Talk:Legality of cannabis by country/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2

POV?

Specifically the United States entry: "Laws vary by state, though state law is unconstitutionaly superceeded by federal law which classifies cannabis as a Schedule I substance, the same classification as heroin and LSD." As much as I believe that the federal government has no place in making laws about drugs (especially considering that a national prohibition on alcohol required a constitutional amendment to implement), I can't help but feel that it is unfair to merely dismiss the law as unconstitutional, especially in the light of the ruling in the Supreme Court case Gonzalez v. Raich. Would a link to Legal history of cannabis in the United States be more appropriate, more informative, and less POV? 204.29.160.141 (talk) 05:31, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Obvious POV, and contrary to established case law. Removing "unconstitutionaly" from that section.171.159.194.11 (talk) 22:31, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Obama's New Marijuana Policy For The US

I'm waiting for the green signal to update America's new MMJ policy- the feds are no longer intruding on states-rights MMJ laws. KittenKiller

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-tv/watch-ryan-grim-discusses_b_326653.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by KittenKiller (talk • contribs) 04:23, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Ontario has not legalized canibus

Anyone who thinks cannibus is legal in Ontario needs a head check, there were 100 people arrested for being part of a gang ditributing marijuana. Every week on the news there are chinese people going to prison for grow ops all over toronto.

Additionaly, Canada is a federation where criminal laws are the same in each province. There is no way that cannabis can be legal in Ontario without being legal in all the other provinces. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.239.154.174 (talk) 19:42, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Sources

This article is severely lacking in sourced material, remember to cite your sources for facts and assertions, otherwise they will be deleted. --voodoom (talk) 07:29, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Please use articles that link specific drug legislation

I've tried to do a cursory clean up of the existing claims in the article compared to the references provided, but this is only a start obviously. Let's face it, as 'helpful' as Erowid can be, it would be much more desirable to directly cite the laws in the individual countries themselves. I realize that over time more unreferenced personal conjecture is going to creep back in, so we'll have to keep an eye out for them. I'm going to wait for a short while to give people a chance to contribute, and then begin the next step in this process, which may 'ruffle a few feathers', removing all unreferenced claims in the article. cheers Deconstructhis (talk) 18:08, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

And then there is sourced material which appears to not back-up the claim made. Philippines, for example, states: Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act Of 2002, makes provision for restricted medical use. Then sources the act at: http://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2002/ra_9165_2002.html If that act provides for, "restricted medical use," I certainly can't find it. Richard Mellon (talk) 09:10, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Preamble Section 2, "Declaration of Policy", the second sentence of the second paragraph; "The government shall however aim to achieve a balance in the national drug control program so that people with legitimate medical needs are not prevented from being treated with adequate amounts of appropriate medications, which include the use of dangerous drugs." The first paragraph of Article II, section 16, makes a general provision for the restricted cultivation of cannabis by sanctioned bodies for "experiments and research purposes, or for the creation of new types of medicine". Article IV Section 43(5) "School Curricula" makes provision for the "instruction" of students regarding "[m]isconceptions about the use of dangerous drugs such as, but not limited to, the importance and safety of dangerous drugs for medical and therapeutic use as well as the differentiation between medical patients and drug dependents in order to avoid confusion and accidental stigmatization in the consciousness of the students." There are more examples contained in this act as well, if you want to see them. cheers Deconstructhis (talk) 15:54, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry if my closing in that last posting sounded flip, it wasn't intended as such. Actually, your initial posting to the Philippines entry was spot on in terms of intention; we really do need more references directly from "legal sources" deriving the information from sources within the countries themselves; a reliable English translation of the relevant legislation isn't the easiest thing to locate I know; but it's definitely worth looking for; I appreciate the fact that you even tried. cheers Deconstructhis (talk) 17:37, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Very much appreciated.Richard Mellon (talk) 02:45, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Japan and 3rd column...

