So the Weed pass thing? and your thoughts?

[Cisco]

So what happened at the meeting the other night ? Coffeeshop union or whoever they are BCD ?

[matty223]

the last up date from Nol is this


Nol van SchaikAmsterdam 2012 - 420 Style Anti-Weedpass Smoke-out PROTEST!

BREAKING NEWS!!!

I just received an email from the 4 foremost cannabis Lawyers, they are going to start a court case to stop the weedpass from being introduced in the South, May 1. The case is based on the Resident Criteria I mentioned in earlier posts.
The case will be won, and it will stop the weedpass dead in its tracks.

[Shaggy]

Actually what Joosy linked states that tighter restrictions will definitely occur across the entire nederlands after Jan1 2013. It is first and foremost at the top of the page.

On 1 January 2012 is the tolerance for coffeeshops strengthened by access to coffee shops to be limited to residents of the Netherlands aged eighteen and older and by membership compulsory . [1] To this end, in this designation include criteria for assessing the whether at a coffee shop - a situation prohibited by law - criminal law has occurred should be supplemented. The tighter tolerance applies to coffee shops in the provinces of Limburg, North Brabant and Zeeland. On 1 January 2013, the additional criteria apply throughout the Netherlands.

That was exactly what I was drawing attention to a few posts earlier. It doesn't say 'if the municipal authorities want to do this' anywhere near to those points. And the guy proposing the legislation doesn't say 'if they want' either.

[Shaggy]

Er? Sorry, I'm a bit confused? What do these bits from the policy document translation you linked to mean then Joosy?:

"On 1 January 2012 is the tolerance for coffeeshops strengthened by access to coffee shops to be limited to residents of the Netherlands aged eighteen and older and by membership compulsory....... . [1] To this end, in this designation include criteria for assessing the whether at a coffee shop - a situation prohibited by law - criminal law has occurred should be supplemented. The tighter tolerance applies to coffee shops in the provinces of Limburg, North Brabant and Zeeland. On 1 January 2013, the additional criteria apply throughout the Netherlands."

(My highlights)

I'm not sure what the bit in between those highlights means because the translation is pretty meaningless in English

Hi Shaggy, If you read the whole document there are numerous references to the local municipality deciding what to implement, I think when the document refers to the local triangle, that means council, mayor & police - i could be wrong on that . We really need a dutch person to give a better & clearer translation & also what it means in layman's terms

Im no expert, im just trying to get the message home that its up to amsterdam what they implement and the amsterdam coffee shops are not worried so why are we.

Sorry, I assumed from the way you were talking about all this that you were actually Dutch Joosy.

[Willjay]

the last up date from Nol is this


Nol van SchaikAmsterdam 2012 - 420 Style Anti-Weedpass Smoke-out PROTEST!

BREAKING NEWS!!!

I just received an email from the 4 foremost cannabis Lawyers, they are going to start a court case to stop the weedpass from being introduced in the South, May 1. The case is based on the Resident Criteria I mentioned in earlier posts.
The case will be won, and it will stop the weedpass dead in its tracks.

There are still Dutch citizens who remember another political group that planed to segregate a section of the population, I believe the Dutch will not adopt the weed pass.

[Slip & Sal]

Also threatening to attack someone physically over something that's said on the Internet "is childish as fuck"


Ya fuckin goon !! Can I get a punch in the face too ?

I like goon. I'm more of a Goonie.

[joossy]

Goonie
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For other uses, see goon (disambiguation) and The goon (disambiguation).

An idiot, dolt, or dullard is a mentally deficient person, or someone who acts in a self-defeating or significantly counterproductive way.

[Shaggy]

When I first visited Holland back in the mid-1980s you could buy 30g of cannabis and drink alcohol in coffeeshops.

Now you can only buy 5g and you can't drink alcohol in coffeeshops.

When these changes came about were they imposed at a national level? Or did municipal authorities have the right to reject these changes?

I assume not, because these are the rules that govern all coffeeshops and are a condition of their licenses as well. I've not come across any suggestion that local councils can change these conditions in their given area, even though they themselves grant the licenses.
.
In which case, it seems to me that if local authorities didn't have the right to over-ride these proposals (because the legislation was established at a national level) then a weedpass could also be imposed at a national level and the local authorities would have to accept them as well, whether they want to or not.

National laws clearly frame the coffeeshop policy, while local councils implement them (if they want to) at a local level. But that doesn't mean that councils can change the legal framework under which they operate (maximum amount for sale, amount for stock, alcohol, age limits, and so on). So if national laws change then presumably councils are required to operate within whatever new parameters they establish.

