Justin Trudeau says marijuana should be legalized

[Kiran403]

I agreed that cannabis shouldn't be sold in the same places as alcohol. Co-mixing the two substances might be harmless for some but for many it's not. Eliminating the option to buy both at the same place can help address that. Also, there have been several cases in which people giving up alcohol have switched to cannabis as a safer alternative. I highly doubt they want to go in a liquor store to get it.
I've spent time in both CO and WA talking to users, non-users, growers, processors, retailers and law enforcement. Everyone had different ideas about what they liked/disliked about their regulatory setups but everyone seemed to agree that co-mixing sales of alcohol and cannabis was a bad idea. Every legalized market in the US (CO, WA, OR, NV, AK) as well as upcoming legal markets such as California and Massachusetts has decided against alcohol and cannabis sales co-mixing.
I just hope that the government goes with privatization over public stores. I'm sure the government has better things to do than build out, staff, and maintain stores. The revenue that they receive could be much better spent towards public health issues, education about the dangers of cannabis for youth etc.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Parallex

Y'know, Having travelling to other provinces that have government run liquor stores I can't say I've noticed they being any worse then the private ones here. I put down private in the survey but only because I'm certain that they'll probably #### up their implementation and then the UCP (or whomever) will then subsequently #### up the privatization... may as well skip to the second #### up and avoid the first.



Yeah, I noticed that as well. It's a really overly tepid... I mean I support doing it to just get the "yes" and then letting the reality of it override the historantics of the nervious nellies and puritans... but it's seriously anti-fun. No online sales/home delivery? Bad Idea, No cafe/communal consumption sites? What you guys don't like Pubs?

I mean ok guys, do whatever you got to do politically to get to the yes... but you're wasting a lot of future time altering the regs with the go slow.

It's more when you want to get some booze after 9pm, like many of us often do. Not every liquor store needs to be open until 2am, but it's nice to have that option.

But more importantly, the economic potential should not simply be taken away from the citizenry. This is the exact sort of thing people hate government over - government's job is to set the rules, not play the game.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Top Shelf

I mentioned a few reasons earlier in the thread, but another thing I didn't mention was that the products have very different storage requirements that existing liquor stores won't be able to meet. Temperatures, humidities, expiration times, etc. Retail liquor stores are not equipped to handle marijuana.

Could they be? Sure.

Yeah well no stores other than tobacconists would be prepared right now.

by next July though? Everyone who wanted to, would be.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Kiran403

I agreed that cannabis shouldn't be sold in the same places as alcohol. Co-mixing the two substances might be harmless for some but for many it's not. Eliminating the option to buy both at the same place can help address that. Also, there have been several cases in which people giving up alcohol have switched to cannabis as a safer alternative. I highly doubt they want to go in a liquor store to get it.
I've spent time in both CO and WA talking to users, non-users, growers, processors, retailers and law enforcement. Everyone had different ideas about what they liked/disliked about their regulatory setups but everyone seemed to agree that co-mixing sales of alcohol and cannabis was a bad idea. Every legalized market in the US (CO, WA, OR, NV, AK) as well as upcoming legal markets such as California and Massachusetts has decided against alcohol and cannabis sales co-mixing.
I just hope that the government goes with privatization over public stores. I'm sure the government has better things to do than build out, staff, and maintain stores. The revenue that they receive could be much better spent towards public health issues, education about the dangers of cannabis for youth etc.

Silliness.

I would wager that 95% of people drive to the liquor store to make purchases.

So because weed is sold at a different store 2 blocks away, they are more likely to skip getting weed, thereby not going to be mixing the 2 substances?

Ridiculous to believe that.

If they legalize stuff...trust that the citizenry can handle buying it at a liquor store and get the nanny state out of it.

Adults really can make their own decisions.

[rubecube]

Does anyone think that by making them sell it in separate stores that it's possible there might be more entrepreneurial and employment opportunities created? Not being sarcastic, just thinking out loud here.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Does anyone think that by making them sell it in separate stores that it's possible there might be more entrepreneurial and employment opportunities created? Not being sarcastic, just thinking out loud here.

Seems reasonable. Not to mention most liquor stores in my area are run by a select few companies, mostly grocery stores. Mom and pop shops just can't compete.

I don't see any benefit, other than convenience, to having Sobeys and Loblaws controlling the weed market in Alberta. I'd way rather some entrepreneurial businesses pop up and provide this service.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Stoners do need jobs after all. But why not both? Why not allow liquor stores the option to do it? For the biggest customers, they will always go to the pot only stores so there will definitely much more business going there, but liquor stores having a couple strains for convenience seems fine. Sobeys and Liquor Depot won't ever be go to destinations for buying weed, unless they get known great stuff for cheap (and, well, we know they don't do that). I also think AB stores should be like BC stores where you can buy smokes and snacks as well.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Some elements of the government aren't fully onboard with legalization, and they're tying themselves up in knots over how to legalize it while still sending a message that's it's bad and dangerous and people really shouldn't use it.

