Justin Trudeau says marijuana should be legalized

[Coach]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Why start now? A buddy of mine does seismic surveying. He also smokes pot (though never when he's out in the field). Every time he gets a call to go out for a job, he gets drug tested. That means if he smoked pot six days ago, it's going to show up. So he takes masking agents to try to get past the tests. Why do energy companies care if a guy doing surveying smoked pot a week before he goes out in the field? Who knows. But they do. And their policies have stood up to challenges for decades.

Its just because the THC stays in your system for longer, whether you're high or not. I think it's anywhere from a week to a month. Obviously those people aren't stoned anymore, but it's still in their system and if it's flagged there's no way to tell if it was 2 hours ago or 2 days ago. So they have to adopt zero tolerance.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by 8sPOT

Those policies make sense for an illegal substance, but when pot is legal there's no way the current testing method can work. It would be the equivalent of testing for alcohol and if you had a drink in the last 6 days you'd fail. No way they'll do that.

I wouldn't doubt if these companies already have a plan in place come July 2018.

Yes, their plan is to fight it tooth and nail, and continue drug testing.

The industry is raising the issue, Salkeld said, because it is concerned the government’s task force has so far not even considered the workplace safety aspect of legalization.

“The companies will do as they’ve got to do, but if they don’t have some kind of support or backup or legislation or laws to fall back on, then they’re left to enforce this all on their own,” he said. “And that’s not fair.”

In its letter, Enform cites a 2003 study that found male marijuana users had a 28 per cent higher rate of hospitalization due to injuries than non-users and female users had a 37 per cent higher rate of hospitalization due to injuries.

http://calgaryherald.com/business/lo...-safety-hazard

...On-the-job drug testing is considered an invasion of privacy and potentially discriminatory in many Canadian workplaces, though the courts have given employers some leeway on job sites where safety — and sobriety — are critical, including the oilpatch.

Still, current drug testing technology cannot detect whether someone is impaired by marijuana. Unlike the breathalyzer test for alcohol, oral swabs and urine screens can only indicate whether someone has recently smoked or ingested pot, not whether they are high.

Until drug testing can detect intoxication with legal limits, Enform believes governments must allow employers to impose a zero-tolerance policy in workplaces where safety is paramount.

http://calgaryherald.com/business/en...erous-jobsites

And it looks like they'll have the support of the public.

Workplace Drug Tests OK With Canadians If Weed Legalized: Poll

More than three in five Canadians say companies should be allowed to administer random drug tests to employees when marijuana is legalized, a new poll finds.

The poll from Insights West found 62 per cent of respondents would support drug-testing policies. That number rises to 70 per cent among those aged 55 and over, and 71 per cent among those who voted Conservative in the last election.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Yes, their plan is to fight it tooth and nail, and continue drug testing.





And it looks like they'll have the support of the public.

Workplace Drug Tests OK With Canadians If Weed Legalized: Poll

I would think this is more of a liability issue than a moral one on behalf of the companies.

[PepsiFree]

Mark me down as someone who thinks the whole conversation around drug testing and corporate culture boils down to a whole lot of nothing, and fairly devoid of good old fashioned common sense.

Work at a place that tests for drugs? You probably won’t smoke pot. Deathly afraid of someone seeing you walk out of a pot shop/liquor store/sex cabin? You probably will either not do those things or find a sneakier way to do it. Not in a place where you can gab about how high you got on the weekend? You probably won’t gab about it.

Are any of these so statistically significant or even generally important that it’s worth worrying about? No, probably not.

[woob]

Originally Posted by transplant99

What did they do before dispensaries opened?

Everyone has/had a dealer at one time or you didn't buy the stuff.

Indisputable.

as for edibles, I guess thats a thing but did people not just make their own previously? Would that not still be cheaper?

His argument is precisely what is going to take place once legalization is in effect; 90% of people are going to forget about "Terry" and go buy their weed where it's legal, easy, and convenient. Regardless of having a dealer, price, etc.

[Flames_Gimp]

Originally Posted by woob

His argument is precisely what is going to take place once legalization is in effect; 90% of people are going to forget about "Terry" and go buy their weed where it's legal, easy, and convenient. Regardless of having a dealer, price, etc.

not at the proposed prices, about 300 an oz right? "Terry" will be able to cut that price in half or more easily.

