Travelling with cannabis in Canada

[nothernbud]

Does anyone have the details on traveling in Canada? Yes you can have 28 or 30 grams but does that have to be legalized cannabis in the packaging with the sticker on it? What if I grow at home and want to head to a friends with a baggie is that ok? And do those rules apply across Canada if I want to go to Ontario and buy legalized cannabis or someone gives me home grown how does that work and how can they tell where it came from?

 

[Hijinxxx]

If we are allowed to grow our own and share with adult friends I would suspect you would only have problems in Ontario and Manitoba where you can't grow . ? But I'm not going to overthink it

 

[nothernbud]

Yeah seems like a lot of no information. Like what if your a good grower and after a couple grows have 2 pounds sitting around, are you a trafficer then? How can they tell it’s for personal use or some dealer.

 

[Dwight Monk]

Probably best to check whatever website the govt. has, as here in Oregon it seemed like it changed every other week at first (wasn't that bad, but it changed a lot). What I have seen for Canada it says you are allowed to possess so much (30g I think last one I saw) and doesn't say it has to be labeled and from a Dispensary, so you can travel around with that much and be legal and as long as you not selling it to anyone or giving/selling it to someone under age there should be no issues. Not sure on the Province thing, as here you can't even travel from a legal State to a legal State (Oregon to Washington/California/Nevada) even though you don't cross into a non legal State as it is a Federal offense then. Also need to find out if there are any "rules" far as how you have to have it in your car, as here in this State it has to be not in reach of the driver or it is "open container" like alcohol (so in trunk or back of car and not within "reach").

 

[Hijinxxx]

Yeah seems like a lot of no information. Like what if your a good grower and after a couple grows have 2 pounds sitting around, are you a trafficer then? How can they tell it’s for personal use or some dealer.

Again , you can have up to 1000 grams . If you ain't breaking the rules , ( selling, driving) then there shouldn't be any problems .

 

[HonestGR]

@nothernbud

So here is a rundown for all of Canada:

-You are allowed to possess up to 30g of dried cannabis (or what is equal to; 1 seed = 1g for example) in public. (Except Quebec which is 15g I believe so if you are travelling through QC, you are only allowed to have 15g...... Stupid IMO)

-If your medical patient: your allowed to carry a 1 month supply or up to 150g. *Plus 30g recreational (This is still VERY iffy in wording and may need to be fought in court)*

-You are not required to have the cannabis in the sold container. (Although this would avoid hassles with RCMP if you had it in containers) The container is to be there when it is sold.

-If you plan on carrying your own, I recommend doing the math. Seeds only recently became legal to purchase in some provinces through a federal legal means. So math would say if you were to grow at home, it would take minimum of what approx 4 months ? (3-4 weeks veg until it matures + 2 months flowering + 1 month cure at the earliest? This would be a small plant!). I wouldn't recommend walking around town with your own grow until around May (although I doubt anyone would care).

-If you did happen to get seeds via a legal source; ie your medicinal and they happened to have a seed in your M.M.... that is a legal source to my knowledge (although it can be debated in court). My last point could be fought if you started the grow on Oct 17th 2018.

Just keep in mind when it comes to legalities at this point there will be A LOT of court cases that will allow for the laws of to change. It is going to take time to stabilize. In my honest opinion, there are many of the rules that need to be just plain removed from the system, it will eat up so much of our law systems time and money.

They will not be able to tell where your product is from. So if your given homegrown great! It may have been grown illegally, but it is legal to give it to friends. (Never mention it was a grow prior to that "May" mark)

You are allowed to store an unlimited amount in your household. So regardless if you had 1 LB - > 20 LB you are within your limits. Just don't possess more than 30g in public. You can buy it wherever it is legal! You are however allowed to "Gift" it, so if it is an exchange for anything but money, it's ok. IE: I am cooking supper a kick @$$ supper, you are REALLY craving it, you give me 15g to join us for supper. That is still "gifting".

@Hijinxxx , It is QC / Manatoba your not allowed to grow in. Ontario is legal.

 

[Hijinxxx]

Yep sorry I got mixed up there
I’m pretty sure personal I’m home possession is 1000 grams thou .. ?

