I gotta say... JT needs some enligtenment!

[gb123]

Sadly what he is doing is "creating a false flag". He is creating a "problem, a public safety risk, a rallying point against evil. Organized crime.... That is step one.
Step two will be in the form of "strict new measures". Undoubtedly these will require a further erosion of Canadians rights (fuck the charter 101). The governments actions will be for our own good - trust them - they have never lied before, right ?
Step three will be the photo op with Justin, as he saves the day....

This thing trudeau calls legalization is going to be the NEW PROHABITION - THEN YOU WILL REALLY SEE HOW OUT OF TOUCH THOSE FOOLS ARE. ( I hope I am wrong...)

Man... its thinking like this that makes it the biggest joke going!
Would you like to know why?

BECAUSE HE CANT! He's already lost to the ones that count! The people!

it does make me chuckle at the thought of them doing anything really.
That little court descision made only a while back is KEY to all of this BS..
Watch it burn asses left right and center!!! Faster than fast as well.
There's no hiding behind BULLSHIT anymore... We have all the proof we need and its mounting every day!

THEY ARE WAY TO LATE to do anything with this..
to bad so sad... way little way late..

cheers fedwads!! You cant do SHIT to any person anymore for smoking or growing their oWN!

cheers!

1. ↑
   
   
   
   Looks real friendly to MJ user's...and this wad is in charge of the panel on non experts.....Expect the most stupid system you an imagine
   BOYCOTT LP's...please....seriously......boycott...spread it around.
   
   
   
   
   look how upset he is..He knows what Im saying all to well.. and their hands are tied..and its no wonder they dont know what to do and havent yet... if they were so smart they would have had a plan..no plan makes this utter crap!
   
   again...they already KNOW THEY ARE BEAT!!!

 

[VIANARCHRIS]

What worries me s how they are going about coming up with new rules to make legislation. First the guy in charge has a terrible record for up holding peoples rights. Bill Blair has spent his career arresting people for using cannabis, and that concerns me. I have heard they want a one once limit, that seems restrictive, Justin has said they want to look to WA and OR to see what works there - WA has a five year mandatory minimum for one plant.
Prove it right, exactly. With no public consultation or anything I worry what they are dreaming up for Canada.
Sorry to sound negative...
But I have learned to read between the lines when listening to the governments promises. I guess I have become jaded by the years and some days have trouble suppressing it, for that I apologize.

I understand the distrust...believe me. I just don't see how they will ban personal production of a legal plant. Unlike OR and WA, legalization will be national in Canada and not something that goes against federal law. CO and AK allow personal grows, and they could just as easily pattern our system around those. We also have a charter that would require them to successfully defend banning cultivation of a legal plant for personal consumption. I'm a glass half full kinda guy, I guess, but until I hear otherwise, I'm going with my gut and it says we will do just fine.

 

[gb123]

I think they will surprise in some respect..
only because they dont have a choice...

 

[doingdishes]

i just hope the Government won't try to do the new prohibition 2.0
even the legal still has problems in the restrictions. it won't be completely "legal" like tomatoes or corn.
booze has restrictions so i don't look at it as "legal"..I look at it as "monitored"
if i want to have a party with 1000 people, i won't need any license or permit to make the food. i can rent a hall and feed all i want. if i want to give away booze (open bar) or charge (closed bar) then i have to have a permit and let them know my intentions etc.
i believe there's a difference between totally legal and not legal

 

[VIANARCHRIS]

even the legal still has problems in the restrictions. it won't be completely "legal" like tomatoes or corn.
booze has restrictions so i don't look at it as "legal"..I look at it as "monitored"

Of course it will be completely legal So is booze. Having controls doesn't make something less legal, imo. Car ownership and use has all kinds of restriction, as does many things we do and use every day. They are all legal. reasonable restrictions are a normal part of a free society and being an intoxicant, mj will never be treated like tomatoes or corn

 

[OLD MOTHER SATIVA]

I haven't heard anything that indicates we won't be allowed to grow our own, so that worry is mute.

well the word is "moot"..

and as usual i hope you are correct but do not think you will be..

all the best..

 

[VIANARCHRIS]

well the word is "moot"..

and as usual i hope you are correct but do not think you will be..

all the best..

