6 ms·

How is the US travel situation with Canada any different to someone coming from say the Netherlands? Regarding pilots, Transport Canada, the governing body ove

by verelo 8y ago

How is the US travel situation with Canada any different to someone coming from say the Netherlands? Regarding pilots, Transport Canada, the governing body over federal aviation regulations has explicitly come out and said use of Canabis is valid grounds for a revoked medical certificate, which is required for any pilot to fly. While the airline rules are one thing, this is a very serious implication for pilots.

clomond 8y ago
One major thing that comes to mind is that cannabis is still technically illegal in the Netherlands. Instead there is a distinction of "soft drugs" and "hard drugs" and authorities follow a policy of non-enforcement in many (but not all) cases. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_the_Netherlands#Non-enforcement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_the_Netherlands... In Canada cannabis has become legal in a manner similar to alcohol, making the difference.
- JPKab 8y ago
  Interestingly to me, it seems that the broader international audience on HN has absolutely no idea that individual states in the USA have fully legalized and regulated cannabis. Colorado (where I live) has done so for 4 years, and California, Nevada, to name a few, have followed suit.
  - softawre 8y ago
    We know, it's just that it is still illegal at the federal level. It's similar to the non-prosecution agreement mentioned in the Netherlands above.
    - jerrysievert 8y ago
      > It's similar to the non-prosecution agreement mentioned in the Netherlands above not necessarily. in Oregon, it is tracked, taxed, and regulated. one can still grow their own and remove themselves from the tracking, but this is for personal consumption not for sale. there is still enforcement, and cooperation with the federal levels, specifically to help curb the black market and the problems that arise due to the black market. one example of a difference would be the airport - you can fly in Oregon with cannabis, as long as you are under the legal limit to carry and are flying within the state (not crossing any borders). if the TSA (federal employees) are concerned about how much you are carrying or that you are not old enough, they will detain you long enough for local authorities to check, then release you and whatever legal amount you have with you to fly (if you are over the limit, you are asked to dispose of it, much like having too much liquid in your carry-on). this differs quite a bit to pre-legalization, where non-prosecution was more likely if you were white and in a larger city such as Portland. the limits are for federal property, which falls under federal law, crossing borders, which again falls under federal law, and black market activities, which are illegal under state laws, and likely include crossing of borders or federal land (quite a lot of forests in the United States are federally owned).
      - derefr 8y ago
        The major practical difference to the average American citizen, is that the FDA is a federal organization, and so must still follow the federal ruleset when licensing drugs, even for products that will only be sold within a given state. If an Oregon pharmaceutical company wanted to try to put THC in a pill; do a study for its positive effects against, say, anxiety; and then get it bottled and sold at drug stores—they still wouldn't be able to, because, even if the government of Oregon would love for them to do so, the Oregon state legislature isn't responsible for allowing or disallowing that to happen. Whereas, if a Canadian pharmaceutical company now wants to attempt to get a cannabis byproduct licensed for prescription or OTC usage in Canada, they now totally can.
        jerrysievert 8y ago
        > Whereas, if a Canadian pharmaceutical company now wants to attempt to get a cannabis byproduct licensed for prescription or OTC usage in Canada, they now totally can. you are absolutely correct, but I was only addressing the note that state legalization is equivalent to looking the other way in the Netherlands, which was the opinion of OP. I very much look forward to the research that Canadian companies are able to do, specifically with other cannabinoids other than thc.
  - amscanne 8y ago
    Just to be pedantic, Washington was the first state to legalize for recreational use (by 4 days), so Colorado was also following suit ;)
giarc 8y ago
Here are a few points by the CBC. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener-waterloo/cannabis-5-things-about-international-travel-1.4860241 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener-waterloo/cannabis-5... Basically don't cross an international border with weed. From the above article "This is the case even if you are travelling to places like The Netherlands or Uruguay that have decriminalized or legalized cannabis."
A2017U1 8y ago
Pilots are in short supply worldwide, any country creating further restrictions is going to obviously face even more supply problems. Get the feeling it will pass unnoticed, like many regulations that don't make sense it's far easier to let it slide rather than change the rules.
- todd3834 8y ago
  I’m surprised to hear that pilots are in short supply. I started learning to fly as a hobby and I saw many videos about how hard it is to get a job at a commercial airline. I got the impression that there is more supply than there is demand.
  - verelo 8y ago
    Depends where you are. In Asia this is very true, in North America it's not true at all. Source: I'm a pilot.
  - borkt 8y ago
    Getting the necessary time in complex aircraft has gotten almost prohibitively expensive. I also believe the military is creating less pilots as a result of having fewer and fewer airframes. I wanted to be a pilot and pursued an Air National Guard C-17 squadron, but to get the hours they were looking for would have required me to be independently wealthy. And if you go the civilian route, you end up flying for a regional with hopes it doesn't get bought out before you get enough PIC time to be competitive for one of the majors. And that is while making 20k-30k anually for 5-10 years.
  - mrguyorama 8y ago
    Pilots aren't in short supply. Pilots willing to accrue $40k in dept for the necessary education to then get paid $25k a year are very much in short supply. Many regional pilots are on food stamps. This is the reason I currently write software instead of flying commercial airplanes.
    - softawre 8y ago
upofadown 8y ago
It's a bit more passive than that for the aviation stuff. Transport Canada has decided not to change the current policy. That's a bit surprising. A cynical person might think that they were just too slow to come up with such a policy and that there might be one showing up later. Cannabis is not explicitly mentioned in the regulations and is lumped in with any drug, legal or not, that can cause impairment.

by verelo 8y ago

clomond 8y ago

One major thing that comes to mind is that cannabis is still technically illegal in the Netherlands. Instead there is a distinction of "soft drugs" and "hard drugs" and authorities follow a policy of non-enforcement in many (but not all) cases. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_the_Netherlands#Non-enforcement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_the_Netherlands... In Canada cannabis has become legal in a manner similar to alcohol, making the difference.