  • The heading ("illegal") in unclear.
  • The value of Japan ("who knows") is obviously not acceptable... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.72.153.173 (talk) 02:41, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Really dated source

Until I edited the Ecuador section just now, this source from fifteen years ago was being used to ref the cannabis laws of five countries. As I knew that Ecuador's situation had changed significantly in the interim, I fixed that entry; however, this same source is still being used to ref Bolivia, Paraguay, Uruguay, and Venezuela. It is entirely possible that their laws have also changed in the last fifteen years, if someone would like to take a look. Heather (talk) 03:21, 27 March 2010 (UTC)


Austria

Although the legal information is correct, it only applies for amounts above 3-7g in practise, everything above "geringe Mengen" (small amounts). The illegality of cannabis was never loosened by law though, but small amounts arent fined or prosecuted anymore. I suggest to edit the status to Decriminalized, because the situation is pretty similar to Germany's. --93.83.7.202 (talk) 22:21, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to point that out, I've wondered in the past if the Austrian situation in regard to cannabis is similar to the one in Germany. Unfortunately, if we don't have a reference to a "reliable source" that directly supports what you're saying, we can't use it in the article. If you can provide a reliable reference, please, by all means add it in either German or English. Many of our entries in this list are in all likelihood out of date;they don't reflect what the actual legal conditions currently are in a given country. Any help is appreciated. cheers Deconstructhis (talk) 01:11, 21 April 2010 (UTC)


Wait a Minute...

I thought it was only really illegal for Americans because of "big cigarette companies" and "government propaganda." Are all of these countries really enforcing their laws? Or am i just hearing urban legends about other countries? 71.51.50.38 (talk) 22:58, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Wrong information about Russia

This edit wrongly reverses my correction. Actually постановление Правительства Российской Федерации N 76 (7 feb 2006) changed that amount from 20 to 6 grams. This is correctly reflected in the main article but is wrong here. See also note about Russia earlier on this page. If no sources could be provided for correct info, it's better not to include any info at all than to have wrong and outdated info with sources. As an alternative I can link to russian version of law. --83.102.212.115 (talk) 07:47, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Please try to see this situation from the the perspective that another editor might have as they're examining your edits. Your initial "correction" [1] removed two references from the material altered a claimed amount and left the hidden editorial comment "Six grams since 2006!" Not exactly confidence inspiring in my opinion. My question to you is the following: instead of taking the time to leave me a rather tersely worded note on my talk page and then in turn post more remarks here; why didn't you simply take the time to replace the existing information for Russia with your newer data and the more reliable reference you're offering? I'd like to suggest that you might also want to add the same reference to the Russia section of the main article you're referring to; it appears to be completely unreferenced at the moment. I'm going to remove the second of the two references in the current version of the Russia entry on this page, because it appears to be wholly derived from the same medical article being utilized in the first reference; I'm then going to add a "dubious" template to the remaining reference based on what you're saying. Because my Russian language skills are non-existent, I'm going to leave it in your capable hands to alter the current version and add your new reference. thanks Deconstructhis (talk) 04:57, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
Um, okay, you are right - I should just add a source, and I've found one now. Pretty good one. But unsourced edit doesn't mean wrong edit anyway, and sources are often outdated. --83.102.212.115 (talk) 07:31, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Romania

Please update the page because posesion of Cannabis is fined only if the sources are divulged otherwise is penalized with jail (3-5 years). Everything is left to the latitude of the prosecutor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Djloststylez (talk • contribs) 09:50, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Please provide a reliable reference to support your claim. cheers Deconstructhis (talk) 13:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey

The law on durgs is quite shity. The same as russian. http://www.diicot.ro/ This is the legislator and enforcer of drug related offences. DRUGS AND TERRORISM :(

143th law from 2000: http://www.diicot.ro/pdf/legislatie/en/law_143_2000.pdf this is the link of the actual law on drugs in Romania.

Cannabis is listed as a high risk drug in RO. Consuming is enforced and there are many cases of jailed consumers. First time, it does matter if yo're caught with 1 gr VS 100 gr. But if yo're caught repeatedly, it wont matter anymore. More of that, the 16'th chapter tells that the source is divulged you will get half of the penalty. There is no fine. If you give your girlfriend a smoke from the joint and she goes to rat you out you will be liable for 10-20, but without reduction. Because "giving" is the 11th article and the half reduction is for the articles second to 10th

There is a 2009 movie about the law on drugs in romania "Politist, adjectiv" that shows the shitty realities of the law on drugs. 

