Drug Policy Discussion, Research Papers, New Laws, Misc.

... said:
I can't believe you guys are comfortable linking to the DEA website.
Click to expand...

The DEA is supplied with signals intelligence from the NSA that it uses to illegally convict defendants using parallel construction. I don't think that Bluelight linking to this website is giving or showing the DEA anything that it isn't already aware of.
 
Canada - The Protection Of Communities From The Evolving Dangerous Drug Trade Act

Key Features Of The Protection Of Communities From The Evolving Dangerous Drug Trade Act
Government of Canada
June 11th, 2015

As part of the Government of Canada's comprehensive approach to addressing illicit drug production, distribution and use, a series of amendments have been proposed to update the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (CDSA), which originally came into force in 1997 as Canada?€™s federal drug control statute. Key features include:

New Temporary Scheduling Authority

The Minister of Health would be able to quickly address potentially dangerous new drugs, including new psychoactive substances that are increasingly being seen on the illicit market. Substances would be added to a new Schedule to the CDSA, which would prohibit their import, export, production and distribution for up to one year, with a possible extension for a second year. This process would be faster than the normal regulatory process and allow for a quick response to emerging drugs.

For example, new designer drugs such as synthetic cannabinoids, cathinones such as methylone and analogues of fentanyl are being found frequently on Canadian streets.

New Criminal Offences

The existing offence for the illegal possession, production or sale of anything (e.g. chemicals or equipment) intended to be used in the production of methamphetamine would be expanded to apply to things intended for use in the production of any controlled substance. The broader offence would provide law enforcement with a wider choice of charges to lay in situations when individuals are found with large volumes of drug production material and yet have no legitimate purpose for possessing those materials.

Streamlined Disposition Schemes

The current rules related to the handling and disposition of controlled substances, precursors and other property related to the commission of drug-related offences when they are seized by law enforcement officials are cumbersome and complex. Among other changes, the proposed amendments would introduce a new expedited process for the disposal of seized controlled substances, precursors and chemical offence-related property whose storage or handling pose a risk to health and safety. This new process would reduce the burden on courts, government agencies and law enforcement agencies.

For example, law enforcement could dispose of hazardous chemicals, contaminated lab equipment and drugs whose storage or handling poses a risk to health and safety without seeking a court order and would not be required to seek Health Canada authorization prior to disposal.

Improved Inspection Authorities

Currently, Health Canada inspectors are only able to inspect sites where authorized activities with controlled substances and precursors are taking place; they cannot inspect places that are not licensed such as ports of entry or where activities related to controlled substances or precursors are only suspected to be taking place. The proposed amendments would broaden the range of places Health Canada inspectors could go, thus ensuring that inspectors can more effectively carry out compliance promotion and verification.

For example, Health Canada would be able to inspect vehicles used to transport controlled substances and carry pre-license inspections.

New Administrative Monetary Penalties Scheme

The proposed amendments would provide the Minister with the authority to impose fines in instances of non-compliance without resorting to a criminal prosecution. This would improve Health Canada?€™s ability to encourage compliance and address non-compliance more quickly; since current measures such as warning letters are not always effective and harsher sanctions such as licence suspension are not always necessary. The maximum penalty for a violation would be $30,000 per day.

For example, regulated parties could be liable to pay fines in instances of non-compliance with security or record-keeping requirements.

Tamper Resistance

The authority to put in place a regulation that would require certain drugs at high risk of abuse to have tamper-resistant properties currently exists. However, the proposed amendments will provide broader authority to regulate in this area. As previously announced by the Minister of Health, Health Canada is also moving forward with regulations.
Click to expand...

Read the press release here.

Let's hope they can't get this passed by October. :X
 
Last edited:
I shudder thinking what Rona Ambrose would do if she's still Health Minister after this year's October elections (and Steven Harper remains our Prime Minister). This woman is hellbent on using her distorted, twisted moral compass to punish non-violent, otherwise law-abiding Canadians for being in possession of parts of a plant, powder, etc.