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Its just because the THC stays in your system for longer, whether you're high or not. I think it's anywhere from a week to a month. Obviously those people aren't stoned anymore, but it's still in their system and if it's flagged there's no way to tell if it was 2 hours ago or 2 days ago. So they have to adopt zero tolerance.

That's b.s. that the Companies want you to believe.
You can definitely tell whether it just looking at some one or the amount of thc that would show up in a test. Companies generally dont test for delta-9 THC but for inactive THC-COOH. If you did a blood test 2 hours later it would show delta 9 thc but not in a piss test. Which is why law enforcement does blood tests over urine.Companies generally only do urine to prove at some point you smoked it but even the your body will have metabolized it over time and the test will show a lower number over time and higher closer to when to last toked or ate pot in THC-COOH.


Depends how you ingest it or in hale it. A general rule thats been accepted around many places that are well sourced and respected for a time table.

1-time use: clean in 5-8 days
2-4 times a week: 11-18 days
5-6 times a week: 33-48 days
Daily use: 50-65 days, up to 77

[gasman]

Originally Posted by Flames_Gimp

not at the proposed prices, about 300 an oz right? "Terry" will be able to cut that price in half or more easily.

Doesn't matter. You can buy black market cigarettes from a reserve and save a ton of money on Tax, but the majority of people don't. Reason, is that

1. People are lazy and it's easier to swing by a store on your way home than to arrange a time and place with "Terry".
2. There is no risk, buying in a store, you know what your getting, and you know that the store isn't going to rip you off, or that your transaction may get broken up by the police.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by gasman

Doesn't matter. You can buy black market cigarettes from a reserve and save a ton of money on Tax, but the majority of people don't. Reason, is that

1. People are lazy and it's easier to swing by a store on your way home than to arrange a time and place with "Terry".
2. There is no risk, buying in a store, you know what your getting, and you know that the store isn't going to rip you off, or that your transaction may get broken up by the police.

The difference is that there was never a time when 100 per cent of Canadian smokers bought their cigarettes on the black market. So those reasons you give don't really matter to people who have been successful buying black market pot for years. Most regular pot smokers are accustomed to buying in sufficient quantities to last them weeks or months, from people who they haven't had problems with. The premise of "Terry" is that he's a reliable supplier for regular smokers.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The difference is that there was never a time when 100 per cent of Canadian smokers bought their cigarettes on the black market. So those reasons you give don't really matter to people who have been successful buying black market pot for years or decades. Most regular pot smokers are accustomed to buying in sufficient quantities to last them weeks or months, from people who they haven't had problems with. The premise of "Terry" is that he's a reliable supplier for regular smokers.

How's the black market liquor trade doing these days?

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by rubecube

How's the black market liquor trade doing these days?

Has there been a vast black market liquor trade in Canada for the last 40 years supplying sufficient alcohol to meet the needs of all Canadian drinkers?

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Has there been a vast black market liquor trade in Canada for the last 40 years supplying sufficient alcohol to meet the needs of all Canadian drinkers?

No, but why would you expect this to be any different than when prohibition ended in the U.S. and Canada? You keep making the claims that a majority of Canadians are going to continue to seek out marijuana on the black market, despite a pretty substantial amount of evidence to the contrary. If this were the case, why do commercial weed sales continue to grow in California, Nevada, Colorado, and Washington? Why do we have multiple dispensaries opening up within a block of each other in Victoria and Vancouver? All you've provided is speculation based on anecdotes. Where is your actual evidence that this is actually going to be a common occurrence?

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by rubecube

No, but why would you expect this to be any different than when prohibition ended in the U.S. and Canada? You keep making the claims that a majority of Canadians are going to continue to seek out marijuana on the black market, despite a pretty substantial amount of evidence to the contrary.

I've said that as long as there's still a stigma around pot, retail sales will face competition from the black market, especially if the black market also beats retail on price. And regulators openly acknowledge the issue of price sensitivity. They've come right out and said if they set the price too high, or set the age limit too high, lots of Canadians will stick with the black market.

One of the principle reasons for legalization of pot is that criminalization failed to suppress demand and consumption. For the government to take away customers from the black market, they'll have to beat the black market.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I've said that as long as there's still a stigma around pot, retail sales will face competition from the black market, especially if the black market also beats retail on price. And regulators openly acknowledge the issue of price sensitivity. They've come right out and said if they set the price too high, or set the age limit too high, lots of Canadians will stick with the black market.