So if a weedpass is imposed at a national level, then the councils would have to implement it, whether they want to or not, just like the changes concerning the amounts coffeeshops can stock and sell, age limits, the alcohol ban, etc.

The responses by councils like Amsterdam and others indicate they don't want the weedpass, but they've not actually said that they have the absolute right of veto, so presumably the haven't got that right. If they had then the discussion taking place now wouldn't be happening. Councils wouldn't be saying they don't want the weedpass, they'd be saying they're not having it period, end of conversation. And the git proposing the legislation wouldn't be in a position to say that it will definitely apply to Amsterdam, as he has been doing. So presumably he thinks that national laws will over-ride any objections to the pass from local councils and stop them implementing it differently from the national guidelines.

I personally think if the weedpass is legislated at a national level, then councils will indeed have to implement it, just like the quantity limits, the booze ban, age limits and so on.

And presumably that's why the coffeeshop owners are so concerned. And rightly so. Because if the government legislate for it at a national level, then it'll probably happen, just like all the other conditions/restrictions currently in place.

That's not to say that it can't be challenged legally - on the basis of residential criteria, violation of privacy, restrictions and limitations concerning membership and the like - but that would be challenging the specifics of any law, not the principle of the law itself.

This is just me expressing my opinion, so please don't threaten to beat me up or anything if you disagree. Just my thoughts on the weedpass thing from reading this thread and looking at the legal policies that seem to frame the coffeeshop policy...

[Slip & Sal]

Goonie
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For other uses, see goon (disambiguation) and The goon (disambiguation).

An idiot, dolt, or dullard is a mentally deficient person, or someone who acts in a self-defeating or significantly counterproductive way.

Have you insulted me enough yet dickhead????

Mine related to "The Goonies" the movie but I suppose your not old enough to know this???

[Shaggy]

For goodness sake chill out people, have a smoke or something.

[Slip & Sal]

Goon
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A goon is someone that is employed as someone's personal enforcer, such as either a personal bodyguard or a ruffian who is kept on staff to intimidate or batter people.

Goon is the name they give cask wine in Australia.

Goonie
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For other uses, see goon (disambiguation) and The goon (disambiguation).

An idiot, dolt, or dullard is a mentally deficient person, or someone who acts in a self-defeating or significantly counterproductive way.

you should post the link to that also so everyone knows you just didn't make up your own definition.

[TwoCanucks]

the last up date from Nol is this
Nol van SchaikAmsterdam 2012 - 420 Style Anti-Weedpass Smoke-out PROTEST!
BREAKING NEWS!!!
I just received an email from the 4 foremost cannabis Lawyers, they are going to start a court case to stop the weedpass from being introduced in the South, May 1. The case is based on the Resident Criteria I mentioned in earlier posts.
The case will be won, and it will stop the weedpass dead in its tracks.

This is exactly what I said would be done...

a legal challenge is the most direct and effective method imho, to get change or as in this case, prevent change from happening in the first place.

Who is going to challenge to law/policy, the shops that sell illegal substances? Think about it for a while longer...

The answer, cannabis lawyers in Netherlands. Sane, legal minds and a court system will determine the next step here.

[treetop]

When I first visited Holland back in the mid-1980s you could buy 30g of cannabis and drink alcohol in coffeeshops.

Now you can only buy 5g and you can't drink alcohol in coffeeshops.

When these changes came about were they imposed at a national level? Or did municipal authorities have the right to reject these changes?

I assume not, because these are the rules that govern all coffeeshops and are a condition of their licenses as well. I've not come across any suggestion that local councils can change these conditions in their given area, even though they themselves grant the licenses.
.
In which case, it seems to me that if local authorities didn't have the right to over-ride these proposals (because the legislation was established at a national level) then a weedpass could also be imposed at a national level and the local authorities would have to accept them as well, whether they want to or not.

National laws clearly frame the coffeeshop policy, while local councils implement them (if they want to) at a local level. But that doesn't mean that councils can change the legal framework under which they operate (maximum amount for sale, amount for stock, alcohol, age limits, and so on). So if national laws change then presumably councils are required to operate within whatever new parameters they establish.

So if a weedpass is imposed at a national level, then the councils would have to implement it, whether they want to or not, just like the changes concerning the amounts coffeeshops can stock and sell, age limits, the alcohol ban, etc.

The responses by councils like Amsterdam and others indicate they don't want the weedpass, but they've not actually said that they have the absolute right of veto, so presumably the haven't got that right. If they had then the discussion taking place now wouldn't be happening. Councils wouldn't be saying they don't want the weedpass, they'd be saying they're not having it period, end of conversation. And the git proposing the legislation wouldn't be in a position to say that it will definitely apply to Amsterdam, as he has been doing. So presumably he thinks that national laws will over-ride any objections to the pass from local councils and stop them implementing it differently from the national guidelines.