 

[HonestGR]

Yep sorry I got mixed up there
I’m pretty sure personal I’m home possession is 1000 grams thou .. ?

I stand corrected.

Quebec is 150g or equivilent.
B.C. is 1,000g
I dont think anywhere else has a limit, but correct me if I am wrong!

Im in NB, we have no home limit (Minus under lock and key)

What I dont like is each provence can regulate it.... that makes no sense to me.

It should be federally decided and straight across the board.

 

[TorturedSoul]

-If your medical patient: your allowed to carry a 1 month supply or up to 150g. *Plus 30g recreational (This is still VERY iffy in wording and may need to be fought in court)*

I'd hate to be the first lawyer who tried to argue that in court, lol. If I was on the other side, I'd take the stance that medicinal users are already allowed to possess (and, therefore, presumably consume) more than either (I'm making an assumption here) the letter or the spirit of the "recreational" law specifies. If the lawyer then tried to counter that, I'd posit that someone who is willingly consuming more of any given medicine than is prescribed is, at that point, self-medicating above and beyond what their doctor has ordered - which sort of makes it all recreational. I might even suggest a comparison between that and the person who might reasonably believe that a glass or two of wine per day can be medicinal - but the eight more that he/she pours in to go along with it not only are not medicinal, they also cancel out the benefits of the first one or two glasses.

IDK if that'd fly in court, but if I was employed by the government to argue against it, I'd start with the above. IF that didn't get me home before lunchtime, lol, I suppose I'd spend more than the 15 seconds time it took me to think it up... on a serious legal strategy.

 

[HonestGR]

I'd hate to be the first lawyer who tried to argue that in court, lol. If I was on the other side, I'd take the stance that medicinal users are already allowed to possess (and, therefore, presumably consume) more than either (I'm making an assumption here) the letter or the spirit of the "recreational" law specifies. If the lawyer then tried to counter that, I'd posit that someone who is willingly consuming more of any given medicine than is prescribed is, at that point, self-medicating above and beyond what their doctor has ordered - which sort of makes it all recreational. I might even suggest a comparison between that and the person who might reasonably believe that a glass or two of wine per day can be medicinal - but the eight more that he/she pours in to go along with it not only are not medicinal, they also cancel out the benefits of the first one or two glasses.

IDK if that'd fly in court, but if I was employed by the government to argue against it, I'd start with the above. IF that didn't get me home before lunchtime, lol, I suppose I'd spend more than the 15 seconds time it took me to think it up... on a serious legal strategy.

I am 100% behind you on this one. My wife tries to argue this with me all the time. But I think it was just something overlooked. Although I see her point, I still dont feel it would fly in court.

Lots of lawyers want to fight it all however. There are a lot of changes to come up over the next while. Reshaping the laws regarding cannabis.

 

[Etzmishpat]

The argument that an authorized medical user with a hybrid stash, part obtained pursuant to the legislation in respect of medical marijuana and filled by prescription and the balance obtained pursuant to the recreational provisions of the Cannabis Act, would have their entire stash characterized as non-medical unless they prove otherwise might be correct.

The question would be whether the medical prescription, which has been commingled with a recreational supply, can be ascertained - it’s like a trusts-tracing exercise in a criminal context which is frequently encountered.

In the event that the person authorized to use medical marijuana has commingled her impugned hybrid stash to such an extent that an evidentiary issue arises - a presumption of wrongdoing will arise against the person responsible for wrongful mixing and they will have to prove (reverse onus) that they exercised due care etc etc and may actually be convicted if the offence is construed as a strict liability offence.

Yeah, so don’t be mixing things and thinking it will be fine.

It is probably open to the Crown to argue that a person who failed to act with due diligence and who cannot prove, on balance, facts that support the discharge of the associated duty, is a person who has sufficient mens rea to be convicted of a strict liability criminal offence (BC Motor Vehicle)...

Since all the laws are so new you can expect the minimum Charter section 7 protections (especially since we are about to have a Conservative government)

Try not to become the defendant in a test case.

None of this is legal advice.