Drug pushers? Ontario to force unwanted pot shops

29 posts / 0 new
Last post
Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture
Drug pushers? Ontario to force unwanted pot shops

Communities across Ontario cannot opt out of hosting a government-run pot shop if they are selected for a site, the provincial government said Friday after at least one town expressed resistance to having a cannabis retail location.

I guess weed is somehow different from every other thing, and if some little municipality wants to be a "dry county" they expect their anachronistic wishes to be granted.

I can't imagine any city or town in Ontario holding a councillor's vote on whether they should have a beer store, or let drug stores sell condoms, or permit a Mosque.

Guess what?  A store selling pot in Richmond Hill won't be "forcing it" on anyone.  Those who don't want any won't be forced to shop there and those who do want to shop there will be enjoying their new rights.  And if the moral fabric of Richmond Hill is ripped and torn asunder, I guess they'll deal with that when the time comes.  Like with booze, condoms and Mosques.

lagatta4

News for them; already there is plenty of cannabis in Richmond Hill. And everywhere else.

WWWTT

I see Brampton and Mississauga are in the first 14. But not much east of TO? You’d think Peterborough? Oh well whatever I don’t really care because I don’t smoke pot or anything of that nature. 

I can see the province making deals with municipalities over this issue. If Richmond Hill is already against it, I’m thinking the regional politicians want to score points fighting the stoner bogey man from spreading reefer madness that will surely cause mass rape hysteria or some other unimaginable phantom phobias. That a boy mayor of Richmond Hill, keep protecting your fine citizens from getting the munchies!

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Communities across Ontario cannot opt out of hosting a government-run pot shop if they are selected for a site, the provincial government said Friday after at least one town expressed resistance to having a cannabis retail location.

I guess weed is somehow different from every other thing, and if some little municipality wants to be a "dry county" they expect their anachronistic wishes to be granted.

I can't imagine any city or town in Ontario holding a councillor's vote on whether they should have a beer store, or let drug stores sell condoms, or permit a Mosque.

Guess what?  A store selling pot in Richmond Hill won't be "forcing it" on anyone.  Those who don't want any won't be forced to shop there and those who do want to shop there will be enjoying their new rights.  And if the moral fabric of Richmond Hill is ripped and torn asunder, I guess they'll deal with that when the time comes.  Like with booze, condoms and Mosques.

Agreed and agreed. And like lagatta said,there's always been pot in Richmond Hill and always will. And you can sday that about just about any town in Canada.

These prohibitionists make no sense. It's sort of like the new DUI commercials. They focus on pot. It's as if they believe that legal marijuana (I hate that term) people will start driving after smoking a joint/ But only if it's legal. Because we all know that nobody has ever driven after smoking cannabis because it's illegal.

Newsflash to MADD. People have been driving after smokijng cannabis long before I was  born. In fact,if you're going to worry about stoned drivers under the influence of cannabis,you're really sad and pathetic.

I remember in my teens eating a bag of mushrooms and dropping some blotter acid with a friend who drove. We went out for a spin (I think we were going to buy beer,I don't remember) peaking on both. In hindsight that was really stupid but that isn't my point.

People have been driving under the influence of drugs (and I'm going to count alcohol in that category) for as long as I can remember. And probably before I was born. And I'm a middle aged man. This sudden bullshit hysteria about needing 'more cops' to deal with...Hmm..I don't know...but it's some mental gymnastics for these simple minded and ignorant people.

And BTW,provinces were supposed to deal with legal cannabis after the 1971 LeDain commission. The Liberals of that time even had a plan to sell joints packaged like cigarettes. Too bad that went nowhere. But the point is,people have had 46 YEARS (not 1 year like these scrambling prohibitionists claim) to prepare for legal pot. So fuck you if you think we need more 'time' and 2018 is too soon.

