NOT BREAKING ANY LAW

If there is no law governing the possession of under 30 grams of cannabis
right now, how is it that the cops think that it is okay to take someone's
personal property and their personal information with an eye to charging
them later? Especially if there is no current law banning that person's
behaviour currently.

I liken it to the government saying that in six months to a year from now
they may change the DWI limit to only .06 from .08. Now even though there
is no law now against driving with a blood alcohol level of .07, the police
are going to take some action if they find you driving with .07. That
action being that they will take your personal information and if the
government changes the law in a year they will come back and charge you
with impaired driving. Oh yeah, and even though you were not breaking any
current law while driving at .07 the police are still going to impound your
vehicle for 30 days and you will still get the automatic license
suspension, even though there is no current law banning your behaviour.

See, the cops are making perfect sense when they say that a person's
cannabis will be taken away and they may be charged later even though they
are breaking no law right now. This is the way all of our laws should work.
Kind of like the movie Minority Report where the people are caught before
they actually commit the crime. Except in this case the people in
possession of under 30 grams of cannabis are not actually breaking any law
in Ontario, at least according to the Superior Court of Ontario.

Trevor Houlahan

Garson

(That's a heck of an "at least" -- and the feds do seem to be under the
impression they can still prosecute for marijuana possession)