 CHAPTER II
   Sanctioning traffic and other illicit operations with substances placed under national control
   ART. 2
   (1) Growing, production, manufacture, experimentation, extraction, preparation, processing, offering, 
    putting up for sale, sale, distribution, delivery either free of charge or for a consideration, dispatching, 
    transportation, procurement, purchase, holding or other operations related to risk drug circulation, without 
    legal right, shall be punishable by imprisonment from 3 to 15 years and the prohibition of certain rights.
   (2) If the actions stipulated under paragraph (1) refer to high-risk drugs, the sentence shall be 
   imprisonment from 10 to 20 years and prohibition of certain rights
  
   ART. 15
   No punishment shall be applied to a person who, before the criminal prosecution starts, denounces to 
   the competent authorities his/her participation in an association or in an agreement aimed at committing 
   one of the crimes stipulated under Articles 2 - 10, thus allowing the competent authorities to identify and 
   hold the other participants criminally accountable.
  
   ART. 16
   The person who has committed one of the crimes stipulated under Articles 2 - 10 and who, during the 
   criminal prosecution, denounces and facilitates the identification and holding criminally accountable of 
   other persons who have committed drug-related crimes shall benefit from a reduction by half of the 
   sentence limits stipulated by the law.

The legalization proposals are electoral scams. :( "EBA" is one of the daughters of the actual president. She is truly stupid and illiterate, and her comment on cannabis law was just an election strategy. Many "rasta like romanians" believed that the candidate (actual president) will change the law and voted with him. And.. guess what :D... a bit political ..but it is the truth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.114.117.211 (talk) 21:14, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Italy

Ever heard of a country called Italy ? Anybody ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.173.29.135 (talk) 18:02, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

That's the one that looks sort of like a boot, right? cheers Deconstructhis (talk) 18:40, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
Is that where pizza comes from? 66.158.181.133 (talk) 22:55, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Sure this is right?

"Decriminalized/Illegal to tourist from end of 2090" Is it really supposed to be 2090? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.233.54 (talk) 00:02, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Greece

Greece decriminalized possession and use of cannabis a few days ago, Please check it out. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.176.193.3 (talk) 16:56, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Use?

As I have understood it, in most countries usage is in itself seldom criminalized. Although it is in at least Sweden. Is a separate column for "use" warranted? Steinberger (talk) 18:14, 22 March 2011 (UTC) It has been illegal to use in Sweden since 1988 (confirmed by Swedish Wikipedia) if I remember it correctly, hell, the police will even bust you for having certain substances CONNECTED to drug use in your blood. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.69.86.28 (talk) 13:38, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Ecuador

Although the legal information is correct, it fails to mention the mandatory rehabilitation in what really amounts to a jail for one year. In practice the law is not respected by consumers or the police. Many people toke here and it is easy enough to buy in the tourist zone of Quito and certain commercial areas, dealers sell fairly openly in the street. However when the police catch someone they usually insist that there is in fact a jail term for possession (it is called rehabilitation but it really is not that different from jail, you can´t leave and are highly controlled in such institutions) bribes are a common thing. The reliable source to refer to is the law itself, in the consitution it says clearly that it is not a "delito" or crime, however mandatory rehab is not fun. However there is a law going through our "assemblea" (congress) that will depenalize small amounts of all drugs and it should pass within a few months (the government supports the measure and has sufficient support to see it through)

190.131.126.95 (talk) 19:27, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Ambiguity - Cannabis the plant or drug?