And if this Bill passes and is implemented... all I can say is fuck Harper, Ambrose, and their two-faced conservatard ideoloigy.
 
I have been saying for the last five years they would go the health canada route rather than try and keep up with the criminal ban hammer. I knew they would do this. It takes like 3 plus years to get stuff banned, and that only happens when there is some media hysteria. Chinese labs have long since stopped making stuff before it even gets banned here.
It was funny to see the bath salts hysteria of to or three summers ago. America banned shit right away, Canada was like well our politicians are on va-cay so it's just going to have to wait 3 months.
Scary how our country is going.

"This process would be faster than the normal regulatory process and allow for a quick response to emerging drugs"

Doublespeak: Allowing debate amongst elected officials about your freedoms is taking too long so now an unelected body will just force laws on you as they see fit, isn't this better?
The writing is on the wall for RC vendors in this country. All the etizolam addicted people are going to be fucked.
 
I still almost lived in Canada, well, in Vancouver I mean... Now, well, shit's starting to scare me away from wanting to live up there now. Seems like they've been moving in this more draconian direction in all aspects of Canadian law for a long time, so I guess it shouldn't surprise me, but still. It's just sickening.
 
If the drug trade is "evolving", shouldn't we too "evolve" how we approach drugs and drug trade? Instead of using the same recycled plan of dissolving citizens' rights and freedoms, should we not develop a new approach, one that is actually effective, perhaps?
 
Last edited:
typical bureaucratic overreach, courts will dismiss it and cops will disgregard it and we'll just go back to being Canadian as always.
 
S.J.P. said:
The Supreme Court can't strike down a bill before it's even been passed into law.
Click to expand...
Damned legal jargon, I just tried to read the differences between an act and a bill and I still don't get it. So can the bill be thrown out by the Supreme Court even if the Senate has passed it? Who needs to pass a proposed act before it becomes a law, and can the Supreme Court strike down an act once it is passed?
 
[éS]Infinite said:
Damned legal jargon, I just tried to read the differences between an act and a bill and I still don't get it. So can the bill be thrown out by the Supreme Court even if the Senate has passed it? Who needs to pass a proposed act before it becomes a law, and can the Supreme Court strike down an act once it is passed?
Click to expand...

A bill and an act are interchangeable terms. The Supreme Court can't throw out acts/bills per se, but it can strike down laws, and bills are made up of multiple laws. The laws within a bill become Canadian law once they are passed by the House and the Senate (and technically, the Governor General, although this is simply a formality). Once these laws are in place, the Supreme Court cannot immediately strike any of them down. A challenge to the law must first make its way through a series of lower courts. This generally takes a few years.
 
Thanks for the info SJP! That's sort of what I thought was the case from what I've seen in the past, but then I tried to read the technicalities behind it all and got horribly lost.
I'm also not quite understanding the "Improved Inspection Authorities" section. How would Health Canada determine that a vehicle has been used to transport controlled substances? HC would also be able to search any place determined to be "suspicious" but what are the criteria that deem an area/property suspicious? Seems pretty vague.
 
^ that would be the overreach part. it's not clear why on earth Health Canada would need such authority and guaranteed that if it's granted they will overstep and be challenged in court.

this is just another example of the current gov't pushing vaguely-worded legislation that the courts will look at and go "how the fuck do you expect us to interpret this?" then they will naturally fall back on the charter of rights which doesn't have such idiotic ambiguities.
 
Canada - Order Amending Schedule II to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act

Order Amending Schedule II to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (Synthetic Cannabinoids)
Canada Gazette
Government of Canada
July 29th, 2015

P.C. 2015-1082 July 16, 2015

His Excellency the Governor General in Council, on the recommendation of the Minister of Health, pursuant to section 60 of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (see footnote a), deeming that it is necessary in the public interest, makes the annexed Order Amending Schedule II to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (Synthetic Cannabinoids).

