From a chicken in every pot to a pot plant in every window:
“Tax it, regulate. It’s one of the only ways to keep it out of the hands of our kids because the current war on drugs, the current model is not working.”
What could go wrong?
By the way, if you believe in normalizing cannabis to reduce crime, while denormalizing tobacco to reduce use —- you might be a liberal.
Trudeau is successfully creating the most random platform in Canadian history which will result in some excellent hilarity in 2015. He gets dumber and dumber every day.
As a youth, taxation and regulation of alcohol meant that I never, ever got drunk. Not even once.
Hopefully his dope-smoking supporters will get high, then get the munchies and forget when it’s time to vote.
He’d keep pot out of the hands of children, in the way that selling lettuce in the grocery store keeps it out of home gardens.
The schizophrenia argument is a non starter. There is no evidence that pot ’causes’ the disorder … That is speculation … HOWEVER ..
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF), in 2000, estimated that 14 million U.S. residents suffer from alcohol abuse and dependence, and 76 million are affected by the alcoholism of a family member.
That might be a better place to put ones efforts to control a devastating drug … And do you know how many drunks kill with their Motor vehicles?
Pot is a trank an anti depressant and good medicine for cancer sufferers, insomniacs, arthritis sufferers, migraines, it also help stop epileptic seizures and it is also a pleasant ‘altered state’ for recreational user.
Nothing can wrong unless the user is already a whack-job and I have met a few of those in my long life of pot use.
Whether the Trudeau twit wins and pretends to legalize it or not, it remains a very useful drug with a growing number of users. Most don’t care if it get s legal or not …. They will ignore the government offerings and continue to get cheaper and better weed from their usual sources that won’t go away easily.
Thousands of families rely on growing and selling pot to make ends meet. Trudeau will try to destroy those people … That’s what can go wrong.
Seriously, who would buy taxed weed?
This character saying something, anything is wholly irrelevant, he comes across as a complete air head, a windbag if you like. The real threat to the Canadian society is that he may be elected into primeministership, which of course would be disaster of global proportions.
“War” on drugs is not working …. so they say.
The campaign against drugs employs a way large number of people, keeps politicians telling people that they are going to do something about it. There is absolutely positively no reason to win it, some might even call winning it counterproductive.
It is a life time employment for the police, the lawyers, the judges, the politicians, the sociologists, the “onsite” industry and assortment of other hangers on.
If there was no “war” on drugs, there may well be another few million Canadians unemployed.
The “war” on drugs is here and will be for a long time to come, even in the case that it becomes legal to do drugs.
It’s a matter of employment.
ofaycat:
Your argument is a nonstarter because nobody says it causes schizophrenia. It has been shown to result in malformed brain regions and altered myelination grey matter levels which seems to correlate with intelligence tests.
“It’s one of the only ways…” This from someone who attended McGill and UBC? Even a substitute drama teacher should speak better English than that.
Funny, the people for whom this is a huge issue, and I’m looking at YOU, LAS, never stop to ask themselves the consequences that would ensue if their wishes came true.
I know, right now, that if I wanted to score some pot, I could get it quite easily, and quite cheaply, and my chances of being arrested for it would be negligible. But I’ve tried it, and don’t really like it, so why bother?
As it stands, the cops are rarely bothering to bust recreational pot smokers, but if the stuff became taxable, suddenly government revenue would be involved, and you can bet your ass they will become a whole lot more hard-nosed about enforcement.
As much as pro-potters say Tax! Regulate! Control! You KNOW there will still be an underground market where people will be avoiding the tax. See cigarettes/home renovations/ etc. etc. etc. Same goes for those proponents of taxing and regulating prostitution. Cops will be just as busy.
Sorry but Trudeau is correct (this time) and Harper will be viewed as the old clueless crank on this one. Is marijuana harmless? Only a fool would say such a thing. If you toke up from dawn to dusk there’s a pretty good chance of repercussions, obviously the same goes for having several drinks daily. I would like some of my fellow SDA readers to explain to me why having a few drinks once in a while is OK but smoking a joint with the same frequency is not. How many punch ups or domestic abuses are caused by booze vs marijuana? You know the answer. How much crime stems from the illegal marijuana trade? Plenty. Prohibition in the 20’s gave the mafia more money and power than they could imagine simply because the government created a law that the majority of the US population didn’t agree with, and in Canada most people think the same towards pot. I agree with most of bill c-10, but does the mandatory jail sentence of 6 months for growing between 6 plants (a year supply for a few friends)and 200 plants (a year supply for a freaking town) makes sense to anyone?? Many adult smokers have families, hold down jobs and pay taxes. They just unwind differently. Since it’s easier for a kid to buy pot than booze, why not try Trudeau’s approach? Harper’s has already been proven a failure. And yes it hurts to admit that Trudeau is right…feel so dirty.
