tell the gov what you want for legal MJ

kDude

Well-Known Member
The Government of Canada has made a commitment to legalize, strictly regulate and restrict access to marijuana. To do this, a task force has been created to advise on the design of a new system. The Task Force is seeking the views of Canadians on issues that are key to the design of a new system. They will then provide the federal government with a final report.

http://healthycanadians.gc.ca/health-system-systeme-sante/consultations/legalization-marijuana-legalisation/index-eng.php
http://surveys-sondages.hc-sc.gc.ca/s/Marijuana_Section2/?l=en

hate the wording 'strictly regulate'. but minus well fill out their survery and tell them what we envision for legal MJ
 

jafro daweedhound

Well-Known Member
The Government of Canada has made a commitment to legalize, strictly regulate and restrict access to marijuana. To do this, a task force has been created to advise on the design of a new system. The Task Force is seeking the views of Canadians on issues that are key to the design of a new system. They will then provide the federal government with a final report.

http://healthycanadians.gc.ca/health-system-systeme-sante/consultations/legalization-marijuana-legalisation/index-eng.php
http://surveys-sondages.hc-sc.gc.ca/s/Marijuana_Section2/?l=en

hate the wording 'strictly regulate'. but minus well fill out their survery and tell them what we envision for legal MJ
They know what they want - it is not what we want. Give them all the feed back - it is like pissing in the ocean to see if you can get the water level to rise.
Did you watch bills body language in this big announcement ? fidgeting around, kept taking a drink of water 20 times I bet, question on home growing came up and he looked like he had to pee real bad. Plus his words. = one lying bastard. He is hiding the truth from the audience.
Hate "strictly regulate" wait until the new law (s) are in place...
 

The Hippy

Well-Known Member
So they just go from shit laws to shittier laws...although laws that they envision filling the bank accounts.
Guess The Old Hippy was right. Boycott and show them who's who here. Or be a fuckin goof.
It's always about the money and control..same assholes...new stink ( Actually same old stink really )
 

GroErr

Well-Known Member
F***king useless trying to tell them anything in that survey when it's clear they have a pre-conceived agenda already written up. I went through it cringing at the background/comments, including some of the bull-shit that Phelan dismissed about mouldy home grows and the like. They are building what they want, the surveys and "input" are all just show. The program(s) will be a f***ing joke. The section on medical looks like it was written by the CONs. I'm predicting that medical grows, if allowed, will be so restrictive most wouldn't bother. Fuck them all, staying under the radar and certainly won't be registering in any program with these idiots at the helm. An oh yeah ** BOYCOTT LP'S ** lol
 

Brewery

Well-Known Member
I'm drafting my responses to the survey - while I'm 100% onboard with the fuck off sentiment I don't see it being useful in the least.

If you are going to waste time responding to the survey you might as well respond with something of substance - at least that's what I'm going to do.

Edit: anyone else get enraged when the document called the mmpr a"free market"?
 

VIANARCHRIS

Well-Known Member
My letter to everyone at that table this morning...

I listened to the announcement of the task force on marijuana this morning, and I was left disappointed and a little confused. While your government campaigned on a promise of legalization with the aim of protecting children and removing organized crime, everything being said points to exactly the opposite outcome. One hundred years of prohibition certainly hasn't had that affect and limiting production to a very small, exclusive, government selected group is going to insure the black market continues to thrive.

The ministers and others at the announcement were very evasive on the question of allowing personal grows, even for medical users. If the plan is to limit growing to licensed producers for the recreational market, I would suggest your government save face by abandoning legalization now. Every argument the government brought to ban medical grows was overruled by the judge. The courts have said there is no inherent risk to growing cannabis. Refusing to allow for personal gardens in a system that has been promised to be a 'model for the world', while other jurisdictions are enjoying much success with a less restrictive system, will guarantee failure. Not a good look when you have invited the world to watch. You will also have to justify why cannabis cannot be produced by responsible adults while allowing home alcohol and tobacco production. Cannabis is inherently safer than either of those substances so trying to convince the public that they aren't capable of safe production and use isn't going to work.