I interpret cannabis to mean the plant. And previous editors have so interpreted it, as seen by the comments about fiber, seed, and medicinal use. If so, let's be consistant. In that case, cannabis is legal in most nation-states, at least for producing fiber and seed. Thus the most common rating would be something like "Legal except for recreational drug products." I propose that we have columns for fiber, seed, medical, and recreational. (Hemp producers: Canada, Finland, Romania, China, Thailand, France, plus many more. America is one of the few industrialized nations of the world that still does not grow hemp.) PhilLiberty (talk) 05:26, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

What you are referring to would be the legality of Industrial Hemp production, which usually only applies to a very specific species of Cannabis, specifically varieties of the species Cannabis sativa. The production and personal possession of other types of Cannabis would still be illegal in those countries.--voodoom (talk) 07:31, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

In the UK, 'cannabis' is a 'controlled drug' under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, and legal growers aiming to produce non-drug fibre have licences issued under the act by the Home Office
Licences do require use of low-THC strains, but if non-drug fibre is the intended product then the growers will tend not to want plants to flower anyway
It is the flowers that have the drug content, and the non-drug fibre content of the plant starts to get past its best when the plant starts to flower
Laurel Bush (talk) 12:34, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

UK & Sativex - government and GW Pharma acting illegally?

See my Sativex: a new tincture of cannabis article at http://www.spanglefish.com/laurelbush/index.asp?pageid=375588
GW Pharma Limited may be breaking the law by producing and supplying cannabis while pretending it is some other substance, and the UK government may be acting illegally also, by providing GW with unique, secret licences to produce and supply the cannabis
Laurel Bush (talk) 12:40, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Venezuela

It says As of September 15, 2010 possession of up to 20 grams of Marijuana or 5 grams of genetically modified Marijuana, however, there is no such thing as genetically modified marijuana. In terms of cannabis that has been genetically modified to produce a plant with higher amounts of THC, then I can tell you this does not exist. I suppose it might be theoretically possible but the costs involved to produce such a plant would be astronomical and what would be the point when the same thing can and has been easily achieved by cross breeding? This is an error entry is an error in my opinion. Christopherbrian (talk) 13:10, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Illegal but often not enforced

Does this refer to the amount of police intervention and/or arrest relative to illicit marijuana activity? If so, how can this be ascertained? Perhaps we can be provided with a proper definition of "illegal but often not enforced". Blueneondot (talk) 16:53, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

South Korea

For some reason, it is not listed anywhere in the table. At the same time, the map shows "red" or "illegal" for South Korea. Should add South Korea to table. I will if I find sufficient sources, otherwise hope someone rectifies this omission Harel (talk) 21:44, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

PERU

weed and other drugs are legal in peru for personal use

article 296, 299 peruvian Penal Code

please color peru on the map as it currently stands, it shows no info.


296 del Código Penal, constituyen delito las siguientes conductas:

1) Promover, favorecer o facilitar el consumo ilegal de drogas mediante actos de fabricación o tráfico; 2) Poseer drogas para su venta (tráfico); 3) Comercializar insumos destinados a la elaboración ilegal de droga;

4) Comercializar o cultivar amapola o marihuana u obligar a su siembra o procesamiento;

5) Elaborar o comercializar insumos químicos y productos. En materia de tráfico ilícito de drogas existen dos modalidades: la promoción o favorecimiento al tráfico y la microcomercialización (venta de drogas ilícitas a pequeña escala – hasta 50 g de PBC, 25 g de clorhidrato de cocaína, 5 g de látex de opio, 100 g de marihuana o 2 g de éxtasis).

El artículo 299 referente a la posesión no punible establece lo siguiente:

¨No es punible la posesión de droga para el propio e inmediato consumo, en cantidad que no exceda de cinco gramos de pasta básica de cocaína, dos gramos de clorhidrato de cocaína, ocho gramos de marihuana o dos gramos de sus derivados, un gramo de látex de opio o doscientos miligramos de sus derivados o doscientos cincuenta miligramos de éxtasis, conteniendo Metilendioxianfetamina – MDA, Metilendioxianfetamina, MDMA, Metanfetamina o sustancias análogas.(Artículo modificado por el Artículo 2 del Decreto Legislativo N° 982, publicado el 22 julio 2007).