Oh please, Kate, is what we’re doing right now keeping the kids away from the pot?
Just because he’s a pretty boy princeling doesn’t make him wrong on this.
Here’s William Buckley, you can be a conservative and for the legalization of pot, in fact, it’s the position that is consistent.
http://old.nationalreview.com/buckley/buckley200406291207.asp
The champ
Did you not click the ‘what could go wrong’ link?
Read it … That article is clearly linking pot use to schizophrenia.
Here is a quote …
Though they receive little attention in the legalization debate, the scientific studies showing an association between marijuana use and schizophrenia and other disorders are alarming.
I am linking alcohol use to the devastation of families, traffic death and injury.as a much more pressing drug problem. I won’t bother to mention the devastation caused by the prescription drug trade.
If pressed I would say that all the drug problems combined pale in comparison to the devastation being caused by the Obama presidency and .what might go wrong with a Trudeau reign in this silly country.
Its going to be hard for liberal candidates going door to door to defend this platform, when their is so many trying to ban smoking. The counter argument makes Trudeau look insensitive with all the historical data that proves smoking causes lung cancer.
Observing drug trade in my neighbourhood, I concluded long time ago that everyone who wants to smoke weed, smokes it. Drug transactions and use occurring all over the place with silent approval of police. This is selective application of the law and it’s already occurring. Police only catches large packages in token raid for the sake of news releases and photo ops. This is a farce, travesty and you ‘conservatives’ earn no brownie points for perpetuating the farce.
Were walking around the neigbourhood along a new route with the kids and they did not recognize the area. I said – here, we are right by that house where the druggies live, but on the other side…
My son looked weird at me and said: dad, druggies live everywhere, this is not really a point of reference. And we all laughed because that is true.
Your WOD was lost before it started, just like Prohibition it only accomplished putting mafiozzi into position of power and enriching them. All prohibitions are lobbied for behind the scenes by mafia bosses. If you don’t understand that, you are still kittens.
Association does not mean causation. They are different terms. I am not going to get into the debate about what drugs are worse. My opinion is that people need to be informed about what they are signing up for, and to realize that the pro-legalization zombie crowd will not tolerate scientific research disputing their pathetic “it’s totally harmless” arguments.
Waste of time and money having it illegal. One of the few times ever agreed with Trudeau.
Determined kids will get their hands on any drug if they try hard enough. I do believe however if we treat pot the same as booze we can adult conversations about responsible use instead of just saying don’t do it. Most adults would happily buy weed legally from a retailer-this fact alone would devastate the illegal pot industry (who have no issues dealing to kids). People brew their own beer and wine at home, why shouldn’t they be able to grow a few plants? Many adults do so now because buying from criminals doesn’t appeal to them. Weed is easily grown in Canada whereas coke and heroin is imported. Legalization would enable cops to concentrate on truly harmful drugs.
Maybe Trudeau thinks the only way to become PM is for the electorate to be ‘stoned’; then they won’t notice they are being ‘ripped off’.
Or maybe he is saying the government is broke, and they need to rape the populace of funds so what a better way to raise taxes than legalize pot and get in on the billions of dollars in underground action.
But the drawback is that everyone will be too stoned to work and the economy bites a dirt sandwich.
Just think you can have “TRUE-DOPE-IA” where work is optional…and only the druggies needs are met; you know the “True North stoned and free”; err I mean taxed.
I agree with Kate’s rhetorical question, what could possibly go wrong with introducing psychoactive chemicals into your brain?
Cheers
Hans Rupprecht, Commander in Chief
1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North”
Yep. Where I was growing up a large number of young men were getting involved in growing pot for the Hells Angels. The amount of money they were making was extraordinary and these young men would have all the luxuries a 40 year old would have accumulated after years of work.
However the other problems of gang violence, money laundering etc. were issues, and some were hurt badly or even died.
All because it is a criminal activity.
Yeah I have problems with the government being involved, their rent seeking, corruption, creation of monopolies, bureaucracies etc. that have sprung up due to liquor is a lesson here too. As Washington State and Colorado are now finding out.
Be nice if we could just get back to the free market.
I am not part of the legalize everything crowd. But, if I am to be intellectually hones, I must say that the WSJ piece mentions something that gets my BS-detector going.
The bit where it says there is “up to a 200% increase” bothers me. Sounds big…but it is indeed probably nothing.
