The PokéCommunity Forums

The PokéCommunity Forums (https://www.pokecommunity.com/index.php)
-   Deep Discussion (https://www.pokecommunity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=39)
-   -   Canadian government to announce marijuana legalization by July 1st, 2018 (https://www.pokecommunity.com/showthread.php?t=390614)

Alex March 27th, 2017 2:26 PM

Canadian government to announce marijuana legalization by July 1st, 2018
 
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/liberal-legal-marijuana-pot-1.4041902

The liberal government will put forth legislation that legalizes the sale and possession of marijuana in the week of April 10th, 2017. The provinces will then have until July 1st, 2018 to plan their rules & infrastructure for the public sale of the plant. The federal government will restrict sale to anyone below the age of 18, although the provinces will be free to overrule that age as long as it is higher. The drinking age in most provinces in Canada is 19 or older, but in Quebec it is 18 or older.

I think this is a great progressive step forward. Thoughts?

5qwerty March 27th, 2017 4:46 PM

Does this make weed more accessible or less accessible to children?

Also, despite me mentioning the word "dank" super often, I don't really like the smell and can't really see any benefits for me personally.

Palamon March 27th, 2017 4:55 PM

Well, in my opinion, this is progressive. Marijuana is less dangerous than drinking to start with. That's all I'm going to say.

Alex March 27th, 2017 5:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 5qwerty (Post 9603148)
Does this make weed more accessible or less accessible to children?

I'd say with legalization and regulation, in theory, it should be a lot harder for children, or anyone under the age of 18, to get ahold of weed. In theory, the black market is willing to sell to anyone, just to make a buck, and perhaps profit on impressionable young people.

Anecdotally, I can say it was a lot easier for a 16 year-old me to score a bag of weed compared to a mickey of vodka.

SirBoglor March 27th, 2017 10:07 PM

I find it interesting to see how this will affect possible legalization here in the states. This is a very progressive step forward, and perhaps other places will follow Canada's footsteps in the future.

Lipstick Vogue March 28th, 2017 5:00 AM

The fact that weed is illegal in a majority of countries around the world despite the fact that it cures cancer is an atrocity.

Esper March 28th, 2017 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 5qwerty (Post 9603148)
Does this make weed more accessible or less accessible to children?

Won't some 18 year olds still be in high school? If they can legally buy marijuana then it'll be pretty easy for them to sell or share it with other high school students who aren't yet 18. I imagine it'll make it more accessible for children.

gimmepie March 28th, 2017 7:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lipstick Vogue (Post 9603636)
The fact that weed is illegal in a majority of countries around the world despite the fact that it cures cancer is an atrocity.

Nothing cures cancer.
Let's not bring fallacies into this.

Somewhere_ March 28th, 2017 7:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lipstick Vogue (Post 9603636)
The fact that weed is illegal in a majority of countries around the world despite the fact that it cures cancer is an atrocity.

It is undeniable that hemp has great potential in a variety of products and could even make them more cost effective and that marijuana also has medical potential, but I think thats a bit of an exaggeration.

Regardless, I am happy Canada has passed this legislation. It might be a nice test for the US. Hopefully it works out!

Alex March 28th, 2017 8:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Esper (Post 9603923)
Won't some 18 year olds still be in high school? If they can legally buy marijuana then it'll be pretty easy for them to sell or share it with other high school students who aren't yet 18. I imagine it'll make it more accessible for children.

I thought most people are finished high school at 17, but it's true that a lot go back for a victory lap, as its known. Perhaps that's a big reason why most provinces bump up the legal drinking age to 19. I think the number of 19 year olds still in high school is pretty low, but that's just what I assume.

The flip side is, with how unregulated the market is ATM, any kid with the right amount of money can buy it if he finds a dealer. And they're not hard to find. Ask around to a few people who you think are into the drug and you'll always find someone who's selling it. It was much easier in my high school years to get a bag of weed by the end of the day than alcohol.

Kanzler March 28th, 2017 8:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gimmepie (Post 9604213)
Nothing cures cancer.
Let's not bring fallacies into this.

