homeland Security.

Later that year, you attempt to cross the border into the US, you answer "No' when asked if you have a Criminal Record, as this is often suggested, even by Lawyers who should know better, that an Absolute Discharge means you have no Criminal Record. Let me state right here that you do in fact have a Criminal Record if you have been in court for any reason, including if you were acquitted or the charges dropped before you entered court. Your record will exist until you die or reach the age of 95. * Also, Lying to a Border Agent is grounds for refusal, and you just lied to him, as he can see right there on the screen you were convicted of possession, and that you were refused will be part of the permanent record at the border in either Country.

What an Absolute Discharge really means is your record of conviction will be kept in a separate, un-searchable area in the Criminal Records data repository in Ottawa. It can be moved back into the searchable active area if you commit further crimes. It also takes time to do the record management.

That last statement is where our fictional pot smoker gets in to trouble. He attempted to cross the broder into the US before enough time had passed to move his Criminal Record to the non-searchable area. So the Border Agent accessed CPIC (Canada Personal Identification Computer) record that every officer in Canada can access in the car or by radio transmission ** if on foot. And CPIC reports back that he was convicted of possession of marijuana in Canada six months earlier. From that point on, that information will be in all US Homeland Security databases, affecting Air Travel across the US even if no stop on US soil, and travel to the US, where a drug conviction of any kind makes you inadmissible.

* The Police Agency that layed the charge also has records of the event. They are never required to delete any data either, so if you were busted in Toronto and your record is not in the CPIC database because you were given an Absolute Discharge and enough time ... typically two years ... has passed since the conviction, when you are stopped in Toronto they will have a complete record of the event, which will be limited to you being charged and what you were charged with.

Because the courts are a different branch, they won't have a record of whether you were convicted or acquitted, but they will know they are dealing with a pot smoker who was given an Absolute Discharge ("get out of here, kid") or a Conditional Discharge (probation, pay a fine, anything except even one day in jail),because the record back from Toronto PD headquarters will be "charged, no conviction".

There is only one way to get a "charged, no conviction" reply, and that is if you were given a Discharge. The CD is distinct from a sentence of probation, a fine, etc so don't confuse the two. The latter means a permanent searchable Criminal Record.

If an Absolute Discharge was the result of your court appearance, they will be prohibited from offering that information to other law enforcement agencies, so if you are stopped in Hamilton they cannot access Toronto's information. But ... you sometimes hear of officers investigating a crime traveling to another jurisdiction as part of their inquiries. What records do you suppose the officer is looking at?

** Canada's CPIC and the US's FBI records databases have been shared since the 1970's. Sometime around the late 1980's both countries got around to making it legal by passing legislation to that effect. Because of the numerous police agencies in the US, some local police used to have limited access in the car, State Police have always had access as have RCMP and all local police in Canada. These days even small American local forces have instant access. It takes about 30 seconds to get a full report that includes data from both countries.
 
Last edited:
Johnny2Bad

Johnny2Bad

Audioholic Chief
...{snip} ...

I definitely had one friend who was turned away several years back for a theft as a minor that wasn't even supposed to be on the books any more (but computer still had it); his buddies dumped him and his bike at the border and he came here instead of Whistler (we also have good mountain biking) and I knew he was supposed to be in Whistler and we had a nice conversation about it.

Was the waiver offered the whole time as you passed thru Customs since what 2002, I think it was around then when it went into effect? Customs officers often have much leeway in what they choose to enforce, too.
You "ahould" contact a Canadian Consulate in the US if you think you might be refused at the border perhaps six months before your intended travel date. That way you can get a definitive waiver to take and present at the border. The CCRA (Canada Customs & Revenue Agency) Officer has the *option* of offering a waiver at the border. If you are offered a waiver at the border, it costs $C 100.00

There are many reasons why someone is refused entry. It could be he lied to the officer and that is grounds for refusal in either country right there. Maybe his attitude was such that the Officer decided to refuse him instead of offering a waiver. Maybe he refused to pay the $C 100 which, depending on when he was there, could have been as low as $US 65 or as much as $115.

The waiver has always been available.

For Canadians traveling to the US, there are no waivers available at the border; you will be refused and that you were refused, and why, will form part of your permanent record with Homeland Security. Waivers to enter the US require an application process and fee that takes about a year. You will be required to submit your fingerprints to the FBI records office in Minneapolis. If granted, you have one year where you MUST enter the US, and get into zero trouble while there. Watch cable in your hotel room for four days, basically. After that the waiver is permanent and can be used to cross into the US at any time in the future.

Some Canadians are (incorrectly) advised to obtain a Pardon from the Government of Canada, usually in advertisements from agencies who offer to do the paperwork, for a fee, of course. Firstly, the paperwork is trivial and not worth paying someone to fill out. But there's more.