One lesson I will never forget from stats class is, when looking at epidemiological studies, the rule is “If it’s less than 300%, it should be looked at with suspicion. If it’s less than 200%, it should be ignored completely.”
Ignoring this rule and the use of stats (with big sounding numbers) to fool the general public is really annoying. The link between smoking and lung cancer was established by showing (over and over again) an increased risk of 1400% to 2000%. However, on the other hand, I think the strongest studies for second-hand smoke got no higher than 50%. But the public bought it.
This “up to 200%” business can be translated to, “almost something worth examining closer.”
“Most adults would happily buy weed legally from a retailer-this fact alone would devastate the illegal pot industry (who have no issues dealing to kids).”
How easy ‘facts’ get thrown around. Citation please for the 51%+ number and the allegation that unlike every other legal vice there won’t be an underground market.
Legalization or decriminalization is exactly what the drug dealers and organized crime are hoping for. They will ALWAYS be able to undercut the price and “quality” of the “legal” sources, collect all the taxes (and additional profit) themselves AND be able to operate in the open. Much bigger distribution systems and more pushers…..all operating in the open.
“Legalize pot, tax and regulate it instead.”
So instead of charging people for using/possessing illegal drug, we’re going to legalize it and create a new set of regulations and laws to charge people for using/possessing an untaxed/unregulated therefore “illegal” drug.
Does anyone see the problem here?
> Legalization or decriminalization is exactly what the drug dealers and organized crime are hoping for
You got it upside down.
Currently mafia maintains monopoly and spends a great deal of $$ on bribes to LE and pols.
If legalized, every farmer will be able to grow and farmers are educated in agriculture vs drugheads and crooks. Farmer’s bottom line would always be lower. And then industrial processing and logistic power of pharmacies would instantly push mafia out of business.
You are sounding like you never ran a business in your life whereas I own 3 companies in 3 different industries and export to USA and Europe since 1999.
As with several others, it pains me to admit I’m with the Shiny Pony on this one. Compared to the damage alcohol does, marijuana IS pretty much harmless. Add in the wasted tax dollars and encroachments on our freedoms entailed by The War On Drugs, and it’s ridiculous that the stuff wasn’t legalized ages ago.
You have it exactly backwards and history proves it. The Capone-style gangs focused on the alcohol trade dried up right after it ended.
Never said there wouldn’t be an underground market for weed. It will however be a helluva lot weaker after legalization compared to the fully functional and lucrative underground market that exists now. Don’t forget many illegal pot growers would sign up with legal businesses, denying supply to criminals.
Don’t smoke it myself, but know/have known people who do on occasion. Personally, I think that it’s completely dumb to criminalize consumption or possession of any plant/weed that’s consumed in unprocessed form, and almost as dumb to argue that that government should be dealing marijuana, or to think that it’s even possible for government to control/corner the market, for the purpose of taxation, of something you can “manufacture” by planting a seed in the ground.
Cocaine and heroin, which aren’t plants but rather heavily processed/refined concentrates of plants, are devastating, heavily addictive drugs that can kill you and ruin your life in short order. Along with crystal meth, which is a thoroughly grotesque substance, these sorts of drugs tend to destroy the lives of users, with the rest of us picking up the tab – not just in the medical sense, but in terms of muggings, petty thefts, etc. Marijuana is relatively harmless in comparison, by orders of magnitude. No one has ever died from a marijuana overdose, for one thing.
If you look down the street on Vancouver’s east side and witness the twitching human wreckage, you’re looking at the effects of alcohol, lysol, crack cocaine, heroin, meth, etc. etc., not marijuana. When people break into homes/cars on a daily basis, or prostitute themselves on the street to support their habit, it’s for these drugs, not marijuana.
One of my cousins was a cop (he’s now retired). He was extremely anti-marijuana when he started out his career, but he came to realize over time that whenever he was called to a violent domestic dispute, or a violent assault at a party, including knifings, etc., it was almost inevitably alcohol-related, and that people smoking marijuana (assuming they’re not drinking and/or taking other drugs at the same time) tend to be calm, cooperative, and kinda dumb when they’re high; when he was hired to police rock concerts he eventually learned to look for people who’d smuggled in liquor, and to ignore the people furtively smoking marijuana, who were more likely to sit still passively and stare at the stage and listen to the music than start a fight or cause disruption.
Is Justin Trudeau is a total himbo? Yep, but that’s a totally separate issue.
It appears Justin over heard someone say that he would have to be “stoned out of his mind” before he voted for Trudeau. Alrighty then. I was going to add something, like, really profound but I, like, forgot what it was.
Yeah well, somebody mentioned the “Hells Angels”…..
I trust their judgement….zero tolerance in their membership.