ORDER AMENDING SCHEDULE II TO THE CONTROLLED DRUGS AND SUBSTANCES ACT (SYNTHETIC CANNABINOIDS)

AMENDMENTS

1. (1) The portion of item 1 of Schedule II to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (see footnote 1) before subitem (1) is replaced by the following:

1. Cannabis, its preparations and derivatives, including

(2) Subitems 1(5), (6) and (7.1) of Schedule II to the Act are repealed.

2. Schedule II to the Act is amended by adding the following after item 1:

2. Synthetic cannabinoid receptor type 1 agonists, their salts, derivatives, isomers, and salts of derivatives and isomers — with the exception of ((3S)-2,3-dihydro-5-methyl-3-(4-morpholinylmethyl)pyrrolo[1,2,3-de]-1,4-benzoxazin-6-yl)-1-naphthalenyl-methanone (WIN 55,212-3) and its salts — including those that fall within the following core chemical structure classes:

(1) Any substance that has a 2-(cyclohexyl)phenol structure with substitution at the 1-position of the benzene ring by a hydroxy, ether or ester group and further substituted at the 5-position of the benzene ring, whether or not further substituted on the benzene ring to any extent, and substituted at the 3’-position of the cyclohexyl ring by an alkyl, carbonyl, hydroxyl, ether or ester, and whether or not further substituted on the cyclohexyl ring to any extent, including

(i) Nabilone ((±)-trans-3-(1,1-dimethylheptyl)-6,6a,7,8,10,10a-hexahydro-1-hydroxy-6,6-dimethyl-9H-dibenzo[b,d]pyran-9-one)
(ii) Parahexyl (3-hexyl-6,6,9-trimethyl-7,8,9,10-tetrahydro-6H-dibenzo[b,d]pyran-1-ol)
(iii) 3-(1,2-dimethylheptyl)-7,8,9,10-tetrahydro-6,6,9-trimethyl-6H-dibenzo[b,d]pyran-1-ol (DMHP)
(iv) 5-(1,1-dimethylheptyl)-2-(5-hydroxy-2-(3-hydroxypropyl)cyclohexyl)phenol (CP 55,940)
(v) 5-(1,1-dimethylheptyl)-2-(3-hydroxycyclohexyl)phenol (CP 47,497)

(2) Any substance that has a 3-(1-naphthoyl)indole structure with substitution at the nitrogen atom of the indole ring, whether or not further substituted on the indole ring to any extent and whether or not substituted on the naphthyl ring to any extent, including

(i) 1-pentyl-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole (JWH-018 )
(ii) 1-butyl-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole (JWH-073)
(iii) 1-pentyl-3-(4-methyl-1-naphthoyl)indole (JWH-122)
(iv) 1-hexyl-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole (JWH-019)
(v) 1-(4-pentenyl)-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole (JWH-022)
(vi) 1-butyl-3-(4-methoxy-1-naphthoyl)indole (JWH-080)
(vii) 1-pentyl-3-(4-methoxy-1-naphthoyl)indole (JWH-081)
(viii) 1-(2-morpholin-4-ylethyl)-3-(1naphthoyl)indole (JWH-200)
(ix) 1-pentyl-3-(4-ethyl-1-naphthoyl)indole (JWH-210)
(x) 1-pentyl-3-(2-methoxy-1-naphthoyl)indole (JWH-267)
(xi) 1-[(N-methylpiperidin-2-yl)methyl]-3(1-naphthoyl)indole (AM-1220)
(xii) 1-(5-fluoropentyl)-3-(1-naphthoyl)indole (AM-2201)
(xiii) 1-(5-fluoropentyl)-3-(4-methyl-1-naphthoyl)indole (MAM-2201)
(xiv) 1-(5-fluoropentyl)-3-(4-ethyl-1-naphthoyl)indole (EAM-2201)
(xv) ((3R)-2,3-dihydro-5-methyl-3(4-morpholinylmethyl)pyrrolo[1,2,3-de]-1,4-benzoxazin-6-yl)-1-naphthalenyl-methanone (WIN 55,212-2)