It's the same kind of foggy, irrational thinking behind prohibitions on liquor stores being located beside gas stations. We can't in any way connect the purchase of liquor with driving, even though 95 per cent of people drive to buy liquor.

I'm sorry, I'm not going to say you're wrong, but I hope you can admit that, at the very least, you're passing your opinion off as fact. There are a number of very valid reasons why weed shouldn't be sold at liquor stores.

Alcohol can impair your decision making. Marijuana can impair your decision making. The effect is magnified when someone who regularly uses alcohol adds marijuana to their usage, and vice versa. This can cause someone who regularly knows their limit with either substance on its own to misjudge the effects the combination is having on themselves.

It comes down to a public safety issue. Drinking is regulated, yet people still drive drunk and make other poor decisions while using alcohol. So in an effort to reduce the likelihood of abuse, there are deterrents like restrictions on availability. The idea that 2 regulated goods being sold together will not increase incidents of misuse/abuse is completely ignorant to what those regulated goods are capable of doing.

Guns are regulated too, and you can't buy alcohol or guns while under the influence(according to regulations) so should they be sold at the same store? Or will not selling them together completely prevent someone from having both a gun and booze in their possession? No, but it will completely eliminate the chance of something bad happening because someone bought a gun and alcohol together at the same place. This is a similar scenario is it not? It doesn't stop people from mixing the two, it makes it so people have to put a little more effort into doing something that is potentially more dangerous.

[TorqueDog]

I think having separate, privately-run stores opens up possibilities for different types of retail experiences too, from run-of-the-mill to higher-end boutique style experiences.

Problem with combining liquor and cannabis retailers is that a good portion of liquor stores have employees who don't know a damn thing about the finer points of the booze they sell, save for the Kensington Wine Markets and Willow Park Wines And Spirits of the world. I have little faith that the guy behind the counter at Liquor Depot is going to have a sweet clue of the differences between sativas, indicas, and hybrids, never mind the nuances between individual strains. You really want people who are enthusiastic about the product selling something like this for the best possible retail experience.

Imagine the Willow Park Wine and Spirits of cannabis... now that would be cool.

[Regular_John]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

I think having separate, privately-run stores opens up possibilities for different types of retail experiences too, from run-of-the-mill to higher-end boutique style experiences.

Problem with combining liquor and cannabis retailers is that a good portion of liquor stores have employees who don't know a damn thing about the finer points of the booze they sell, save for the Kensington Wine Markets and Willow Park Wines And Spirits of the world. I have little faith that the guy behind the counter at Liquor Depot is going to have a sweet clue of the differences between sativas, indicas, and hybrids, never mind the nuances between individual strains. You really want people who are enthusiastic about the product selling something like this for the best possible retail experience.

Imagine the Willow Park Wine and Spirits of cannabis... now that would be cool.

I think the potential for "boutique" style cannabis stores is really intriguing, and I hope it happens. However we'll have to see what effects the federal packaging/advertising/brand rules around cannabis end up being.

They seem to be leaning towards tobacco style rules, rather than alcohol, which likely means pretty generic packaging VS some of the stunning liquor brands/bottles we have now. Which could make for a pretty "meh" experience if stores are limited in how much character they can infuse into an experience.

But hey maybe they get creative and we end up with David's Tea type shops, strains on display, gift packages, pre-rolled taster packs and only the take home packaging is fear laden boxes with minimal branding.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

It comes down to a public safety issue. Drinking is regulated, yet people still drive drunk and make other poor decisions while using alcohol. So in an effort to reduce the likelihood of abuse, there are deterrents like restrictions on availability. The idea that 2 regulated goods being sold together will not increase incidents of misuse/abuse is completely ignorant to what those regulated goods are capable of doing.

And the kinds of people who make those regulations are completely ignorant of how people who like to both drink and get stoned behave. If someone wants to both drink and smoke pot, they'll get their hands on booze and weed. Making it inconvenient to buy them both together will deter nobody.

The people who are regulating pot clearly don't understand why prohibition failed in the first place.

[Ducay]

Well I think the argument is that it shouldn't be kept out of liquor stores, not that it has to be sold there exclusively. They could carry it for a quick grab bag, but would also allow for dispensaries to open up to cater to the niche crowd for a more custom experience.

All the regulations applying to liquor also apply to cannabis, so really makes sense to allow the two to be sold in one location. Ignoring built in infrastructure only serves to force a doubling of overhead costs and cost to consumers. Any argument about mixing the two is idiotic when you consider mixing two quantities of alcohol is far more dangerous and point of sale won't impact mixing of the two.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

And the kinds of people who make those regulations are completely ignorant of how people who like to both drink and get stoned behave. If someone wants to both drink and smoke pot, they'll get their hands on booze and weed. Making it inconvenient to buy them both together will deter nobody.

Exactly.

It blows my mind that any critical thinking individual would believe that selling two different items in two different locations would prevent those two items from being in the possession of a user at the same time.

Again, they may not allow liquor stores to sell weed in which case I will go get my box of beer and 2 bottles of wine, leave that store and drive the 2 blocks to the weed store and get my ounce of sativa. How did that prevent ANYTHING?