“don’t get high” is enforced….firmly.
That is mine as well. Experience made me zero tolerance.
If some-one comes around here and lights up a joint here…they have a choice of leaving with or without the aid of an open door….regardless of who they are or how long I have known them.
My friends respect that….those I have ostracized….are history IMHO.
But then despite having prescription pain management…I will tolerate a lotta pain first. It’s just the way I roll.
“But the drawback is that everyone will be too stoned to work” -do alcohol drinkers have a habit of showing up at work drunk? Obviously drinking and\or toking up daily will not make one productive. Is that a good reason to deny these substances from majority of adults who don’t have addictions. Remember anyone who has a few beers (thus feeling the effect of alcohol) could be considered a “druggie” no?
So what? You can still be self-righteous after legalization as well.
Personally, I never smoke pot. And legalizing it won’t me start.
You don’t think the Hells Angels get high??? Okay….I guess dealing drugs doesn’t count. You would kick a friend to the curb for smoking a joint??? You sound like a self-righteous delight to be around sasquatch. Christ.
Well, it’s sasquatch’s home, so it’s his choice. There are people don’t allow their house guests to smoke cigarettes or drink alcohol either.
I’ll redirect comments to Trudeau’s assertion that it would keep drugs out of the hands of kids.
How exactly, does that work, when it’s legal to grow it in any garden? Why would you go to a government store when all you need is a grow light.
And exactly where would users smoke legally? Certainly not in public places where smoke is prohibited. That leaves the home. Where children are.
How ironic.
And if it’s going to be a controlled substance, what changes? The drug war remains the drug war, with police enforcement going after “unlicensed” producers instead. Who’s going to grow it and under what multi-million dollar bureaucracy? A Canadian Marijuana Board?
Except that under the pot as legal model, the market will explode, as the forces currently suppressing casual use will be gone.
…people smoking marijuana (assuming they’re not drinking and/or taking other drugs at the same time) tend to be calm, cooperative, and kinda dumb when they’re high…
That’s what we need, more dumb people…
It is interesting how strident the pro-drug people get about any threat to their favorite way to escape reality. It’s almost as if it’s an addiction. 🙂
Le Dain.
“Medical research shows a clear link between marijuana use and mental illness.”
Oh sure, I saw “Reefer Madness” when I was a kid and who could argue with the “experts” and all the government endorsed studies even back then ? Medical research has also shown that coffee, eggs, butter, pop,junk food,red meat,alcohol and on and on will kill you long before your time. No smoker lives past 40 dontyaknow. At least judging by the scare pictures on the package. I look forward to legalized pot just to see what the new warning pictures look like. I can see it now…..babies unattended while the parent is flaked out on the couch surrounded by empty munchie bags. There is simply nothing more entertaining than pissing contests between government and the people. Bring it on.
“Medical research shows a clear link between marijuana use and mental illness.”
Obviously deliberately escaping reality is a mental illness. Leftists prove it all the time. As Trudeau is proving with his nutty proposals.
Jesse Ventura sums it up nicely: “Making something illegal doesn’t mean it goes away, it just means criminals are going to run it”. It doesn’t matter what your opinion of pot and it’s users is-it’s in high demand and someone is going to serve the market. Surely legalizing a drug that doesn’t destroy lives through crippling addiction (sorry pot haters it’s true) is something worth looking at. The alternative is that a large chunk of the Canadian population will continue their lives as criminals. I wonder how many here would be singing the same tune if we were talking about booze, which has ruined far more lives than pot ever has.
Read the comments to the linked ‘story’. The article is a joke. Correlation =/= causation. There is no reason to believe that casual MJ use leads to or increases the danger of schizophrenia and even if it did that wouldn’t justify banning. I know you want MJ to lead to reefer madness more than anything but it just isn’t so.
This is well timed on Trudeau’s part. Harper, being his usual idiot self, has taken the perfect position for Trudeau to paint him as the reactionary know-nothing crank he is.
Along the continuum of risky behavior, smoking Pot is likely much less than skydiving or mountain climbing and closer to drinking and smoking. The question is, do we want the state to continue infantalizing the citizenry (with extreme prejudice) by attempting (in futility) to “eliminate” selective risks or any risks or do we want a society where adults take responsibility for their own actions? The Spawn of Satan is selectively pimping the mindless for greater share of the leftist vote and is most assuredly on the wrong side of the underlying question.
This debate brings to mind Bruce Yandle’s essay: “Baptists and Bootleggers”
As things stand both sides win – Dealers because they have little competition and bureaucrats fighting an un winnable war for personal gain. Not to mention the banksters who launder the ill-gotten gains.
