diesel_3 Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 And somewhere...The owner of Doritos is smiling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avelanch Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 Wow, stuck up, sheltered, and ignorant. Your life must be quite the wild ride. Lol. It's illegal because people don't feel the need to go spend money on other things as they feel contented on marijuana and it detaches them from government control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogbyte Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 you don't really know Heisenberg's schtick yet, do you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coyotecanuck Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 Imagine the irony when one goes to cross into Washington State and is denied access because they signed this petition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbal23 Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 Imagine the irony when one goes to cross into Washington State and is denied access because they signed this petition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
literaphile Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 I hope everyone who signs the petition (I'm in favour of legalization too, BTW) realizes that, at the end of the day, it means absolutely nothing. BC cannot decriminalize marijuana. Only the federal government can do that by amending the Criminal Code. The only thing the petition will do is let the federal government know that a certain number of people want to see weed legalized, which I think is pretty well known already. But don't fool yourselves into thinking that the BC government can actually do anything about the law, because they can't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
literaphile Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 And I'll also point out that this "draft legislation" talked about in the article would likely fail any judicial test due to the Canadian doctrine of federal paramountcy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 I believe it IS a gateway drug and will never support it. Plus i hate people who party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
literaphile Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 Neither could Washington as it's also under federal jurisdiction in the US...Oh wait! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 If you don't know the difference between American and Canadian law then you should educate yourself before using Washington as a comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themcdeal Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 No, I have never once smoked weed, never been offered or been around it and that's just fine with me. I have seen stories on what pot does I don't need anyone to tell me otherwise. It is illegal for a reason, because it is not safe to use. I am against any form of dicriminalization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
literaphile Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 I didn't say there aren't legal (or other) differences. But the same "It's federal law" and "it won't matter" naysayers were out in force there as well. Even if it doesn't actually federally, legally, fully decriminalize the substance, it's a powerful statement and important baby step towards the ultimate goal. Officially binding, valid or not. It's symbolic of the will of the people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 Link to the site if you want to sign. http://sensiblebc.ca/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 The big difference between Canadian and American criminal law is that, in the USA, both the states AND the feds make criminal laws. That is, in addition to federal criminal laws enforced by federal law enforcement officials, states also pass their own criminal laws. So, what's happened in Washington is that it's legal in that state, but federal officials can still make arrests under the federal code. We don't have that in Canada. There's only one set of criminal laws here and they're federal. Provinces are not allowed to pass their own criminal laws or amendments. We also have something called "paramountcy", which, in a nutshell, means that if an otherwise valid provincial law and an otherwise valid federal law are in conflict with each other, the federal law will prevail. So even if this proposed legislation actually becomes BC law (which is highly unlikely), since it conflicts with the federal criminal laws - by preventing the judicial system from enforcing the drug laws - a court would likely declare it to be invalid under the paramountcy doctrine. Not saying that it's right, and that I agree (like I said, I think marijuana should be legalized), but it will take a lot more than 90,000 signatures to change anything here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tre Mac Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 I don't want anyone harvesting the Devil's Lettuce in the garden of life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbal23 Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 The big difference between Canadian and American criminal law is that, in the USA, both the states AND the feds make criminal laws. That is, in addition to federal criminal laws enforced by federal law enforcement officials, states also pass their own criminal laws. So, what's happened in Washington is that it's legal in that state, but federal officials can still make arrests under the federal code. We don't have that in Canada. There's only one set of criminal laws here and they're federal. Provinces are not allowed to pass their own criminal laws or amendments. We also have something called "paramountcy", which, in a nutshell, means that if an otherwise valid provincial law and an otherwise valid federal law are in conflict with each other, the federal law will prevail. So even if this proposed legislation actually becomes BC law (which is highly unlikely), since it conflicts with the federal criminal laws - by preventing the judicial system from enforcing the drug laws - a court would likely declare it to be invalid under the paramountcy doctrine. Not saying that it's right, and that I agree (like I said, I think marijuana should be legalized), but it will take a lot more than 90,000 signatures to change anything here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
literaphile Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 I think the point is to lobby BC to get the federal government to create an exception or other wise amend the law to exclude BC from that law. They could argue it would help deal with preventing lacing and meddling with pot that get people onto other drugs and allow them to enjoy the real weed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbal23 Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 I would support it if that were the point, but according to the original article, they're trying to pass something called the "Sensible Policing Act", which just wouldn't fly (for reasons I've stated above). If they just want to persuade the feds to change the law they should be more straightforward about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avelanch Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 if BC does decriminalize it, that would mean only the federal bodies would continue to prosecute (RCMP). local police and provincial law would simply choose not to enforce the federal law unless they are forced to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
literaphile Posted September 10, 2013 Share Posted September 10, 2013 if BC does decriminalize it, that would mean only the federal bodies would continue to prosecute (RCMP). local police and provincial law would simply choose not to enforce the federal law unless they are forced to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.