I personally think if the weedpass is legislated at a national level, then councils will indeed have to implement it, just like the quantity limits, the booze ban, age limits and so on.

And presumably that's why the coffeeshop owners are so concerned. And rightly so. Because if the government legislate for it at a national level, then it'll probably happen, just like all the other conditions/restrictions currently in place.

That's not to say that it can't be challenged legally - on the basis of residential criteria, violation of privacy, restrictions and limitations concerning membership and the like - but that would be challenging the specifics of any law, not the principle of the law itself.

This is just me expressing my opinion, so please don't threaten to beat me up or anything if you disagree. Just my thoughts on the weedpass thing from reading this thread and looking at the legal policies that seem to frame the coffeeshop policy...

Talking sense there Shaggy. Good post.

It seems possible that this leglislation will end up being decided in the courts with multiple legal challenges based on various issues needing to be resolved before policy can be legally implemented/enforced.

Or not.

Perhaps the government cannot be challenged over policy in the courts in Holland. After all there are still some countries where lawyers/judges don't decide every little thing. Does anyone know how these dynamics work in the Netherlands?

So Shaggy whilst you made a good post I didn't quite agree with your opinions and felt that you were speculating at times.

Now I must smash you in the face!

[piedpiperofvice]

Also threatening to attack someone physically over something that's said on the Internet "is childish as fuck"


Ya fuckin goon !! Can I get a punch in the face too ?

[piedpiperofvice]

When I first visited Holland back in the mid-1980s you could buy 30g of cannabis and drink alcohol in coffeeshops.

Now you can only buy 5g and you can't drink alcohol in coffeeshops.

When these changes came about were they imposed at a national level? Or did municipal authorities have the right to reject these changes?

I assume not, because these are the rules that govern all coffeeshops and are a condition of their licenses as well. I've not come across any suggestion that local councils can change these conditions in their given area, even though they themselves grant the licenses.
.
In which case, it seems to me that if local authorities didn't have the right to over-ride these proposals (because the legislation was established at a national level) then a weedpass could also be imposed at a national level and the local authorities would have to accept them as well, whether they want to or not.

National laws clearly frame the coffeeshop policy, while local councils implement them (if they want to) at a local level. But that doesn't mean that councils can change the legal framework under which they operate (maximum amount for sale, amount for stock, alcohol, age limits, and so on). So if national laws change then presumably councils are required to operate within whatever new parameters they establish.

So if a weedpass is imposed at a national level, then the councils would have to implement it, whether they want to or not, just like the changes concerning the amounts coffeeshops can stock and sell, age limits, the alcohol ban, etc.

The responses by councils like Amsterdam and others indicate they don't want the weedpass, but they've not actually said that they have the absolute right of veto, so presumably the haven't got that right. If they had then the discussion taking place now wouldn't be happening. Councils wouldn't be saying they don't want the weedpass, they'd be saying they're not having it period, end of conversation. And the git proposing the legislation wouldn't be in a position to say that it will definitely apply to Amsterdam, as he has been doing. So presumably he thinks that national laws will over-ride any objections to the pass from local councils and stop them implementing it differently from the national guidelines.

I personally think if the weedpass is legislated at a national level, then councils will indeed have to implement it, just like the quantity limits, the booze ban, age limits and so on.

And presumably that's why the coffeeshop owners are so concerned. And rightly so. Because if the government legislate for it at a national level, then it'll probably happen, just like all the other conditions/restrictions currently in place.

That's not to say that it can't be challenged legally - on the basis of residential criteria, violation of privacy, restrictions and limitations concerning membership and the like - but that would be challenging the specifics of any law, not the principle of the law itself.

This is just me expressing my opinion, so please don't threaten to beat me up or anything if you disagree. Just my thoughts on the weedpass thing from reading this thread and looking at the legal policies that seem to frame the coffeeshop policy...

Talking sense there Shaggy. Good post.

It seems possible that this leglislation will end up being decided in the courts with multiple legal challenges based on various issues needing to be resolved before policy can be legally implemented/enforced.

Or not.

Perhaps the government cannot be challenged over policy in the courts in Holland. After all there are still some countries where lawyers/judges don't decide every little thing. Does anyone know how these dynamics work in the Netherlands?

So Shaggy whilst you made a good post I didn't quite agree with your opinions and felt that you were speculating at times.

Now I must smash you in the face!

treetop, thank you for the last 2 sentences. funniest thing i have ever read on ACD. i would say laughing out loud but i hate that cutesy abbreviation shit