Shiny Pony’s argument has no merit, as moral arguments have no business in the political arena.
A typically progressive approach designed to deride family and community values in favour of central planning.
That said Libertarians would argue that responsible soft drug use is a victimless crime – i.e, non-aggresive behaviour.
@ bryceman…
Statistics have always been used to push agendas, I as well, find it disturbing if not evil.
At the link it’s mentioned that 80% of smokers never develop lung cancer, how can this be true if the risk is between 1400% and 2000% or have the numbers been manipulated?
IMHO, whether you’re going to get cancer(any form) or not, is determined more by your genetic make-up rather than if you smoke or have been exposed to second hand smoke.
How else to explain the many children who have cancer while never being exposed in any way or that lung cancer is the number one cancer of people who have never smoked?
One overlooked/deliberately ignored(?) possibility is the benzene we all breath every time we fill our gas tank.
@ EBD…
Three park benches, the first has two crackheads, the second has two alcoholics and the third has two potheads.
All run out of their preferred vice.
The crackheads will rob and/or kill their mother for their next fix..
The alcoholics will get into a fight while seeking more of their swill..
While the potheads will wander off to a friends for more and order a pizza.
The writing on the wall is there for anyone who cares to read it.
This debate brings to mind Bruce Yandle’s essay: “Baptists and Bootleggers”
As things stand both sides win – Dealers because they have little competition and bureaucrats fighting an un winnable war for personal gain. Not to mention the banksters who launder the ill-gotten gains.
Shiny Pony’s argument has no merit, as moral arguments have no business in the political arena.
A typically progressive approach designed to deride family and community values in favour of central planning.
That said Libertarians would argue that responsible soft drug use is a victimless crime – i.e, non-aggresive behaviour.
The “war” on marijuana has been a disaster, which has resulted in large-scale criminalisation of otherwise innocuous people. Their loss of respect for the law has facilitated the introduction of truly dangerous drugs. I have watched this from the beginning; it was patently nonsense from the first. Several states in the US have been sensible and have refused to prosecute possession.
So far as I can determine nearly everyone under the age of 50 uses marijuana occasionally or regularly (yes, Ms. McMillan, even among your family and acquaintances). The role of the police in this
is to maintain prices and hence availability.
And of course some police officers do use the stuff themselves. One story about that – a few years ago a friend of a friend was picked up at a folk festival for possession – he had 29 gm of marijuana, which might have been a big problem for him – 28 gm or more is considered possession for the purposes of trafficking, a much more serious offence than simple possession. Things looked bleak, but he was in the event charged with possession of 1 gm. He was really annoyed, as the police had made off with 28 gm, but there was absolutely nothing he could say, unless he wanted to spend several years in prison.
Regulate drugs? What you have here are men who refuse to regulate themselves by learning God’s law and keeping it. By the time they’re quite finished addling their brains with drugs, they’re beyond regulating themselves in any case.
Like I said not long ago, the only nation that ever came close to solving its drug problem was Red China. Mao’s solution could not have been simpler—haul the druggies off to re-education camps and put down the dealers. And it worked.
Trust me, you’ll make a lot more money hauling the pot-head disgrace of many a Canadian family for some tough love and tough mining work well away from civilization than taxing the pot-head’s habit (the funds begged, borrowed or stolen from sober people in any case, because the pot-head has better things to do than work if he has any choice). Rest assured many families will be glad of the opportunity to hand over their useless pot-head son and never have to spare him a second thought again, except when thanking the Queen for their national dividend cheque and being able to warn Uncle Cosmo’s nephews and nieces never to make the mistake he made, because if they do they’ll be next in line. If a credible threat of ending their days in a blackfly-infested prison camp with Uncle Cosmo won’t scare children straight, I don’t know what will.
It is a liberal conceit that men are fixable and perfectible, and do more damage than they fix trying to help people who, 999 times out of a thousand (at least) are not worth trying to help. Once it is accepted that man is utterly depraved and his sinful nature irreparable except by divine grace, everything that is wrong with the world is explained, and one becomes much more realistic about how to deal with it.
Oh, and by the way—someone should inform the Get that drug addicts rarely have the presence of mind to make it to the polls, and have no business in a polling booth in the first place.
As someone else alluded to here earlier, if smoking tobacco is so bad for you and causes cancer, etc., what about smoking weed on a regular basis? Can’t be good for your lungs either. What does Health Canada have to say about this? Are there going to be packs of marijuana cigarettes you can buy having warning labels with pics of black lungs and cancerous mouths on them too?
I can’t help but think about the new bureaucracies that will be necessary to regulate this. Government will get even bigger.