At the end of the day,legalizing it will immediately stop people getting arrested for small amounts of cannabis on their person. THAT is the real point. The smoking and eating is just what comes with it.

lagatta4

Absolutely. I don't smoke dope because I don't smoke anything - it will be pleasant if cannabis taken another way can calm some types of pain or even anxiety though. But I care deeply because I've seen too many people dragged through the legal system, denied employment etc because they were arrested for a bit of cannabis. This must end, and it annoys me when people say they don't care if it is banned because they don't use it.

I still remember when a Black man in Montréal-Nord was SHOT by the police (and killed) because he was dealing a bit of cannabis, while being the wrong colour.

voice of the damned

Magoo wrote:

I can't imagine any city or town in Ontario holding a councillor's vote on whether they should have a beer store, or let drug stores sell condoms, or permit a Mosque.

Google etc won't allow me to do a full search on the relevant keywords, but I'm pretty sure I've heard about residents of Canadian neighbourhoods organizing to oppose porn shops, peep shows, strip clubs etc, moving into their areas. I'm not exactly sure what the outcomes of any of them were, but presumably the residents had reason to believe that the government at least listens to objections from people who don't want certain businesses in their neighbourhoods, even if those businesses are  otherwise pefectly legal. 

 

 

 

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
People have been driving under the influence of drugs (and I'm going to count alcohol in that category) for as long as I can remember.

Remember all those jurisdictions that banned smartphones until they could further study the effects of texting while driving, and figure out how to fund the necessary expansion of their police force and implement new legal frameworks and so on?

voice of the damned

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
People have been driving under the influence of drugs (and I'm going to count alcohol in that category) for as long as I can remember.

Remember all those jurisdictions that banned smartphones until they could further study the effects of texting while driving, and figure out how to fund the necessary expansion of their police force and implement new legal frameworks and so on?

Are you trying to say that banning pot shops would be as absurd as banning cell phones? If so, I'm not sure if the comparison is exactly parallel. Cell phones are privately-maintained items, whereas pot shops are for-profit businesses that draw people into their respective neighbourhoods.

Back to my earlier example, people have tried, with whatever degree of success, to get porn shops blocked from opening in their neighbourhoods. I don't think you can refute these endeavours by saying "Well, we don't ban people from having porn in their basement, so how can we ban the shops?", since the law and indeed basic public sentiment see a diffference between having a store in your area, and having the items in your house.

(And yes, for the record, I think that anyone who protests the opening of a porn shop in his neighbourhood, while going into someone else's neighbourhood to buy porn from a shop there,  is in serious violation of the Golden Rule, because he's helping to inflcit on the other area the same thing he wishes to keep out of his own. But that's a matter between him and his conscience, not something for the law to concern itself with.)

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
Are you trying to say that banning pot shops would be as absurd as banning cell phones?

No, I just think it's funny that both the province and municipalities are Chicken Little-ing about "stoned drivers" and how many years they'd need to adequately study and prepare for that.

Except that:

a) people already smoke pot, and drive.  I'm not endorsing that, but it's not like any province will need to have some special plan in place when their first marijuana-using driver takes to the road in July, 2018.

b) people texting while driving, or checking their Facebook while driving or otherwise looking at their cell phone instead of the road is apparently a problem now.  But I don't recall how any jurisdiction needed a few more years to plan for that the way they seem to need a few more years to plan for some driver smoking a doobie.  Nor do I recall any jurisdiction suggesting that cellphones should be banned until such planning could happen.

Quote:
Back to my earlier example, people have tried, with whatever degree of success, to get porn shops blocked from opening in their neighbourhoods.

That's just plain old municipal zoning.  And I'm basically OK with that.  Nobody wants a lard-rendering plant in the middle of a residential subdivision.

But every municipality, surely, has SOMEWHERE where a provincial cannabis dispensary wouldn't unduly lure children from the neighbouring daycare, or whatever.  If a municipality can zone for an LCBO, they can zone for a CCBO.  Suggesting that the entire city is somehow against cannabis is just a few councillors going full-NIMBY.

progressive17 progressive17's picture

Some communities are more permissive than others. In Durham region, Ontario, there is an Amish furniture outlet which shares a building with a XXX video store...

