Police ask feds to postpone date for legal pot...

[Murphy]

Do you think the feds will give them the time? I doubt it. There might be some minor concessions, but this legislation is too popular with the voters for Trudeau NOT to keep his promise.

IMO, this will bite the Liberals in the ass. Roadside charges ,might have a rough time in court at the start. There will be a lack of understanding by the public as to what exactly is legal and what isn't WRT growing and/or possessing marijuana.
---

Police ask feds to postpone date for legal pot,say there’s zero chance they will be ready

Representatives from the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, the Ontario Provincial Police and the Saskatoon Police Service also say they want the government to reconsider allowing people to grow pot at home.

By Mia Rabson - Canadian Press
Tues., Sept. 12, 2017

If the government doesn’t postpone the start date for legalized pot and allow police time to prepare and train their officers, there will be a window of six months to a year to allow organized crime to flourish and mistakes to be made, OPP Deputy Commissioner says.

OTTAWA—Canada’s police services say there is zero chance they will be ready to enforce new laws for legalized pot by next summer.

Officials from the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, Ontario Provincial Police and the Saskatoon Police Service are among dozens of witnesses testifying to the House of Commons health committee this week as it studies the government’s bill to legalize marijuana.

They said Tuesday they need more time to properly train officers about the new laws and more than double the number of police officers who are certified to conduct roadside drug impaired driving testing. There also needs to be more time for public education, the police said.

The police also want Ottawa to reconsider allowing individuals to grow up to four of their own marijuana plants because it will be difficult and expensive to enforce and provide an additional way for young people to get access to pot.

“Why do you need home grows when we’re going to have a good system to access marijuana legally?” asked Barnum.

The rest here.


https://www.thestar.com/news/canada...ay-theres-zero-chance-they-will-be-ready.html

 

[petros]

Maybe they should come to RCMP F Division and learn off them how to grow pot thus learning how to spot an illegal grow?

 

[ZulFiqar786]

Growing a plant should be legal without any repercussions or restrictions. Smoking pot isn't the same as growing a plant. Let's stop being so authoritarian.

 

[lone wolf]

Smoking it isn't the illegal part

 

[ZulFiqar786]

Just because pot is or will be legal doesn't mean that residential buildings can't enfore a no pot policy, especially since the stench is unbearable. I personally think it should remain illegal though perhaps decriminalized. Grow ops should absolutely be legal.

 

[lone wolf]

Then how do you propose getting the product for market?

 

[Murphy]

Just because pot is or will be legal doesn't mean that residential buildings can't enforce a no pot policy, especially since the stench is unbearable. I personally think it should remain illegal though perhaps decriminalized. Grow ops should absolutely be legal.

The smell or smoking it in a residential bldg has nothing to do with the article. I will summarize for you.

- police services say there is zero chance they will be ready to enforce new laws for legalized pot by next summer

- they need more time to properly train officers about the new laws and more than double the number of police officers who are certified to conduct roadside drug impaired driving testing. There also needs to be more time for public education, the police said.

 

[petros]

Then how do you propose getting the product for market?

Licensed producers.

July 1 you can grow 4 plants legally.

Question is; "will it be grown safely and without kids getting access?"

 

[Murphy]

Production isn't a problem. The police aren't prepared to assess and test possible offenders. They need more staff trained to do roadside checks. They would like the public to get a clear and easy to understand explanation of what the new laws actually mean, and how they affect users.

 

[petros]

Yeah, there is no known "stoned" threshold or what defines impaired.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Yeah, there is no known "stoned" threshold or what defines impaired.

So make one up. That's what they did with alcohol.

 

[Murphy]

They have equipment, similar to a breathalyzer, but there aren't many officers trained on how to use it. Like breathalyzers, the mary-meter requires training and certification.

I was chatting with some OPP friends and they tell me that most users do not know how the law will impact them. They are unaware of legal requirement for testing, under what circumstances police can demand that they take the test, and what will happen if they fail to comply.

For the police, their responsibilities have not been clearly outlined. It's new legislation, and one cannot simply say the law will work in the same way as it does for alcohol.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

For the police, their responsibilities have not been clearly outlined.

Not like they'll follow the outline anyhow.

 

[petros]

They have equipment, similar to a breathalyzer, but there aren't many officers trained on how to use it. Like breathalyzers, the mary-meter requires training and certification.

I was chatting with some OPP friends and they tell me that most users do not know how the law will impact them. They are unaware of legal requirement for testing, under what circumstances police can demand that they take the test, and what will happen if they fail to comply.

For the police, their responsibilities have not been clearly outlined. It's new legislation, and one cannot simply say the law will work in the same way as it does for alcohol.

Blood test measuring X amount is the only proof of impairment.. A swab or trip up doing the hokey pokey gets you a 24hr suspension but not an impaired.

 

[Murphy]

Not like they'll follow the outline anyhow.

They have to know what they can do, so when they do what they shouldn't do, they won't be prosecuted for doing what shouldn't be done.

 

[petros]

It's the same as booze. Pass the roadside and off you go. F-ck up saying the alphabet backwards or show physical signs then they will request a blood sample.

Been there done that for smoking and driving I got a 24hr on a long weekend Friday night.

I couldn't get my truck released from impound until Tuesday and $480.

 

[Johnnny]

Nobody knows what the hell is going on with this whole legalization thing.

Im telling people its better off the way it is right now. But "No Johnny" they say, your "Betraying the cause" they say...

Im a pothead, although ive only smoked 8 days out of the last 32

 

[petros]

Decriminalization was the way to go but kids are too stupid and took the bait.

 

[Murphy]

Blood test measuring X amount is the only proof of impairment.. A swab or trip up doing the hokey pokey gets you a 24hr suspension but not an impaired.

Yes, but for the police, what constitutes a legal reason for taking someone into custody who is suspected of having too much ganja? You can detain anyone who might be a danger to themselves and others, but new laws mean modified ways of how they are to do their jobs.

The law will have to be amended (if it hasn't already) that effective 1 Jul, anyone suspected of being under the influence of cannabis will be dealt with as follows: insert amendment(s) here.

You can bet that defense lawyers are already researching the law. How do they get their clients off? It's that back and forth we see that plays out with the courts and the police.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

They have to know what they can do, so when they do what they shouldn't do, they won't be prosecuted for doing what shouldn't be done.

They have to know what they can do so they can make sure there's no cameras rolling when they start to breaking heads.