Se excluye de los alcances de lo establecido en el párrafo precedente la posesión de dos o más tipos de drogas.¨ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.238.183.206 (talk) 08:56, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Uruguay

Going to Legalise it over there, just a matter of signing it into law now. ASpaceOdyssey (ASpaceOdyssey 15:01, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Argentina

There was a supreme court case hearing this issue. According to the Huffington Post « In 2009, Argentina's Supreme Court legalized the private use of marijuana in small amounts, ruling that it would be 'unconstitutional' to ban it. » Argentina. This should be marked green on the map. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.45.79.153 (talk) 04:00, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Changing columns

This page is obviously in need of some work - updating, better sources, filling in missing entries, etc. I might try and do some of this when I have time. Before I do that though, it seems like it would be a good idea to change around the columns a bit.

First of all, do we need a "transport" column? I assume that refers to international trafficking, otherwise we're just talking about possession in a moving vehicle or sale. But besides being ambiguous it's universally illegal (if we're talking about international trafficking), and makes a lot less difference to residents and tourists than the legality of possession, cultivation, and sale. If we did away with that, we would have more room for a "medicinal" column, given there's a lot more variation and movement in the legality of medicinal cannabis throughout the world. This would probably be more useful to readers.

I also think we could do with an "As of" column with the month and year the information for each country was last updated. The usability of this page relies on the reader being able to easily ascertain how current the information is, and at the moment it's all over the place.

I was going to go ahead and make these changes, but I wanted to check if there was any opposition first because it will be quite a bit of work. TimofKingsland (talk) 13:00, 19 November 2013 (UTC) [Slightly edited for clarity at 14:12, 19 November 2013 (UTC)]

Bangladesh is missing

Bangladesh is not listed in the table. --94.253.207.8 (talk) 09:04, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Merge

Shouldn't this page be merged with Legal and medical status of cannabis? - there's quite a bit of overlap 2.222.197.88 (talk) 02:19, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Canadian Sale Decriminalized

No, no it isn't. This has been pointed out and corrected before, but some stoned fool must keep changing it. Nothing against getting stoned, just don't toke and edit. And in case this isn't clear, Canada is listed as having decriminalized sale of Cannabis, this is false. See http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-38.8/page-3.html#docCont — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.56.250.16 (talk) 03:47, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Germany

"Possession of small amounts of marijuana/hashish was ruled legal by the German Federal Constitutional Court in 1994." This is not entirely accurate. Possession of small amounts of marijuana/hashish is still illegal in Germany. The German Federal Constitutional Court ruled that charges should be dropped in those cases. http://user.cs.tu-berlin.de/~eikes/faq.html#22 --78.54.218.97 (talk) 17:34, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Actually, the possession of 'geringe Menge' (german: 'small amounts') - loosely defined at the federal level as amounts, 'die für den offenkundigen Eigenbedarf sind' (german: 'for amounts that that are obviously for personal use'; grabbed from the German page with a bundesland specific citation from NRW, because I don't feel like sifting through German constitutional orders right now: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rechtliche_Aspekte_von_Cannabis#Geringe_Menge) - is not prosecuted, by constitutional order, which makes it decriminalized for personal use according to bundesland legislation (even in Bavaria of all places). I was extremely surprised to see that such a large mistake exists here. Talonxpool (talk) 20:17, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

As far as I know from newspaper articles, Czechs traveling through Bavaria are commonly prosecuted for such things as having a joint or a small knife (i.e. apple cutter). The Constitutional court might have ruled one way, but on the base level, it seems that people are harrased by the authorities all the same. Cimmerian praetor (talk) 20:01, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
The legal terms 'geringe Menge' (German: 'small amounts') and 'Eigenbedarf' (German: personal use) are left to be defined by each German state and definitions vary (Bavaria is actually the most strict, Berlin the least strict). In any case it is fully illegal to drive under the influence of marijuana in Germany (which is tested with a sweat test that does not differentiate between immediate and 24-48 hours of last use or decided on by possession in a vehicle) with penalties including having your drivers license taken away, fines, and prosecution. In any case Bavaria is the Texas of Germany, taking the example from Bavaria and generalizing to all of Germany is a hilarious exercise in ignorance. In any event, unfortunately we do not live in a world in which ethics and legality are descriptions of each other, in Bavaria, even less so. It is however true that harassment is common in Bavaria, but this does not equal illegal. I will be amending the possession box for Germany with detailed information about the legality in the next couple of days, it would be nice if we could get a native German to check my work. I will go to the German page and ask for help there. Talonxpool (talk) 10:25, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Russia

Information on Russia is not true.