Amen to that. Some cancers can be cured, but it depends on the cancer. There's definitely potential for its use as treatment - not necessarily cure, though. Haven't really looked into it, but I'd keep my eyes open for their potential use as treatment for neurological disorders as well, since cannabinoids affect neurotransmitter release. However, the most likely long-term outcome is that pharmaceutical research will tweak effective cannabinoids into something better - more targeted, more efficacious, less side effects, etc. It won't be so much that "weed cures cancer" as much as the active chemicals will be precursors for drugs that work better. We'll see.

Nihilego March 28th, 2017 10:23 PM

Genuine question: why?

People say this is "progressive" and everything but all I see is legalisation of an intoxicating substance which, outside of medical uses (for which I agree, it should be legal where other drugs are less effective), has no purpose other than for self-indulgence. I realise, before anyone says this, that alcohol is worse - but that's not an argument; just because one thing is bad doesn't make something else which is less bad good.

Anyone who's even talked to me knows that I'm a loooooooong way off saying "ew alcohol and drugs are bad" (most of my friends irl are like "wtf you love drugs" when they hear this stance, haha) but legalising the latter just doesn't seem to have benefits to me.

And ftr, seconding the above: weed does not cure cancer.

Ivysaur March 28th, 2017 11:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nihilego (Post 9604402)
Genuine question: why?

People say this is "progressive" and everything but all I see is legalisation of an intoxicating substance which, outside of medical uses (for which I agree, it should be legal where other drugs are less effective), has no purpose other than for self-indulgence. I realise, before anyone says this, that alcohol is worse - but that's not an argument; just because one thing is bad doesn't make something else which is less bad good.

Anyone who's even talked to me knows that I'm a loooooooong way off saying "ew alcohol and drugs are bad" (most of my friends irl are like "wtf you love drugs" when they hear this stance, haha) but legalising the latter just doesn't seem to have benefits to me.

And ftr, seconding the above: weed does not cure cancer.

If drugs are going to exist, they are better off being regulated and controlled by the Government. The alternative is having massive drug mafias, as the US found out when it banned alcohol. Legalize it and you can control its production, price and sales. Ban it, and you will have to devote trillions to law enforcement, put millions of people in jail and probably see smaller and weaker states/countries get overrun by mafias.

gimmepie March 29th, 2017 12:29 AM

Not to mention legalising weed and attaching a tax to it like alcohol and tobacco could be an excellent source of revenue for the government which can then be used to improve on government programs.

Sothis March 29th, 2017 12:47 AM

Doesn't legalizing it reduce crime anyway?

Alex March 29th, 2017 8:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nihilego (Post 9604402)
Genuine question: why?

People say this is "progressive" and everything but all I see is legalisation of an intoxicating substance which, outside of medical uses (for which I agree, it should be legal where other drugs are less effective), has no purpose other than for self-indulgence. I realise, before anyone says this, that alcohol is worse - but that's not an argument; just because one thing is bad doesn't make something else which is less bad good.

Anyone who's even talked to me knows that I'm a loooooooong way off saying "ew alcohol and drugs are bad" (most of my friends irl are like "wtf you love drugs" when they hear this stance, haha) but legalising the latter just doesn't seem to have benefits to me.

And ftr, seconding the above: weed does not cure cancer.

You ought to broaden your perspective on the impacts legalization can have. If executed properly, it should take the power away from the black markets and funnel money to the government, which we then hope will be invested in the country's well-being (whether or not it will be is an entirely different topic). The goal is to impose an age limit on the substance, compete with the black market and eventually eliminate them by selling better product, more conveniently, that must adhere to health standards. This should, in theory, make the substance a lot less accessible to anyone underage. At the moment, dealers will sell to anyone who's got the cash. That won't be a concern after the government regulates and sells the substance.

Somewhere_ March 29th, 2017 7:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hanzo (Post 9604443)
Doesn't legalizing it reduce crime anyway?

Legalization should undermine drug cartels and drive them out of business with higher quality and lower prices. With less drug cartels and gangs selling drugs, there should also be less crime. Legalization should reduce crime rates.

Lipstick Vogue March 30th, 2017 6:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gimmepie (Post 9604213)
Nothing cures cancer.
Let's not bring fallacies into this.

Weed does. Medical companies and governments are in it for profit though so they don't want the definitive cure out there.

gimmepie March 30th, 2017 7:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lipstick Vogue (Post 9605392)
Weed does. Medical companies and governments are in it for profit though so they don't want the definitive cure out there.

