Marijuana Critic Canada May 10, 2017

        MARIJUANA  CRITIC  CANADA  MAY 10, 2017

  SOME INTERESTING POSITIONS ARE BEING ADOPTED WHICH I WOULD THINK      VIOLATE  CHARTER RIGHTS.  JUST BECAUSE "IT IS A REGULATED SUBSTANCE"?

    It is very important to challenge the right of government officials to do whatever they want to constrict and prohibit  an important part of British Columbia and Canadian citizens rights to do what they want to do under the umbrella of a  "quiet enjoyment of their property".  Because we the citizens pay for and authorize and must approve of the actions of the government we are getting, we the citizens are entitled to get what we want not what those who influence elected officials and appointed authorities want.   Maxwell's Rules of Interpretation of Statutes states that "no man should be forced to accept rule that a reasonable man would not agree to". There are more statements in this tome that outline how government officials may interpret and act on law and most important prohibitions upon establishing regulation and subjecting citizens to arrest and criminal prosecution where no "egregious harm to persons or property is created". Reasonably and with proper consideration, I disagree with the entirety of the  premise that " we do not know what dangers or harm could result so criminalize and crush citizens." 

To me, the concept of  "preventative criminalization" is irrational and barbaric. 

The economic principles which I believe enable businesses to function and expand require that small, often individually operated or family businesses test the market and prepare owners and employees to operate their businesses successfully or learn that their product or process is not economically viable, losing their own efforts and money as well. When shareholders are mistakenly or deliberately lured to invest in an economically flawed enterprise the damage can run to a lot more than lost labor and one family or person's economic ruin. The solo or family business can break even or supply a family income perhaps even in a situation where it can be discerned that the enterprise could not be expanded Do not use regulation morphed into criminal prosecution to overrule Economic Principle! The Soviet Union or worse, Communist East Germany ran their economies just like that!!!

I have been informed that the British Columbia New Democratic Party is planning to remove the existing system of Marijuana Dispensaries and Artisan Growers and Farmers in favor of a BC Government Liquor Store based retailing. Would Artisan Growers be permitted as the Craft Beer Artisan Brewers are to retail through the LCB? Would the associates of and contributors to our politicians and authorities be granted freedom to grow and sell and the Police enforce exclusion?

I am hearing from dispensary owners that they would object to being excluded from the market.    I have  also been told that "They are not taking applications anymore." For what I do not know but it bothers me that a gate is being closed behind a chosen few or fortunate few or willing to break the alleged ironclad marijuana sales laws brave few, certainly in the past, now who knows?

The Farmer who owns agricultural land in multiple parcels is generally entitled to farm some on a piece of property  in the ALR an bring his produce from his other farms to that sales location property, you have all seen Roadside Farmstands. I believe one of Farmer's locations is near a liquor store but no schools or community centers and why cannot he grow and sell marijuana just like potatoes or kale? Why is the line drawn behind the existing dispensaries, Grocery Stores are not protected from competition by exclusion through fear of criminal prosecution without any egregious harm being done. This is agriculture he says, for Gods sake my land is in the ALR tied right up and nothing to be able to do but grow agricultural products and what because it is a comfort and a backstop protection for dispensaries now and city folks from the stock markets and shareholders later I am going to be excluded and I am now excluded. I got the land the hy-way   for customer traffic but I cannot be allowed to build a farmstand, got most of the one from the fifties still. I want to grow and sell my agricultural product but the police let some sell and some not.

The Farmer says that he could use his money to sue over charter rights instead of growing and building the Farmstand . I wonder how many ALR farmer owners would like to get in on a class action suit. All you farmers are richer than you think, farmland values up 40% to 76% . Why should this agricultural product which is our right, our only right in the ALR, to grow agricultural products. Why give all the money to city slickers, farmers say they could do it way cheaper too.