Its bureaucracy at its finest and with the gang of fools steering the ship here, surprises me not at all.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Ducay

Well I think the argument is that it shouldn't be kept out of liquor stores, not that it has to be sold there exclusively. They could carry it for a quick grab bag, but would also allow for dispensaries to open up to cater to the niche crowd for a more custom experience.

All the regulations applying to liquor also apply to cannabis, so really makes sense to allow the two to be sold in one location. Ignoring built in infrastructure only serves to force a doubling of overhead costs and cost to consumers. Any argument about mixing the two is idiotic when you consider mixing two quantities of alcohol is far more dangerous and point of sale won't impact mixing of the two.

Sounds a lot like if we had liquor stores and then specialty wine stores and craft beer breweries.

Hmmm.

[Fuzz]

I wonder if they are going to have trouble finding places for stores. They say they want them a certain distance from schools, but also a certain distance from liquor stores, which I think also have to be placed away from schools.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Exactly.

It blows my mind that any critical thinking individual would believe that selling two different items in two different locations would prevent those two items from being in the possession of a user at the same time.

Again, they may not allow liquor stores to sell weed in which case I will go get my box of beer and 2 bottles of wine, leave that store and drive the 2 blocks to the weed store and get my ounce of sativa. How did that prevent ANYTHING?

Its bureaucracy at its finest and with the gang of fools steering the ship here, surprises me not at all.

At least our government isn't writing letters to delay the planned implementation like the patron saint of conservatism to the East.

The problem with this is it takes a Leftist government to get over the War on Drugs weed is bad philosophy but when they implement the program there answer to appease the war on drugs people is government control. Its in their nature.

So this is the best case scenario. An NDP government who will provide access then we elect a right wing government to fix the business side of it. As more provinces come out with their standards I am willing to be Alberta will have the 2nd most liberal plan behind Quebec. So if we end up second best on the first try that's a pretty good start.

I suspect the default in Canada will be government stores, government distribution no purchases after 9pm and closed Sundays, age 19.

Alberta will end up with Private stores, public distribution, age 18.

The war on drugs mentality of the conservative governments will be a larger hindrance to access than the Pro-government expansion of the left governments.

[Poster]

I am in Amsterdam currently and the coffee shop system works perfect.

[8sPOT]

As long as this is done in a way where there is no reason to purchase from Joe Blow drug dealer in an alley I think it'll be a win.

But absolutely this should be done with a privatized mindset. The market should dictate all the nuances such as price, quality, variety, potency. The government does not, and should not, need to be involved in every intricate detail.

Will be very interesting to see this all play out though. Can't help but wonder with all the jobs lost here in recent years if there could be some opportunities going forward.

[Huntingwhale]

I can see both sides of the argument for having to sell weed in separate locations. On one hand, it would be annoying to have to go to a different place to buy weed if you can't buy it in a store. I already think it's dumb we can't buy booze at the grocery store, like you can in almost every other country in the world. I only smoke pot on rare occasions now, but I always thought it would be nice to simply go to my neighborhood Mac's store and buy a single joint for the night. Having to now go to a designated selling location makes it inconvenient (unless that store is now closer to my house).

As for the deterrence factor, oh please. Anyone who thinks that clearly does not understand the mentality of a pot smoker (or any other kind of addict). These guy aren't going to be deterred or make smarter decisions simply because the stuff got move to a new location. I can't believe people actually think that might happen. Ridiculous.

On the other hand, it makes perfect sense to have new locations set up that are catered ONLY to selling weed. Unless Joe Smith working at the liquor store or grocery store is an experienced pot user, he isn't going to have any idea about different strains or effects. People are going to have questions and are going to want good, accurate answers. Having a designated store almost forces the owner to ensure the employees know what they are talking about and can answer any questions someone might have.

There is a big difference in the Sativa and Indica strains of weed. The effects are quite different. Yet you almost never hear anybody talking about it. Most people seem to think pot is just pot and it's all the same. That couldn't be further from the truth. People working at these specialized stores NEED to know those differences and be able to explain it to ensure customers get the right product. In fact I'm almost certain that most people who have smoked weed a couple times and hated it or had bad effects, likely smoked an Indica strain. Indica is not meant to be smoked in a public setting or for first time users. The guy at the weed store needs to be able to communicate that to someone who isn't sure what to get. The guy at the grocery or liquor store will likely have no idea.

So for me personally, I think I'd prefer to have weed sold in specialized stores. But NOT for the reasons some people in this thread think (deterrence, mixing weed/booze, etc). But more so for the education factor and the fact the employees are MUCH more likely to know what they are selling.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by GGG

The problem with this is it takes a Leftist government to get over the War on Drugs weed is bad philosophy but when they implement the program there answer to appease the war on drugs people is government control. Its in their nature.

The funniest part is we'll end up with a system that enables the public to buy pot legally, which will upset conservatives, but it will be such a hassle that a black market run by organized crime will continue to thrive.