Well, thanks for the grammar/spelling lesson professor...where would this forum be without language cops?
And, as usual you offer no reasoning behind assuming I'm wrong. I've offered many reasons why I think they will be part of legalization... Until there is something said in Ottawa about banning home grows, I'm sticking to my theory that they will be allowed. Life is far too short to be fighting about things that haven't even happened and likely never will.

 

[Gmack420]

Well, thanks for the grammar/spelling lesson professor...where would this forum be without language cops?
And, as usual you offer no reasoning behind assuming I'm wrong. I've offered many reasons why I think they will be part of legalization... Until there is something said in Ottawa about banning home grows, I'm sticking to my theory that they will be allowed. Life is far too short to be fighting about things that haven't even happened and likely never will.

I think you're wrong because they're still arresting people for simple possessin and cultivation when they've clearly stated they want to legalize. The guy put in charge with "legalization" is a cop who's made his living off of busting people for non violent drug crimes. You're dreaming if you think this is going to end well Chris.

 

[jafro daweedhound]

The reason they may not allow personal production is...... wait for it........

THE CHILDREN.... what happens if a child happens to find a plant ??? ( correct answer is "nothing", but the government wouldn't agree).

If they do say no personal production there will be court challenges. The Allard ruling left room for a favorable ruling, when and if this problem should arise, something about charter rights.

On the other hand they may say its OK to grow x number of plants in a secure area, blah, blah....

Only Canada's weed Nazi knows for sure. Google Bill Blair, and then decide if he is your friend on this issue.

 

[doingdishes]

Well, thanks for the grammar/spelling lesson professor...where would this forum be without language cops?
And, as usual you offer no reasoning behind assuming I'm wrong. I've offered many reasons why I think they will be part of legalization... Until there is something said in Ottawa about banning home grows, I'm sticking to my theory that they will be allowed. Life is far too short to be fighting about things that haven't even happened and likely never will.

and i thought it was "moo"...you know a cow's opinion-it's doesn't matter...haha
one of the only episodes of friends I saw

 

[Gmack420]

We

The reason they may not allow personal production is...... wait for it........

THE CHILDREN.... what happens if a child happens to find a plant ??? ( correct answer is "nothing", but the government wouldn't agree).

If they do say no personal production there will be court challenges. The Allard ruling left room for a favorable ruling, when and if this problem should arise, something about charter rights.

On the other hand they may say its OK to grow x number of plants in a secure area, blah, blah....

Only Canada's weed Nazi knows for sure. Google Bill Blair, and then decide if he is your friend on this issue.

ll if they're like we were as kids they're going to try to smoke fresh wet weed and fail miserably lol someone has to tell these kids to dry it out first. Tbh I don't expect the new regs to include home production of any kind.

 

[OLD MOTHER SATIVA]

Well, thanks for the grammar/spelling lesson professor...where would this forum be without language cops?
And, as usual you offer no reasoning behind assuming I'm wrong. I've offered many reasons why I think they will be part of legalization... Until there is something said in Ottawa about banning home grows, I'm sticking to my theory that they will be allowed. Life is far too short to be fighting about things that haven't even happened and likely never will.

well if you want to continue using the wrong word ok..i usually am grateful for people's help not defensive ..
..a simple thanks woulda done....

as usual you have nothing to back up your "pie in the sky we will get ours" attitude..but i was not going to point that out

we are NOT fighting..maybe you are ..

i am just saying the way things are going it doesn't look good..i hope you are right but it even if
you are it has nothing to do with

anything you know

i hope you are correct..but it think you are not..sorry ...thats only based on the last 50 years..and before that it was worse

and yes its the what about the children , the Bill Blair as some sort of figure head....
the Jt's "very tough on anyone who bucks their new Lp protective laws"


dude

...less than nothing has changed ..

 

[VIANARCHRIS]

Tbh I don't expect the new regs to include home production of any kind.