1) Cannabis IS NOT LEGAL (even in small quentities). Criminal penalty code (УК РФ) specifies criminal penalty only for "large amounts", althouth there also exist "Administrative code" (КОАП РФ), which specifies (article 6.8) an administrative fine up to 1500 roubles (approx $50) for storage of any amount. Reference: http://www.zakonrf.info/koap/6.8/ Translation: http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.zakonrf.info%2Fkoap%2F6.8%2F

So it must be specified at least "Decriminalized (in small quantities)", but not "legal".


2) The large doses. The large dose really is 6g for dried cannabis (as in the current version of article), and 2g for hashish (shoud be added to the article). The reference is the same as already specified: (40) http://www.law.edu.ru/norm/norm.asp?normID=1277784&subID=100136337,100136338

IMHO there is no need for subject history (what was the large dose before 2006). Not for this article.

3) Even the status "decriminalized" may be potentionally misleading (for example, for a tourist). Because the reality in Russia may differ heavily from the law. In fact, possesiion of even small quantities can be very dangerous here. If one is cautht by police ("militia") with any dose of cannabis, he will be eigther accused on drug trade, and/or will have any missing amount added so the dose becomes large (that all to effectively extort a bribe for release). The police in russia is highly corrupted, that is common knowledge (you can just google it: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:ru:official&hs=qUr&ei=u-ISS7r8GdHA-QbNsZT2Dg&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&ved=0CAwQBSgA&q=police+in+russia+corruption&spell=1). I believe the information above can be admitted by any russian wikipedia member, although it may be difficult to verify by recpectful references. Maybe the community will help here, how to write this part of article, so that if complied with wilipedia rules, but at the same time was not misleading? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.24.97.228 (talk) 21:14, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

4) How is there a marijuana retail chain opening in Russia? What is the status of the law there? Right now the article says "illegal," but that can't be right if this article is correct - http://www.newsbcm.com/doc/726. -DarthTaper (talk) 22:56, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

I think its possibly a really badly translated article or a hoax of some sort, at least that final paragraph of the piece appears to be. I did a little back reading in Russian news stories from over the past six months or so on the subject, and if anything, that last paragraph in the story you linked, puts forward exactly the opposite conclusion to what other sources are saying about the current legal status of marijuana in the country. There actually appears to have been some sort of crackdown on pot in Russia at the end of last year. Check out the stories from the past few months at this link for instance: [2] cheers Deconstructhis (talk) 01:00, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

5) I've updated info with references to most recent law. Law in Russia changes often. Law is relatively liberal, small amounts are decriminalized. But, as correctly stated above, police is corrupt, and whole legal system is corrupt too. So reality differs from theory, and actual cannabis situation in Russia is far from being liberal, and Russia in general has very strict and prohibitionist drug policies. But in this article we are talking about law, not reality. --Varnav (talk) 05:37, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

the Netherlands

I just noticed how the section about the Netherlands state possession is "legal". Whilst enforcement is rare to non-existent when not having more than 5 grams of Marijuana, it is not technically legal; more decriminalized like other countries show. The government does not wish to prosecute for such small amounts, but may indeed confiscate. (There is an article explaining it; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gedogen) In fact, in certain areas like "the biblebelt": the cannabis products will always be confiscated, no matter how low the amount is that is being carried. And if you're very unlucky in such areas: you will be taken in for questioning and a peptalk. (No detainment will follow, though.) So: possession is actually illegal, but due to the "gedoogbeleid", prosecution will never follow when it concerns certain quantities. I fail to see how this is different than some other countries that state "decriminalized" and explain how certain amounts are considered personal use and will not result in prosecution, or rarely. Cannabis is not truly legal in the Netherlands at all... Despite this common misconception existing wide spread across the globe.

