Comments:Canada to legalise marijuana to 'make it more difficult for kids to access'

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Back to article

Wikinews commentary.svg

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. Please remain on topic and avoid offensive or inflammatory comments where possible. Try thought-provoking, insightful, or controversial. Civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Use the "Start a new discussion" button just below to start a new discussion. If the button isn't there, wait a few seconds and click this link: Refresh.



Start a new discussion

Contents

Thread titleRepliesLast modified
Can't relate523:32, 29 June 2017

Can't relate

I didn't quite get how this would help the problem of minors access to the drug. Are the penalties for giving it to children the same or higher than before? Exactly how is the strict regulation achieved?

Gryllida (talk)23:20, 18 April 2017

The penalties are higher, yes. But the government is yet to frame how exactly they are going to regulate it. Even the taxation, price of the drug, penalty to the drivers driving under the drugs influence, all of these tasks are pending. Bill Blair even commented on this that lot of important things are yet to be done. (Ex-police chief and law maker)

acagastya02:27, 19 April 2017

Perhaps it would be nice to "follow up" with another article after these pending issues are resolved.

Gryllida (talk)23:30, 29 June 2017
 

There are a lot of details that need to be filled in, but it seems the Canadian government are showing maturity and a logical streak almost unheard of in government worldwide.

The 4 plant personal allowance is fairly sensible, though I would point out that the hight limit does not impinge on the strength or weight yeild of a plant, but perversely, often the opposite, as tall plants can't carry heavy buds. That is something that, were I to be making such law, I would remove. In fact, allowing tall plants may start a move back to the cultivation of plants with a reasonable THC content in the leaves, for a nice mild smoke that older (and smarter) folk often prefer.

Unless taxation is high, this will remove the cannabis trade from criminals, organised or otherways, leaving it, one hopes, in the hands of decent people who have ethical concerns which supersede "gangsta" kudos and tawdry profits.

Should commercial cultivation be permitted, in addition to personal cultivation, the economies of scale would allow a fairly high tax to be applied, a decent profit taken, and yet the price to the end user to be lower than the "street" price of the illegal drug, really cutting organised crime out of the picture within about 6 months of the law coming into force.

This also means that sufferers of the many painful diseases that cannabis can help with can acquire and use the drug without landing themselves, or (often ethical) suppliers in a big can of undeserved legal whupass.

Well done so far Canada! Show the world the way!

94.197.120.61 (talk)21:36, 25 April 2017

That reminds me that the plant also has other legitimate uses. It simply grows quickly, meaning it is a good choice for gardening. It is used in textile industry. I personally disagree with banning the growth of the plant at home. I would only penalise its consumption as a drug.

Gryllida (talk)23:32, 29 June 2017
 

California recently legalized cannabis by referendum and set the legal age at 21. It places stiff penalties on selling marijuana to minors. Minors found in possession would be redirected to drug abuse programs or community service rather than face time in juvie.

Of course, the drug remains illegal under federal law, and the current attorney general Sessions doesn't seem too keen on the drug despite rules having been relaxed under the Obama administration.

mikemoral (talk)08:01, 11 May 2017