This is just straight up not true. Weed can certainly aid in the treatment of cancer because it not only relieves stress but also pain and nausea, but it doesn't cure it at all.

Nothing cures cancer. Cancer is a collection of literally thousands of conditions caused by mutating cells. Scientists in the field these days tend to be pretty certain that a blanket cure for all cancer isn't even possible, even if for some forms there is at least a possibility.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/can-we-truly-cure-cancer/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/03/15/lets-stop-trying-to-cure-cancer-says-cancer-professor/
http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/cancers-in-general/cancer-questions/can-cancer-be-cured

Just a few examples. I don't know where you're getting this conspiracy theory but it's just plain wrong - not to mention disproved by the continued trend of governments legalising marijuana.

Lipstick Vogue March 30th, 2017 8:03 AM

You just watch the cancer rates drop in Canada over the next decade.

gimmepie March 30th, 2017 9:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lipstick Vogue (Post 9605437)
You just watch the cancer rates drop in Canada over the next decade.

I'm eagerly awaiting with baited breath.

Somewhere_ March 30th, 2017 1:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lipstick Vogue (Post 9605392)
Weed does. Medical companies and governments are in it for profit though so they don't want the definitive cure out there.

No. Medical companies have competition- the ones that make the cure the first make the most money. Governments have a compelling state interest to ensure their citizenry is healthy.

Kanzler March 30th, 2017 3:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lipstick Vogue (Post 9605392)
Weed does. Medical companies and governments are in it for profit though so they don't want the definitive cure out there.

I don't know if you're trolling or not.

From what evidence is this coming from and what qualifications do you have that allow you to interpret the evidence with such certainty?

Lipstick Vogue March 30th, 2017 6:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadSheep (Post 9605714)
No. Medical companies have competition- the ones that make the cure the first make the most money. Governments have a compelling state interest to ensure their citizenry is healthy.


What world are you living in? If governments really cared about our well being we'd be living in a world where a majority of our energy was green.

Medical companies wouldn't make a dime if it got out that weed does more than anything they could come out with.

Somewhere_ March 30th, 2017 6:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lipstick Vogue (Post 9605805)
What world are you living in? If governments really cared about our well being we'd be living in a world where a majority of our energy was green.

I dont think you understand how democracies work. Elected politicians must balance representing their voters, lobbyists, and their own personal ideals. Its pretty hard to pass green energy legislation in the US considering there is not enough voter support, lobbyists, or politicians wanting green energy. And many places in Europe are actually experimenting with green energy, which kinda weakens your argument. You must also recognize that markets have yet to adopt green energy and the economies of countries greatly affect what governments can do.

Nor do I think you understand that there are various well-backed up theories for economic progress, environmentalism, etc. The notion that governments dont care about our well being because of your unsubstantiated argument is arrogant.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lipstick Vogue (Post 9605805)
Medical companies wouldn't make a dime if it got out that weed does more than anything they could come out with.

Provide evidence please: First, provide evidence that weed is so great. You have yet to do so and gimmepie already debunked the cancer cure argument. Second, provide evidence that medical companies wouldnt make a dime. Currently, the marijuana industry is thriving in Colorado- it is very profitable. What makes you think that marijuana is not profitable? And considering you think that marijuana is so freaking great, its a contradiction to claim that it is simultaneously not profitable. Its like saying smart phones were revolutionary, but not profitable. An obviously false statement because we have seen the success of Apple and other companies that produce and invent new technology for smart phones.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:49 AM.


Like our Facebook Page Follow us on Twitter © 2002 - 2018 The PokéCommunity™, pokecommunity.com.
Pokémon characters and images belong to The Pokémon Company International and Nintendo. This website is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by Nintendo, Creatures, GAMEFREAK, The Pokémon Company or The Pokémon Company International. We just love Pokémon.
All forum styles, their images (unless noted otherwise) and site designs are © 2002 - 2016 The PokéCommunity / PokéCommunity.com.
PokéCommunity™ is a trademark of The PokéCommunity. All rights reserved. Sponsor advertisements do not imply our endorsement of that product or service. User generated content remains the property of its creator.

Acknowledgements
Use of PokéCommunity Assets
vB Optimise by DragonByte Technologies Ltd © 2023.