What I saw on that list of task force members were a whole lot of politicians, doctors and police. I don't believe any of them have ever tried cannabis. How can a group meet to decide on something they have absolutely no personal knowledge of? I believe it was the justice minister who commented on bringing in 'stakeholders' as part of the consultations, yet there were no names I recognized from the cannabis community. At what point do you consider consumers, patients and taxpayers to be stakeholders? ( Hint: We voted you into your job...)

The rumours have been swirling for months about the possibility of backroom deals with the licensed producers and the Liberal government. We are aware there are a number of politicians, party members, associates and supporters with deep pockets invested heavily in the LP market and the optics of making them the sole providers is very bad. I tried to dispel those accusations as paranoia, now I'm not too sure. I guarantee there will be a magnifying glass on the connections to expose any corruption.

I hope you will take direction from all Canadians by inviting, listening to and acting on their directions. The task force in it's current form will have zero credibility without input from the true stakeholders.

Your first chance to get it right and tell us your intent, is August 24th when you answer the Allard ruling. Justice Phelan was very clear when he said our gardens posed no risk. Patients and our legal council are very clear they expect it to mean we can grow. Anything less will be immediately challenged in court. It will be extremely hard to implement a recreational cannabis system Canadians can accept if the Liberals are seen to be continuing the Harper government policy of attacking patients.

There were four supposed areas of concern that resulted in the decision to ban medical grows in favour of the mmpr. Fire, mould, home invasion and diversion and all were ruled to be unfounded, so unless there is something new, I can see no valid justification to limit my freedoms. The only possible reason would be to boost the profitability of licensed producers and their investors at the expense of the sick.

A failure respect the hard won rights of cannabis patients on August 24 will signal to all Canadians and the world that Justin Trudeau's 'Sunny Ways' have been replaced with the seedy darkness of the Harper-era.
 

OGEvilgenius

Well-Known Member
I'm drafting my responses to the survey - while I'm 100% onboard with the fuck off sentiment I don't see it being useful in the least.

If you are going to waste time responding to the survey you might as well respond with something of substance - at least that's what I'm going to do.

Edit: anyone else get enraged when the document called the mmpr a"free market"?
Oh, I specifically let them know I'm not for fascist policy they propose too. Also let them know that there would be no limits on plant growth in a free country. Then I told them to fuck off.
 

OGEvilgenius

Well-Known Member
My letter to everyone at that table this morning...

I listened to the announcement of the task force on marijuana this morning, and I was left disappointed and a little confused. While your government campaigned on a promise of legalization with the aim of protecting children and removing organized crime, everything being said points to exactly the opposite outcome. One hundred years of prohibition certainly hasn't had that affect and limiting production to a very small, exclusive, government selected group is going to insure the black market continues to thrive.

The ministers and others at the announcement were very evasive on the question of allowing personal grows, even for medical users. If the plan is to limit growing to licensed producers for the recreational market, I would suggest your government save face by abandoning legalization now. Every argument the government brought to ban medical grows was overruled by the judge. The courts have said there is no inherent risk to growing cannabis. Refusing to allow for personal gardens in a system that has been promised to be a 'model for the world', while other jurisdictions are enjoying much success with a less restrictive system, will guarantee failure. Not a good look when you have invited the world to watch. You will also have to justify why cannabis cannot be produced by responsible adults while allowing home alcohol and tobacco production. Cannabis is inherently safer than either of those substances so trying to convince the public that they aren't capable of safe production and use isn't going to work.

What I saw on that list of task force members were a whole lot of politicians, doctors and police. I don't believe any of them have ever tried cannabis. How can a group meet to decide on something they have absolutely no personal knowledge of? I believe it was the justice minister who commented on bringing in 'stakeholders' as part of the consultations, yet there were no names I recognized from the cannabis community. At what point do you consider consumers, patients and taxpayers to be stakeholders? ( Hint: We voted you into your job...)

