Don't Bogart that Joint... Eh!

[model 10]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

At $100 an oz, I wonder how much of that is tax, and I wonder what if anything is done to regulate it. I’m sure the local Pot farmer can’t sell his wares at the local Farmers Market.

The state is taxing 25%. 15% to schools, 5% to health care etc. The control board has stopped issuing new permits because the price has dropped so low.

[Dymaxion]

Pot has been legal in Maine for years, right next door to me. Once our CDN pot is legal, will I be driving across the border into Maine with my 30gram personal limit.... ? Don't think so, US federal regs apply and AFAIK pot is not legal in eyes of the Federales.

Lots of confusion up here about accompanying regs up here, impairment, level, unreasonable search, yada...

Our Federales are working on things however.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2PLC_cBJwk4

[a64pilot]

I’m probably going to get into trouble for this, but that belongs in the joke thread.
I haven’t laughed that hard for awhile

[Adelie]

Originally Posted by Shrew

You bring up a good an clear distinction, which I appreciate. The question I would have is....



If you're a Canadian flagged vessel and you have not checked out of Canada and also are not checking into the US, but traversing US waters between Canada and Canada, are you technically subject to US laws and regulations?

If you are in US waters you are going to be subject to boarding and inspection even during an “innocent passage”. The degree to which such boardings are going to be pursued will depend on the policies emanating from D.C.

The legal basis that seem likely to be used is from UNCLOS

Article 19
Meaning of innocent passage
1. Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State. Such passage shall take place in conformity with this Convention and with other rules of international law.
2. Passage of a foreign ship shall be considered to be prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State if in the territorial sea it engages in any of the following activities:
(a) any threat or use of force against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of the coastal State, or in any other manner in violation of the principles of international law embodied in the Charter of the United Nations;
(b) any exercise or practice with weapons of any kind;
(c) any act aimed at collecting information to the prejudice of thedefence or security of the coastal State;
(d) any act of propaganda aimed at affecting the defence or security of the coastal State;
(e) the launching, landing or taking on board of any aircraft;
(f) the launching, landing or taking on board of any military device;
(g) the loading or unloading of any commodity, currency or person contrary to the customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary laws and regulations of the coastal State;
(h) any act of wilful and serious pollution contrary to this pConvention;
(i) any fishing activities;
(j) the carrying out of research or survey activities;
(k) any act aimed at interfering with any systems of communication
or any other facilities or installations of the coastal State;
(l) any other activity not having a direct bearing on passage.

Also usable would be
Article 21 .1.g & .h:
Laws and regulations of the coastal State relating to innocent passage
1. The coastal State may adopt laws and regulations, in conformity with the provisions of this Convention and other rules of international law, relating to innocent passage through the territorial sea, in respect of all or any of the following:
(a) the safety of navigation and the regulation of maritime traffic;
(b) the protection of navigational aids and facilities and other facilities or installations;
(c) the protection of cables and pipelines;
(d) the conservation of the living resources of the sea;
(e) the prevention of infringement of the fisheries laws and regulations of the coastal State;
(f) the preservation of the environment of the coastal State and the prevention, reduction and control of pollution thereof;
(g) marine scientific research and hydrographic surveys;
(h) the prevention of infringement of the customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary laws and regulations of the coastal State.
http://www.un.org/depts/los/conventi...s/unclos_e.pdf

Here’s a nice overall commentary on innocent passage: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/c1b...dec3859f21.pdf

Then again they may cite force majure

Here’s a related article about “innocent passage” of vessels with an armed security force aboard: https://www.maritime-executive.com/f...age#gs.0aV_vsk

[Pelagic]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

At $100 an oz, I wonder how much of that is tax, and I wonder what if anything is done to regulate it. I’m sure the local Pot farmer can’t sell his wares at the local Farmers Market.

According to the new Law

Canadians 18 years and older (19-plus in select provinces) will now be able to possess an ounce of weed in public and up to four plants at home.*

So perhaps Trudeau is looking to improve the youth unemployment figures, by encouraging little cottage industries at home [emoji6] Joke!

[JPA Cate]

Section 2 e in the UNCLOS agreement posted by Adelie would seem to indicate you should not fly your drone in another country's territorial waters, as well.

[deblen]

Latest news. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/wha...tion-1.4715920


Province by Province https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/pot-...tion-1.3733749


Len

[deblen]

Editorial Cartoon | The Chronicle Herald


http://thechronicleherald.ca/canada/...le-experts-say


Len

[Mike OReilly]

Thanks for posting the UNCLOS details Adelie. As I read them, nothing necessitates the interdiction of Canadian boats proceeding on an "innocent passage." And in the case of a legitimate stop, nothing demands that US officials treat legally held cannabis to trigger enforcement action.

Of course, much like the Bible, the UNCLOS is written vaguely enough that one can find justification for just about any action. But as written, it doesn’t demand a legal response.

Like I say, boats from both the USA and Canadian side routinely cross through each other’s waters as part of an “innocent passage.” There are many specific laws which apply in one country, but do not in the other. And as far as I know, there’s never been a demand to enforce these differences. Why would cannabis be any different?

You’re probably right though a64pilot, it may take a few test cases to sort all this out. I, for one, have far more important hills to die on .

Latest news: https://youtu.be/Yk2Y-yA9Tg0?t=1m7s

[a64pilot]

So far as UNCLOS, I doubt it’s applicable. I am certain that Canada and the US has some form of agreement about policing each other’s boats, likely going back a long time.
I don’t know the answer, but bet historically there may be a correlation, how did the two countries handle stopping each other’s boats during prohibition? Cause I bet quite a few Canadian boats were stopped and searched by US authorities

[hellosailor]

Pelagic, does this mean the Canadian Boat Boys are going to be lined up just inside your borders, to offer services to incoming yachts?

I thought I heard someone at CBP saying "Aw jeez!" and burying his head in his hands yesterday. The good news is, Trump isn't placing any tariffs on imports of the stuff to the US.

[deblen]

Brings tears :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPIoJp4VZBs

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by JPA Cate

You know, years ago, in San Diego, we saw one of the yachts in the compound which had been confiscated by the border patrol. It was a Swan 48, iirc, and they had searched it with axes, and had left the hatches open for a couple of years.

The boat was eventually auctioned off, and the new owner discovered that he was subject to rigorous Customs searches thereafter--and he had had no previous connection to the boat.

This issue to me boils down to "don't mess with Hoppy." Would you rather be a civil lliberties test case or out there cruising?

Ann

I've heard similar stories about people who bought ex drug running boats. Another problem would be the difficulty of removing every trace of residual scent left behind. Those sniffer dogs are incredibly sensitive.

You'd really need to seriously consider whether such a boat could ever be used for international travel again.

[model 10]

Very few dogs know more than just one thing. Drug dogs don't smell bombs and vise versa.

[a64pilot]

Many years ago some smart soldier powdered some pot and put it in the floor wax in the barracks at Hunter Army Airfield.
Rendered the pot sniffing dogs useless. Someone must have told, I don’t think they would have ever figured it out any other way.