One of the principle reasons for legalization of pot is that criminalization failed to suppress demand and consumption. For the government to take away customers from the black market, they'll have to beat the black market.

I don't think anyone is disputing the price argument, but you seem to be arguing that even if prices are similar, that a significant percentage of users will still get their weed from the black market and I'm asking you for some evidence to demonstrate why you believe that because all evidence from other jurisdictions seems to indicate that isn't true. Does the stigma not exist in these other jurisdictions?

The one issue I've had with Liberals on this is that their message hasn't been entirely clear on what they see the role of legalization being. Is it to reduce the burden on the criminal justice system? Is it to put a dent in organized crime? Is it to boost government revenue from taxes? So far the only thing I've heard consistently is that they think legalization will be more effective at keeping marijuana out of the hands of kids. I tend to agree with this but it only works if you can significantly put a dent in black market and price is the most crucial aspect of that.

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I've said that as long as there's still a stigma around pot, retail sales will face competition from the black market, especially if the black market also beats retail on price. And regulators openly acknowledge the issue of price sensitivity. They've come right out and said if they set the price too high, or set the age limit too high, lots of Canadians will stick with the black market.

One of the principle reasons for legalization of pot is that criminalization failed to suppress demand and consumption. For the government to take away customers from the black market, they'll have to beat the black market.

One basic factor that you're not considering is that not all pot is created equal.

Not that the pot you're buying from 'Terry' is crap but you really don't know what you're getting other than if it's an indica or a sativa but that's about it.

Buying from a retail outlet, you have the choice of strains, strengths, flavours, etc. Not to mention vapourizing products, shatter, edibles.

Take a look at some of the online sites. I think you'll be surprised by the choices.

At least that's what a friend told me.

[speede5]

I am more concerned about what all the 'retailers' who are currently making money off of illegal product will do to make up for the lost revenue stream then I am about black market weed.

Will we see more harmful drugs pushed? I think weed will gain mainstream acceptance and people will forget it was ever illegal rather quickly, but there are a lot more harmful things out there to trap people.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by speede5

I am more concerned about what all the 'retailers' who are currently making money off of illegal product will do to make up for the lost revenue stream then I am about black market weed.

They become legitimate businesses and continue to rake in the dough (albeit slightly less due to taxes, worth it from both a producers and consumers standpoint to keep everything safe and legal).

Will we see more harmful drugs pushed? I think weed will gain mainstream acceptance and people will forget it was ever illegal rather quickly, but there are a lot more harmful things out there to trap people.

Not sure what this has to do with legalization of one of the drugs. Anyone who wants heroin or crack or cocaine or MDMA or ecstacy or LSD or opium or fentanyl can and will find it.

Are you likely to do crack because your current liquor store now only sells crack? Or will you just go find liquor somewhere else because that's what you want?

[speede5]

Originally Posted by MattyC

They become legitimate businesses and continue to rake in the dough (albeit slightly less due to taxes, worth it from both a producers and consumers standpoint to keep everything safe and legal).

I'm sure some will. I would expect the cost to go up a fair bit as everything will have to be above board. No more stealing power and trashing rental properties as illegal grow ops. haha.

Originally Posted by MattyC

Not sure what this has to do with legalization of one of the drugs. Anyone who wants heroin or crack or cocaine or MDMA or ecstacy or LSD or opium or fentanyl can and will find it.

Are you likely to do crack because your current liquor store now only sells crack? Or will you just go find liquor somewhere else because that's what you want?

No, but people don't typically start any drug by going and finding it. They are introduced to it at some point by someone who is trying to get clients. If they can't sell weed anymore, which is easy money, they may be more aggresive selling other product.

Then again, if weed is legal and you don't have to associate with the nefarious to get it, maybe it lessens your exposure to the real nasty stuff.

SK just announced they are going to license 60 stores in the province. MJ will get 2. That means the market for profiting from weed will exclude a lot of people who are making money right now.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by speede5

No, but people don't typically start any drug by going and finding it. They are introduced to it at some point by someone who is trying to get clients. If they can't sell weed anymore, which is easy money, they may be more aggresive selling other product.

This hilarious. Do people really believe there are random drug dealers just hanging around and offering free samples of drugs to strangers?

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by rubecube

This hilarious. Do people really believe there are random drug dealers just hanging around and offering free samples of drugs to strangers?

You've never been to Drugs Costco?

I don't even buy anything. I just walk around and try the samples. Just like real Costco.