I don't know how legal will not include home grows What possible justification will they use to ban production of a legal substance. The mold and fire risk concerns have been dismissed as a non-issue. Booze and tobacco are both heavily regulated, but completely legal and home production is permitted. Precedence would dictate cannabis will follow suit, What other excuse can they use to restrict a freedom and make it past the SCoC? Neither of us will know who is right until it happens, but nothing so far points to banning home grows, imo. All I've heard from the nay-sayers on here is the government is somehow going to ban millions of Canadians from growing a legal plant in order to help two dozen LP's...I don't buy it. Any legal system will need to allow for personal grows if they intend to limit organized crime involvement. Now we wait...and wait...

 

[VIANARCHRIS]

well if you want to continue using the wrong word ok..i usually am grateful for people's help not defensive ..
..a simple thanks woulda done....

I don't want, need or appreciate anyone's help correcting my use of the English language.

"very tough on anyone who bucks their new Lp protective laws"

You got some sort of facts or evidence or even a quote that suggests that statement is anything more than delusional? Get back on the meds, the paranoia is really coming out, buddy.

 

[GrowRock]

I don't know how legal will not include home grows What possible justification will they use to ban production of a legal substance. The mold and fire risk concerns have been dismissed as a non-issue. Booze and tobacco are both heavily regulated, but completely legal and home production is permitted. Precedence would dictate cannabis will follow suit, What other excuse can they use to restrict a freedom and make it past the SCoC? Neither of us will know who is right until it happens, but nothing so far points to banning home grows, imo. All I've heard from the nay-sayers on here is the government is somehow going to ban millions of Canadians from growing a legal plant in order to help two dozen LP's...I don't buy it. Any legal system will need to allow for personal grows if they intend to limit organized crime involvement. Now we wait...and wait...

I believe you are right but there's still a chance of banning home grows slim but a chance and after all they are the government...just got thinking what other line of employment can a person totally go against what they were appointed and paid to do other then a politician.....lol

 

[Gmack420]

I don't know how legal will not include home grows What possible justification will they use to ban production of a legal substance. The mold and fire risk concerns have been dismissed as a non-issue. Booze and tobacco are both heavily regulated, but completely legal and home production is permitted. Precedence would dictate cannabis will follow suit, What other excuse can they use to restrict a freedom and make it past the SCoC? Neither of us will know who is right until it happens, but nothing so far points to banning home grows, imo. All I've heard from the nay-sayers on here is the government is somehow going to ban millions of Canadians from growing a legal plant in order to help two dozen LP's...I don't buy it. Any legal system will need to allow for personal grows if they intend to limit organized crime involvement. Now we wait...and wait...

Stills are illigal but you can buy liquor. Yes I know you can brew beer and wine but that's like being able to only grow low dose mj.

 

[OLD MOTHER SATIVA]

quote
"What possible justification will they use to ban production of a legal substance.?"

vianna... its called whataboutthechildren.ca along with corporate commerce


YES the only way to combat [the other] organized crime

is to allow home grows..

and for the 20th time..i will say

i want to you to be correct..i have no pride.. i could care less about me being wrong and embrace it

i just want people to be able to grown their own

and on the paranoia. vianna...call it what you wish....i would say "jaded.."


and on quotes..just look in your personal JT data base

.no he doesn't say LP's..but anyone who bucks the "new laws"

new laws means buy from corporate herbage.ca or else



been on this thing for 50 years and counting and still ain't much better

 

[VIANARCHRIS]

I believe you are right but there's still a chance of banning home grows slim but a chance and after all they are the government...just got thinking what other line of employment can a person totally go against what they were appointed and paid to do other then a politician.....lol

vianna... its called whataboutthechildren.ca along with corporate commerce

If that were the case they should have been concerned with the fact that I can make my own booze, smokes and ammunition. Are any of those things less dangerous for children? A freak bible-thumping group of idiots is not going to dictate the rules for the masses.

 

[OLD MOTHER SATIVA]

i agree they "should be"..but all thats old news..its all about pot now

you do not have to convince me..cannabis is pharmacologically the safest compound on the planet

but common sense has no bearing here..and never did

 

[Gmack420]

If that were the case they should have been concerned with the fact that I can make my own booze, smokes and ammunition. Are any of those things less dangerous for children? A freak bible-thumping group of idiots is not going to dictate the rules for the masses.

Any yet pot is and has been illigal for so long and what you state has been legal for decades. Still can't make your own hard liquor. And you need a pal to be able to make your own ammo.