Next to that, the cultivation is legal to some extent; yet when drying the plants and thus obtaining good amounts of dried cannabis: one is violating the law; one is in possession of high amounts of cannabis and this could be seen as for sale. Whilst, yet again, the government will rarely prosecute when it concerns less than 5 plants, and its harvest, and there is no proof one is selling: they may still, and not rarely will, confiscate all the plants and the product it produced...

... Does that really constitute the term "Legal", for possession? Maybe I missed something in the local laws of the Netherlands, but I fail to see how this is "legal" instead of "decriminalized". There is no law that actually states possession is legal, only that they will turn a blind eye. (Reserving the right to prosecute, basically.)

Other than that, the policy in the Netherlands has been degrading significantly due to efforts from, amongst others, now minister Ivo Opstelten. This might require a revision to the general "policy in the Netherlands" page as the Netherlands appear to be going in the opposite direction of what it was once world-renowned for.

ViraTech (talk) 05:53, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Iran

I live in Iran. this: "Growing cannabis is legal if planted for food purposes as the seeds are eaten by the Iranian people, and companies often draw oil from the seeds which is sold legally" is absolutely incorrect.

Growth , Transport, sale and possession of cannabis are all Illegal in Iran, and are punished by jail time. I don't know where this information came from but I am certain that no one eats or draws oil from the seeds in Iran!

Once the police suspected that somewhere in Qalat someone is cultivating in his own yard, they checked the whole area out from above with a helicopter to find them!

Kasaie (talk) 20:53, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello Kasaie. Often times, you can tell where the information comes from by looking for a superscript number in brackets at the end of the sentence, such as "[15]". When you click on the number, it takes you to the source for the information. As you can see if you look at the sentence, the source from the information comes from http://webehigh.org/tehran-iran/. That link says that cannabis in Iran is decriminalized. However, I don't believe that that link is a reliable source, so I will remove the information on Iran from this article. Thank you for pointing this out. Trinitresque (talk) 20:55, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

It is not legal

Inconsistencies

Hello everyone,

Why is this page so inconsistent with the "legal/illegal/decriminalized" classification? For example, the Netherlands is listed as "Legal" with the sidenote that it's only truly legal in Smoking areas. (Decriminalized elsewhere) Spain has the same, but for Spain it's suddenly "Illegal (decriminalized)"

The sale is listed as "legal" in the Netherlands, but it's only legal for the shops in the Netherlands. Thus, making it illegal with exceptions (decriminalized).

In the US, the federal level might state "illegal", but there are the states that do have shops, allow possession, allow cultivation etc. In the Netherlands, in some municipalities: shops are not tolerated and thus illegal. (Even possessing it will lead to some annoyance from the cops; mainly in the bible belt.) So you could consider it somewhat the same situation. Yet again, in the Netherlands it's somehow considered "Legal"; whilst in the US it is "Illegal". And don't make a mistake here, because on an official level: the Netherlands still classifies cannabis as illegal, due to some international treaties. (That the Dutch created a secondary law with some odd exceptions just to work around this, doesn't mean that from a law point of view: it's illegal, but decriminalized.)

The same goes for some other countries. For some countries, the label "illegal" (in red) has been noted down; whilst other countries with similar laws/acts are set as "Illegal (decriminalized)" (in another color.)

It's strange, to me. In all honesty, looking over the policy of the Netherlands and that of the United States for example: it would seem the USA has surpassed the Netherlands in what it does and does not allow in a growing amount of states. Yet for the Netherlands it's all classified as "Legal", whilst it's in reality only "Decriminalized" and absolutely *not* 100% legal. Get caught in possession? You can still have it taken from you. And by law, you could actually still get a fine/imprisonment. (Never done, but it's possible...)

It's de-facto legal in NL, but that still makes it decriminalized rather than actually legal. It looks like a similar comment was made a while ago, but the changes have been reverted.

Anyway, so the biggest weirdness seems to center itself around the Netherlands on this page where it concerns inconsistencies compared to the rest. But there are still multiple other things that don't seem to match up.