The rumours have been swirling for months about the possibility of backroom deals with the licensed producers and the Liberal government. We are aware there are a number of politicians, party members, associates and supporters with deep pockets invested heavily in the LP market and the optics of making them the sole providers is very bad. I tried to dispel those accusations as paranoia, now I'm not too sure. I guarantee there will be a magnifying glass on the connections to expose any corruption.

I hope you will take direction from all Canadians by inviting, listening to and acting on their directions. The task force in it's current form will have zero credibility without input from the true stakeholders.

Your first chance to get it right and tell us your intent, is August 24th when you answer the Allard ruling. Justice Phelan was very clear when he said our gardens posed no risk. Patients and our legal council are very clear they expect it to mean we can grow. Anything less will be immediately challenged in court. It will be extremely hard to implement a recreational cannabis system Canadians can accept if the Liberals are seen to be continuing the Harper government policy of attacking patients.

There were four supposed areas of concern that resulted in the decision to ban medical grows in favour of the mmpr. Fire, mould, home invasion and diversion and all were ruled to be unfounded, so unless there is something new, I can see no valid justification to limit my freedoms. The only possible reason would be to boost the profitability of licensed producers and their investors at the expense of the sick.

A failure respect the hard won rights of cannabis patients on August 24 will signal to all Canadians and the world that Justin Trudeau's 'Sunny Ways' have been replaced with the seedy darkness of the Harper-era.
Well written. I'm way past being patient myself. These fuckers know what they're doing. They are not stupid.
 

VIANARCHRIS

Well-Known Member
Well written. I'm way past being patient myself. These fuckers know what they're doing. They are not stupid.
We're not stupid either...if they think cannabis users will just accept having freedoms unjustifiably restricted they clearly haven't been paying attention. We want to make it very clear to them that if they get this wrong they lose the confidence of the people and the moral authority to govern. It will dog them for the rest of their one term governance....I'll see to it personally as much as possible. I may have voted for them, but once they fuck me over...
 

jafro daweedhound

Well-Known Member
My letter to everyone at that table this morning...

I listened to the announcement of the task force on marijuana this morning, and I was left disappointed and a little confused. While your government campaigned on a promise of legalization with the aim of protecting children and removing organized crime, everything being said points to exactly the opposite outcome. One hundred years of prohibition certainly hasn't had that affect and limiting production to a very small, exclusive, government selected group is going to insure the black market continues to thrive.

The ministers and others at the announcement were very evasive on the question of allowing personal grows, even for medical users. If the plan is to limit growing to licensed producers for the recreational market, I would suggest your government save face by abandoning legalization now. Every argument the government brought to ban medical grows was overruled by the judge. The courts have said there is no inherent risk to growing cannabis. Refusing to allow for personal gardens in a system that has been promised to be a 'model for the world', while other jurisdictions are enjoying much success with a less restrictive system, will guarantee failure. Not a good look when you have invited the world to watch. You will also have to justify why cannabis cannot be produced by responsible adults while allowing home alcohol and tobacco production. Cannabis is inherently safer than either of those substances so trying to convince the public that they aren't capable of safe production and use isn't going to work.

What I saw on that list of task force members were a whole lot of politicians, doctors and police. I don't believe any of them have ever tried cannabis. How can a group meet to decide on something they have absolutely no personal knowledge of? I believe it was the justice minister who commented on bringing in 'stakeholders' as part of the consultations, yet there were no names I recognized from the cannabis community. At what point do you consider consumers, patients and taxpayers to be stakeholders? ( Hint: We voted you into your job...)

The rumours have been swirling for months about the possibility of backroom deals with the licensed producers and the Liberal government. We are aware there are a number of politicians, party members, associates and supporters with deep pockets invested heavily in the LP market and the optics of making them the sole providers is very bad. I tried to dispel those accusations as paranoia, now I'm not too sure. I guarantee there will be a magnifying glass on the connections to expose any corruption.

I hope you will take direction from all Canadians by inviting, listening to and acting on their directions. The task force in it's current form will have zero credibility without input from the true stakeholders.