(3) Any substance that has a 3-(1-naphthoyl)pyrrole structure with substitution at the nitrogen atom of the pyrrole ring, whether or not further substituted on the pyrrole ring to any extent and whether or not substituted on the naphthyl ring to any extent, including

(i) 1-pentyl-5-(2-fluorophenyl)-3-(1-naphthoyl)pyrrole (JWH-307)

(4) Any substance that has a 3-phenylacetylindole structure with substitution at the nitrogen atom of the indole ring, whether or not further substituted on the indole ring to any extent and whether or not substituted on the phenyl ring to any extent, including

(i) 1-pentyl-3-(2-methoxyphenylacetyl)indole (JWH-250)
(ii) 1-pentyl-3-(2-methylphenylacetyl)indole (JWH-251)
(iii) 1-pentyl-3-(3-methoxyphenylacetyl)indole (JWH-302)

(5) Any substance that has a 3-benzoylindole structure with substitution at the nitrogen atom of the indole ring, whether or not further substituted on the indole ring to any extent and whether or not substituted on the phenyl ring to any extent, including

(i) 1-(1-methylpiperidin-2-ylmethyl)-3-(2-iodobenzoyl)indole (AM-2233)

(6) Any substance that has a 3-methanone(cyclopropyl)indole structure with substitution at the nitrogen atom of the indole ring, whether or not further substituted on the indole ring to any extent and whether or not substituted on the cyclopropyl ring to any extent, including

(i) (1-pentyl-1H-indol-3-yl)(2,2,3,3-tetramethylcyclopropyl)-methanone (UR-144)
(ii) (1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indol-3-yl)(2,2,3,3-tetramethylcyclopropyl)-methanone (5F-UR-144)
(iii) (1-(2-(4-morpholinyl)ethyl)-1H-indol-3-yl)(2,2,3,3-tetramethylcyclopropyl)-methanone (A-796,260)

(7) Any substance that has a quinolin-8-yl 1H-indole-3-carboxylate structure with substitution at the nitrogen atom of the indole ring, whether or not further substituted on the indole ring to any extent and whether or not substituted on the quinolin-8-yl ring to any extent, including

(i) 1-pentyl-8-quinolinyl ester-1H-indole-3-carboxylic acid (PB-22)
(ii) 1-(5-fluoropentyl)-8-quinolinyl ester-1H-indole-3-carboxylic acid (5F-PB-22)

(8 ) Any substance that has a 3-carboxamideindazole structure with substitution at the nitrogen atom of the indazole ring, whether or not further substituted on the indazole ring to any extent and whether or not substituted at the carboxamide group to any extent, including

(i) N-(adamantan-1-yl)-1-pentyl-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide (AKB48 )
(ii) N-(adamantan-1-yl)-1-(5-fluoropentyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide (5F-AKB48 )
(iii) N-(1-(aminocarbonyl)-2-methylpropyl)-1-(4-fluorobenzyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide (AB-FUBINACA)
(iv) N-(1-amino-3-methyl-1-oxobutan-2-yl)-1-pentyl-1H-indazole-3-carboxamide (AB-PINACA)

(9) Any substance that has a 3-carboxamideindole structure with substitution at the nitrogen atom of the indole ring, whether or not further substituted on the indole ring to any extent and whether or not substituted at the carboxamide group to any extent, including

(i) N-(adamantan-1-yl)-1-fluoropentylindole-3-carboxamide (STS-135)
(ii) N-(adamantan-1-yl)-1-pentylindole-3-carboxamide (APICA)

COMING INTO FORCE

3. This Order comes into force on the day on which it is registered.
Click to expand...

Holy shit... it looks like they decided to go the U.K. route and attempt to ban an entire class of compounds. This is unprecedented here. And worrying. :(
 
Last edited:
WTF! Now they are adding whole classes of fucking drugs? I saw somewhere the other day that they are also apparently making Salvia a controlled substance in Canada now as well. Yes because those Salvia addicts really take up a burden on the health care system in this country compared to all the morbidly obese people we have currently clogging up the ER's.