Pardons are not recognized by Homeland Security, so it won't get you into the US. Worse, a Pardon can be revoked, and you can be charged with an additional Criminal offense, if you lie about your Pardon. So for the rest of your life, on every job application, at the border, talking to police, etc, you will be required to tell them what you were charged with and that you were Pardoned for the offense.

You are much better off not obtaining a Pardon and just lying about it. If you get away with it, fine. If you don't, the other party has no more information than they would have had you been granted a Pardon, and you won't be subject to a charge about Lying about your Pardon.

I mention this because Canada has indicated that legislation might come at a later date to deal with those whom have simple possession drug convictions. One of the suggested options is a blanket Pardon. That will be worse than having a record, for the reasons cited above, and especially if you were given an AD or CD, taking your un-searchable Criminal Record away and giving you a public record Pardon in it's place.
 
Last edited:
Johnny2Bad

Johnny2Bad

Audioholic Chief
I think it's important to understand that Canada's de-criminalisation of simple pot possession is about fighting organized crime. That is why penalties for "the big fish" have doubled. It's now illegal to possess pot that you didn't grow yourself or didn't buy from a licensed vendor, for example, so "street pot" possession is a Criminal Offense with much higher penalties. Any form of drug trafficking is also a much more serious offense, as is any form of distribution, including giving pot to, or simply being in the same room as a minor (under 18) when smoking marijuana. The idea is to fight street gangs, motorcycle clubs, and professional distribution chains by eliminating the illegal market and significantly increasing the penalties for interacting with them in any way.

It's naieve to think that you are going to eliminate any marijuana interaction with someone under 18. Anyone who thinks that way has completely forgotten what it's like to be 17 or to attend High School. But if your 16-year old neice gets popped with a joint in her hand, and it's child's play (literally) to get a 16 YO to sign a statement saying she got it from Aunt Bessie. Well now Aunt Bessie is looking at a possible 14 years in prison. So the adults (those above 25, apparently) are going to self-police on the issue.

I happen to live in a city where the policy of Police is to charge everyone, every time, for all drug and alcohol offenses, including what other cities might consider trivial, such as possession of a small amount of pot. They were charging people right up to the day it became legal. So we can expect there will be charges in relation to minors here, I think.
 
Last edited:
Johnny2Bad

Johnny2Bad

Audioholic Chief
CPIC codes cover a wide range of outcomes and information. For the most part a numerical code will be returned, and the officer can make further inquiries if he feels the need to dig deeper. But by way of example there is a code for "do not aprehend" for people who may be involved in a lawsuit with the police, or for people under surveillance. Imagine the behind-the-scenes activity if a Border Guard received that code as you were trying to enter the country.

One time, on a lark, we were drunk and late in the Legal Aid office, where a friend who worked there did a CPIC inquiry on the name of Provincial Attourney-General of the time. I don't know why the Legal Aid office could do CPICs, but they could. I doubt that it was legal, but that wasn't enough to stop things like that back then. This was in the late 1970's. The CPIC operator returned the code for "why do you query"? *

There was a bit of a fuss that Monday but as multiple people were there at the time they couldn't nail anyone specific for it. Leave it to a group of Lawyers to know enough to collectively admit being there and to individually refuse to admit making the call.

I was at the Western Association of Broadcast Engineers convention sometime around 1978 or so, and while speaking to the STUDER/ReVox rep, he mentioned that he had just sold 32 loggers to the RCMP Regional Office, and that they were good customers with regular purchase orders across Canada (A logger is an open-reel tape recorder running at 15/16 IPS, designed to be used to record radio station broadcasts for regulatory compliance ... one tape could hold 24 hours of broadcast.)

When I asked the NAGRA people about whom bought their recorders, they refused to be specific but admitted Government and Law Enforcement were major customers. At the time, NAGRA were famous for those tiny open reel recorders, they were used for "wires" taped to an informant's body. They did a demonstration for me, pressed record, threw the machine against the back wall of the venue (epoxy-painted cinderblocks),went and picked it up, pressed "stop", and then played back the recording of it hitting the wall, the footsteps, etc.

Police used the ReVox Loggers to record wiretaps. Wiretaps were not legal at the time either, which was convenient as no pesky details like warrants had to be messed with (they eventually passed legislation making wiretaps legal after the RCMP were caught bugging separatists in Quebec, along with a little arson).

* That reply, I suspect, which would be typical of the times, was so that the officer could be told, with regard to certain "important" people, to ignore an offense, or perhaps even drive the person home if they were too drunk to drive themselves.

Every generation complains that the previous one left the country or the planet in a colossal mess, but as always, that is only partly true. The current generation is going to screw up something over the years too, they just don't know what it will be yet. Policing when I was a teen was very, very different than it is today, and I can assure you for the better. What the average cop did on a daily basis in 1975 would get him a jail sentence today.
 
Last edited:
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top