Your first chance to get it right and tell us your intent, is August 24th when you answer the Allard ruling. Justice Phelan was very clear when he said our gardens posed no risk. Patients and our legal council are very clear they expect it to mean we can grow. Anything less will be immediately challenged in court. It will be extremely hard to implement a recreational cannabis system Canadians can accept if the Liberals are seen to be continuing the Harper government policy of attacking patients.

There were four supposed areas of concern that resulted in the decision to ban medical grows in favour of the mmpr. Fire, mould, home invasion and diversion and all were ruled to be unfounded, so unless there is something new, I can see no valid justification to limit my freedoms. The only possible reason would be to boost the profitability of licensed producers and their investors at the expense of the sick.

A failure respect the hard won rights of cannabis patients on August 24 will signal to all Canadians and the world that Justin Trudeau's 'Sunny Ways' have been replaced with the seedy darkness of the Harper-era.
We had hope in the beginning - but sadly one by one people have come to see what is going on.
Years ago I worked with a federal party and my job was to fuck with people. I do it very well too. Breaking up meetings, hi-jacking news events, putting out propaganda to discredit people. I know what the liberals are doing - I used to do the same shit. I sat on this unnamed parties board of directors they liked my chaos so much. One day I got a conscience and got out much to the dismay of those who I worked with. This type of bait and switch - run on weasel words is not new, it is tired , but still works (often).
As soon as Canada wake up to the warning signs things will be able to hopefully change.....


I am 99% sure we will not get home production for medical and about 10000% sure rec is out too.

PHELAN J. (said)

I. Introduction

[1] This is a Charter challenge to the current medical marihuana regime under the

Marihuana for Medical Purposes Regulations, SOR/2013-119 [MMPR] brought by four

individuals. It is important to bear in mind what this litigation is about, and equally, what it is not about.

Later Phelan goes on to say:

[14] To the extent that affordability was advanced as a ground of s 7 violation, it has not been made out. More importantly, it is not necessary to make such a finding. Affordability can be a barrier to access, particularly where it is a choice made to expend funds on medical treatment to the detriment of other basic needs. However, this case does not turn on a right to “cheap drugs”, nor a right “to grow one’s own”, nor do the Plaintiffs seek to establish such a positive right from government.

[36] The Court’s role is only to determine if the policy or regulations comply with the Charter, not if their development was adequate. Even a bad policy may be Charter compliant. The Supreme Court of Canada in Canada (Attorney General) v PHS Community Services Society, 2011 SCC 44 at para 105, [2011] 3 SCR 134 [PHS], stated the following on the role of the court:

It is for the relevant governments, not the Court, to make criminal and health policy. However, when a policy is translated into law or state action, those laws and actions are subject to scrutiny under the Charter: Chaoulli, at para. 89, per Deschamps J., at para. 107, per McLachlin C.J. and Major J., and at para. 183, per Binnie and LeBel JJ.; Rodriguez, at pp. 589-90, per Sopinka J. The issue before the Court at this point is not whether harm reduction or abstinence-based programmes are the best approach to resolving illegal drug use. It is simply whether Canada has limited the rights of the claimants in a manner that does not comply with the Charter.
 

Gquebed

Well-Known Member
I'm drafting my responses to the survey - while I'm 100% onboard with the fuck off sentiment I don't see it being useful in the least.

If you are going to waste time responding to the survey you might as well respond with something of substance - at least that's what I'm going to do.

Edit: anyone else get enraged when the document called the mmpr a"free market"?
I agree.

Responding in a non-constructive, resentful manner just validates their preconceived ideas that all pot smokers are juvenile morons not worth listening too.

The opportunity to be heard is being given. So take advantage of it, even if it is not a legit offer. Because at the end of the day, if they don't listen and respond to what the people want it'll be obvious and a useful argument down the road.

Give respect to get respect. That is how it works. There is no other way.
 

OGEvilgenius

Well-Known Member
I agree.