This one i didn't see and again how can we call Canada anything resembling a Democracy when some goddamn stuck up bureaucrat in Ottawa who probably doesn't even know anyone personally who has actually taken one of the drugs they are trying to ban (then again they probably lack friends altogether) can decide what is good for a entire nation. Hopefully when the election comes up Canadian voters will remember just how badly things have sucked under our dickless führer Mr.Stevie. A NDP win federally would be the best outcome as i would not trust that slimy prick Trudeau as far as id throw him after he signed that bullshit anti-terrorist legislation.

How they are planning on going about enforcing any of this is another thing altogether. This may very well end up as just another law that has no teeth.
 
Canada - to add 2C-phenethylamines and their salts, derivatives, and isomers ....

24 Jul 2015 Notice C. Gaz. 2015.I.2158: Proposed order amending Schedule III to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act … to add 2C-phenethylamines and their salts, derivatives, and isomers and the salts of their derivatives and isomers.

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
CONTROLLED DRUGS AND SUBSTANCES ACT
Notice to interested parties — Proposed order amending Schedule III to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and regulations amending the schedule to Part J of the Food and Drug Regulations to add 2C-phenethylamines and their salts, derivatives, and isomers and the salts of their derivatives and isomers
In March 2015, the Commission on Narcotic Drugs voted in favour of scheduling three 2C-phenethylamine derivatives, 25B-NBOMe, 25C-NBOMe, and 25I-NBOMe, under Schedule I to the United Nations Convention on Psychotropic Substances, 1971 (1971 Convention). As a signatory to the 1971 Convention, Canada has an obligation to impose controls on these substances and their salts.

Given that there are many substances related to these three that also have psychoactive effects, Health Canada is seeking input to determine whether scheduling the entire 2C-phenethylamines class is warranted. To this end, this notice provides interested stakeholders with the opportunity to comment on Health Canada’s proposal to add 2C-phenethylamines and their salts, derivatives, and isomers, and the salts of their derivatives and isomers to Schedule III to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (CDSA) and to the Schedule to Part J of the Food and Drug Regulations (FDR).

As potent synthetic drugs, 2C-phenethylamines have both stimulant and hallucinogenic properties. Considered “designer drugs,” they are emerging in the market at a rapid pace. These designer drugs are readily available for sale on the Internet as “research chemicals” and at raves, nightclubs and head shops.

The majority of the risks to the health and safety of Canadians from 2C-phenethylamines are associated with recreational exposure causing unknown toxicological short-and long-term effects that may cause bodily harm, injury, illness or death. These designer drugs are available in tablet, powder, or liquid form. Their route of administration may be sublingual, buccal, nasal, oral, injection, or rectal and they may be consumed through smoking. Only a small amount of the substance is enough to cause hallucinogenic effects. As use of these substances may lead to paranoia, violent behaviour, intense hallucinations, and impairment of hand-eye coordination, they pose significant risks to the health and safety of not only the user but also the general public. Risks are further heightened by virtue of the fact that users are unlikely to be aware of the exact dose or substance being consumed.

Health Canada is not aware of any legitimate therapeutic or industrial uses and is aware of only limited scientific and research uses of 2C-phenethylamines. In North America and across Europe, their trafficking and recreational abuse have been on the rise over the past decade. Since 2008, Health Canada’s Drug Analysis Service (DAS) identified over a thousand exhibits of evidence containing 2C-phenethylamines. Moreover, there is a shifting market of a particular 2C-phenethylamine substance being abused. In 2012, the majority of the exhibits contained 2C-E, whereas since 2013, there has been a growing trend in the use of 25B-NBOMe, 25C-NBOMe, and 25I-NBOMe. The number of 2C-phenethylamine exhibits in 2014 was 88, 70 of which contained 25B-NBOMe, 25C-NBOMe, or 25I-NBOMe.

Continued at http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2015/2015-08-01/html/notice-avis-eng.php#nb4
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top