178.84.92.26 (talk) 03:09, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Wichita, Kansas

FYI. Voters approved reduced penalties for first-time marijuana possession in Wichita, Kansas. The ordinance is in legal limbo because "City laws can't trump State laws". This is similar to "State laws can't trump Federal laws", though it didn't stop multiple States ignoring USA Federal law. See newspaper article 1 and article 2. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 09:46, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Malta and Cyprus

The map is outdated and / or wrong, as many people have pointed out. I found two more errors regarding Malta and Cyprus - in both countries it is totally illegal and will land you in jail for even the smallest amounts. Rigid enforcement by police and justice system! Sniffer dogs at border crossings et cetera! And in occupied Northern Cyprus it is just as illegal as in the free South. -- Alexey Topol (talk) 22:31, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Russia

"Cannabis seeds contain no controlled substances and are not regulated. As a matter of fact, possession, cultivation or even use of any quantities of marijuana is heavily prosecuted."

If possession, cultivation and use of ANY quantity is heavily prosecuted, then why does it state it's decriminalized up to 6 grams...? This is confusing. 178.85.187.149 (talk) 04:10, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

The use of the map and accuracy of information visually depicted on it

I would like to make a comment about the accuracy of the adjacent map, which is used in both the Legality of cannabis article and this one; in Romania, the use of marijuana is not even remotely treated lightly. The law regarding the production, import, distribution, sale and consumption of cannabis is enforced to its fullest extent (and according to some sources, perhaps too harshly!). Although I cannot comment on the accuracy and precision of the rest of the map, I believe this is not the only complaint brought to the editors' attention; considering that the map has been labeled as a potential work stemming from original research (and considering Wikipedia's no OR policy) and appears to be insufficiently referenced, can something be done about that? I agree that an imperfect map is better than no map, but it really gives off the wrong impression about an entire social and legal array of things. Considering that a similar objection has been raised in relation a number of other countries and territories, are there any objections if the map is removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thevaluablediamond (talk • contribs) 11:13, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Spain

Its legal to grow in spain, someone add it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.194.133.220 (talk) 19:00, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Where do we go about saying that it is a 'constitutional right'? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.90.87.26 (talk) 15:07, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

There is nothing said about a limit of 2 plants in Spanish law. 83.60.242.125 (talk) 21:13, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Bangladesh is not in the table

Bangladesh is represented as a country on the map where cannabis is legal. However, for some reason, it's not in the table.81.154.59.151 (talk) 10:56, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

table

The giant table is really unwieldy. Would anyone mind if it was changed to normal sections, with colored tables only used on top of the sections? --Joy [shallot] (talk) 18:17, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

I totally agree, and might do this myself, if I had time. --Keeves (talk) 20:07, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Random table header italics removed

While fixing a malformed Flag header in the table, I noticed several other country headings were italicized. Examination of the intro text & the Talk page yielded no intent for italics as a differentiation method, so the italicized header markups are being removed per WP:MOS. — DennisDallas (talk) 17:40, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Costa Rica

Recreational cannabis, and cultivation for personal use, is defacto legal in Costa Rica:

"a person planting marijuana in his/her home for personal use and discovered by police, will not face criminal or economic sanctions". ... The lawyers point out that the only thing authorities can do if they find marijuana crops for personal consumption is confiscate and in some cases, destroy them as dictated in Article 137 of the General Health Law (Ley General de Salud). Lawyer José Miguel Villalobos, emphasized that “the mere fact of planting is not a crime.”

--Timeshifter (talk) 14:15, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Legality of cannabis by country. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:53, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Checks OK. Param set. — DennisDallas (talk) 16:43, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Contradictory information about Bangladesh

According to the table cannabis is illegal in Bangladesh, but the map shows it as legal.--2604:2000:C54F:E500:5DCD:EA4A:CF32:4650 (talk) 15:35, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

China

Is there any source for medical cannabis being illegal in China? Article 2 of the Anti-drug Law provides for blanket medical (and research) exemptions unless another regulation explicitly prohibits a certain drug. In fact, Chinese companies/individuals/governments holds many patents on medicinal cannabis [3]. If no one can provide any source for another regulation, I will edit it.--Zhantongz (talk) 01:02, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Legality of cannabis by country. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:55, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Legality_of_cannabis_by_country/Archive_1&oldid=1028812614"