Responding in a non-constructive, resentful manner just validates their preconceived ideas that all pot smokers are juvenile morons not worth listening too.

The opportunity to be heard is being given. So take advantage of it, even if it is not a legit offer. Because at the end of the day, if they don't listen and respond to what the people want it'll be obvious and a useful argument down the road.

Give respect to get respect. That is how it works. There is no other way.
You can be as constructive as you want, it won't change anything. I made my points. People who run governments only care about themselves. At this point it's obvious there is no recourse for anyone.
 

GrowRock

Well-Known Member
My letter to the task force

To whom it may concern

I am writing to you as a medical cannabis user and law abiding Canadian citizen with a young family and clean driving/criminal record. I would like to first congratulate the liberal government for taking the steps towards legalization.

With this step towards legalization we must use rational, accurate information that is transparent and accessible to all Canadians. I was wondering about this line (legalize and strictly regulate cannabis). If Canada is to be a trailblazer in legal cannabis sales, distribution etc. We must not strictly regulate to stop the black market. Instead we need to flood the market with cannabis products. Thus causing the black market to no longer see cannabis as a financially viable racket. The reffermaddness protect the children propaganda needs to stop. With the access to information we have at our finger tips known as the Internet.

Especially when it comes down to protecting the developing brain from cannabis. This idea that cannabis is a detrimental threat to the developing brain is at best propaganda. If not then please point me in the direction of all the Canadians that have had there developing brains adversely effected by cannabis use? Of course Canada should be littered with people with developmental issues. According to our own government studies stating that young Canadians have some of the highest use of cannabis in the world. So again I ask were are all the medical records of developmental issues as evidence?

If the Canadian government is wanting to protect our children. The best thing to do is be honest and provide factual based evidence. To single cannabis out as something detrimental to our youth is somewhat confusing. As cannabis had not one linkable death. Meanwhile as a concerned parent we should really be looking at the epidemic of prescription drug abuse among our youth? Or the fact that energy drinks can be bought at any gas station in Canada without proof of age. These energy drinks have been actually linked to deaths of young Canadians and yet our government goes after the lesser of the evils cannabis. A little confusing from a parents perspective! If the actual goal of the government is to protect our children then please immediately stop the sale of energy drinks to our youth.


Cannabis and driving. If a person can not pass a road side sobriety test they are IMPAIRED. To think that the Canadian government is going to try any kind of cannabis breathalyzer is laughable and discriminative to say the least. Being a law abiding Canadian citizen with an illness that cannabis helps. I feel very insulted as a medical patient. To think that if our government actually goes ahead with a nanogram breathalyzer. It will have major adverse affects on 10s of thousands of medical cannabis patients. Thus causing law abiding Canadian citizens already struggling with illness to turn into criminals for driving with medical cannabis in our systems in any quantity is discrimination.

Production and distribution of medical and recreational cannabis should not be limited to only select few of legal producers or government sanctioned outlets. Thus causing a monopoly system that only allows the top 5% of the population a chance for the golden ticket! Exactly why the current MMPR legal producer system was rejected first by the patients then by the courts as unconstitutional (via the Allard case)

I was also wondering if the task force had a chance to review the Allard case. Lots of adverse points of home grows that the task force brought up were actually proven to be false in the Allard case.

Examples of propaganda:

That medical home grows were diverting to organized crime. Absolutely no evidence proven in the Allard case.

Risk of fire and mould also proven to be null and void points. Many Canadians grow plants indoors tomatoes etc with out any mould or fire issues. Home grows are no more dangerous then a kitchen is in a home. So with the same reasoning for banning home grows we should also ban kitchen due to risk of fire and mould also proven in the Allard case.

If we are to have a legal cannabis system that works for all Canadians. Our government must treat the general population of Canadian adults with respect and the freedom to choose to grow your own cannabis or purchase it from a store front. From corporate cannabis to mom and pop producers if the legal frame work does not allow room for everyone. It will surely fail before it starts.

Thanks for the opportunity to share my views.
 
Top