WWWTT

progressive17 wrote:

Some communities are more permissive than others. In Durham region, Ontario, there is an Amish furniture outlet which shares a building with a XXX video store...

Theres a good joke in this comment just waiting to come out!

WWWTT

If a municipality can zone for an LCBO, they can zone for a CCBO.  Suggesting that the entire city is somehow against cannabis is just a few councillors going full-NIMBY.

Agreed

lagatta4

I have THREE SAQ outlets within 10 minutes' walk from my house... well, four, but the one closest is a wholesaler for restaurants, not for individual consumers.

And no, that is NOT why I moved to this 'hood. But Jean-Talon market was definitely a factor...

cco

Zoning's always struck me as problematic. I'm certainly not a libertarian who wants to let the private sector put anything anywhere it wants, but zoning's also definitely used to racist and classist ends by wealthier and whiter neighbourhoods pushing the "undesirable elements" out of their backyards.

progressive17 progressive17's picture

I don't like the gentrifying aspects of zoning. But we need some kind of system that preserves farmland and keeps toxic industry from proximity to residential areas.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture
MegB

alan smithee wrote:

FUCK YOU!!

https://montreal.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=1312534

This just further reinforces the two classes of smokers - the ones who can afford to own their own home and smoke whenever and wherever, and those who have to stand outside to smoke (especially difficult if you are medicating for severe chronic pain, end stage cancer).  If people really don't want to smell cannabis smoke, vape pens should be made more affordable or be covered under a social assistance drug plan.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

MegB wrote:
If people really don't want to smell cannabis smoke, vape pens should be made more affordable or be covered under a social assistance drug plan.

That's a terrific idea,Meg. And it's  plausible especially if and when recreational cannabis becomes legal.

lagatta4

There are various ways cannabis-based medication can be taken. They should be covered by medication plans like any other  pharmaceutical product, if they are medicinal as in this case.

I don't see any reason a public cannabis authority in a neighbourhood will "lure" minors anymore than the liquor authority shops. I don't see hordes of pubescent kids waiting outside the SAQ in hopes of scoring one of those horrid spiked sweet fizzy drinks popular among that demographic.

(Kid, come back when you have better taste in beverages...)

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

There are various cannabis-based products. Cookies,brownies,gummies...but a cancer patient using cannabis for nausea and/or pain from chemo cannot eat a cookie or a brownie and the government won't allow  gummies because somehow small children will get their hands on them and become drug fiends.

Unfortunately for a cancer patient,the only mode of taking their medication would be inhaling it. They don't have much of a choice. I like Meg's idea of vape pens nd that they should be part of social assistance (e.g. FREE of cost)

I'd also extend that to recreational use. If people are going to whine and bitch about the smell,that is no defense of keeping it illegal. In fact,it's a lame excuse and extremely stupid. Vape pens for smoking cannabis for any reason should be as affordable as buying a lighter. 

lagatta4

Depends on the cancer patient. I have a friend who is taking some kind of cannaboid and as far as I know it is in pill or capsule form - it definitely isn't smoked.

I'm not a doctor or nurse (and unlike IANL, I don't have direct experience and some degree of knowledge of the field).

Smell, no. But asthma might be a legitimate grounds for complaint.

I think that there a lot of meddling busybodies trying to tell people how to live and what to consume. The kind of people who think that anyone who smokes a joint or otherwise ingests cannabis is a drug fiend and a threat to "our youth".

I tend to post earlier, but right now I'm sipping a glass of white wine as I slowly consume a bit of this, bit of that supper. That doesn't make me a raging drunk!

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

lagatta4 wrote:

I tend to post earlier, but right now I'm sipping a glass of white wine as I slowly consume a bit of this, bit of that supper. That doesn't make me a raging drunk!

No it doesn't make you a raging drunk. Smoking a joint does not make you a drug fiend. But Québec is a reefer madness state.

Riddle me this. Why is the city of Montréal demanding $9.3 million from the government to pay for extra police and fire fighters when and if cannabis becomes legal?

How much would you like to bet that CAQ,assuming they win a majority later this year makes sure legal cannabis does not happen in Québec. I'd say the same thing about PLQ but they seem resigned to the fact. All they want to block is growing any plants at home.

It's embarrassing and despicable that Québec is now going after medical cannabis,I can't imagine what is going to happen when and if it's legalized recreationally.

Be happy you can drink your poison. There is nothing morally wrong nor criminal about smoking cannabis. But explain that to Valérie Plante and Phillipe Couillard and most definitely Fuckface Legault

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
Why is the city of Montréal demanding $9.3 million from the government to pay for extra police and fire fighters when and if cannabis becomes legal?

They'll need the police to arrest all the people who aren't breaking the law any more, and they'll need the firefighters to put out all the fires started by marijuana smokers who light the couch on fire when pot is legal, because YOLO.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
Why is the city of Montréal demanding $9.3 million from the government to pay for extra police and fire fighters when and if cannabis becomes legal?

They'll need the police to arrest all the people who aren't breaking the law any more, and they'll need the firefighters to put out all the fires started by marijuana smokers who light the couch on fire when pot is legal, because YOLO.

That was precisely my point. And it makes no rational sense. I see the provinces sabotaging recreational weed because,you know,all the crime that going to come with it,how it will be easy for youngsters to get their hands on it. Yes,I'm being sarcastic. They're idiots. But with CAQ cruising toward a majority in Québec and a Conservative win in Ontario, it is completely possible that they will impose continued prohibition because the feds gave the provinces that power rather than implementing a specific policy that would apply to all the provinces,Liberal,Conservative or otherwise. And the bullshit is already started here in Québec as they are going after legal medicinal cannabis. This province sahould be ashamed of themselves and more importantly, Quebecers should be outraged.

The fact that the City of Montreal is demanding $9.3 million for police and fire fighters shows just how fucking idiotic  and out of touch the politicians are here in 'progressive'(lol) Québec.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

2 Toronto police officers suspended after allegedly ingesting pot, hallucinating while on duty

Quote:
Two Toronto police officers who allegedly ingested marijuana edibles, hallucinated and called for help while on duty Sunday have been suspended, CBC News has learned.

Luckily they didn't use their state-issued sidearms to shoot those malicious unicorns (AKA regular citizens) that were chasing them (AKA peacefully existing).

But I think the next time TPS "raids" a Toronto dispensary, "to protect the public" we can safely assume it's because the police are out of THC gummy bears.  It surely won't be to ensure that nobody ingests them.

Way to totally lose the public's trust.  "We will save you from yourselves by confiscating this contraband and destroy it by eating it and then hallucinating."

 

lagatta4

They HALLUCINATED on pot edibles????

voice of the damned

lagatta4 wrote:

They HALLUCINATED on pot edibles????

And it was a folie a deux, apparently.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

This reminds me of Maureen Dowd's hilarious encounter with cannabis edibles.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
They HALLUCINATED on pot edibles????

It's alleged that one ended up in a tree.

Quote:
Sources told CP24 that the call for assistance was made after one of the officers ended up in a tree.

I can't even.  The first time I ever tried LSD, my friends convinced me to do two hits at once.  I ended up believing that I could understand bird tweets (no joke), but I didn't end up in a tree!

That said:

1.  I hope that TPS puts any upcoming raids on the back burner, at least until such raids stop looking like a very hypocritical "shopping trip".

2.  I'm not sure why news stories about this keep mentioning the officer who slipped on ice and banged her head, as though she's the third casualty of edibles or something.

3.  If this happened to a couple of cops on their day off, after eating edibles purchased legally like any other Canadian, I'd just smirk a bit and say "next time, start slow".  But the employees of the raided dispensary will have been charged criminally, and are out of a job, while these cops are on paid leave after allegedly eating Crown evidence, wasting police resources, and apparently, climbing a tree to escape the unicorns.  Also, they were presumably armed, and that doesn't mix well with hallucinations.