JPKab 8y ago
Interestingly to me, it seems that the broader international audience on HN has absolutely no idea that individual states in the USA have fully legalized and regulated cannabis. Colorado (where I live) has done so for 4 years, and California, Nevada, to name a few, have followed suit.
- softawre 8y ago
  We know, it's just that it is still illegal at the federal level. It's similar to the non-prosecution agreement mentioned in the Netherlands above.
  - jerrysievert 8y ago
    > It's similar to the non-prosecution agreement mentioned in the Netherlands above not necessarily. in Oregon, it is tracked, taxed, and regulated. one can still grow their own and remove themselves from the tracking, but this is for personal consumption not for sale. there is still enforcement, and cooperation with the federal levels, specifically to help curb the black market and the problems that arise due to the black market. one example of a difference would be the airport - you can fly in Oregon with cannabis, as long as you are under the legal limit to carry and are flying within the state (not crossing any borders). if the TSA (federal employees) are concerned about how much you are carrying or that you are not old enough, they will detain you long enough for local authorities to check, then release you and whatever legal amount you have with you to fly (if you are over the limit, you are asked to dispose of it, much like having too much liquid in your carry-on). this differs quite a bit to pre-legalization, where non-prosecution was more likely if you were white and in a larger city such as Portland. the limits are for federal property, which falls under federal law, crossing borders, which again falls under federal law, and black market activities, which are illegal under state laws, and likely include crossing of borders or federal land (quite a lot of forests in the United States are federally owned).
    - derefr 8y ago
      The major practical difference to the average American citizen, is that the FDA is a federal organization, and so must still follow the federal ruleset when licensing drugs, even for products that will only be sold within a given state. If an Oregon pharmaceutical company wanted to try to put THC in a pill; do a study for its positive effects against, say, anxiety; and then get it bottled and sold at drug stores—they still wouldn't be able to, because, even if the government of Oregon would love for them to do so, the Oregon state legislature isn't responsible for allowing or disallowing that to happen. Whereas, if a Canadian pharmaceutical company now wants to attempt to get a cannabis byproduct licensed for prescription or OTC usage in Canada, they now totally can.
      - jerrysievert 8y ago
        > Whereas, if a Canadian pharmaceutical company now wants to attempt to get a cannabis byproduct licensed for prescription or OTC usage in Canada, they now totally can. you are absolutely correct, but I was only addressing the note that state legalization is equivalent to looking the other way in the Netherlands, which was the opinion of OP. I very much look forward to the research that Canadian companies are able to do, specifically with other cannabinoids other than thc.
- amscanne 8y ago
  Just to be pedantic, Washington was the first state to legalize for recreational use (by 4 days), so Colorado was also following suit ;)

giarc 8y ago

Here are a few points by the CBC. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener-waterloo/cannabis-5-things-about-international-travel-1.4860241 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/kitchener-waterloo/cannabis-5... Basically don't cross an international border with weed. From the above article "This is the case even if you are travelling to places like The Netherlands or Uruguay that have decriminalized or legalized cannabis."

A2017U1 8y ago

Pilots are in short supply worldwide, any country creating further restrictions is going to obviously face even more supply problems. Get the feeling it will pass unnoticed, like many regulations that don't make sense it's far easier to let it slide rather than change the rules.

todd3834 8y ago
I’m surprised to hear that pilots are in short supply. I started learning to fly as a hobby and I saw many videos about how hard it is to get a job at a commercial airline. I got the impression that there is more supply than there is demand.
- verelo 8y ago
  Depends where you are. In Asia this is very true, in North America it's not true at all. Source: I'm a pilot.
- borkt 8y ago
  Getting the necessary time in complex aircraft has gotten almost prohibitively expensive. I also believe the military is creating less pilots as a result of having fewer and fewer airframes. I wanted to be a pilot and pursued an Air National Guard C-17 squadron, but to get the hours they were looking for would have required me to be independently wealthy. And if you go the civilian route, you end up flying for a regional with hopes it doesn't get bought out before you get enough PIC time to be competitive for one of the majors. And that is while making 20k-30k anually for 5-10 years.
- mrguyorama 8y ago
  Pilots aren't in short supply. Pilots willing to accrue $40k in dept for the necessary education to then get paid $25k a year are very much in short supply. Many regional pilots are on food stamps. This is the reason I currently write software instead of flying commercial airplanes.
  - softawre 8y ago

upofadown 8y ago

It's a bit more passive than that for the aviation stuff. Transport Canada has decided not to change the current policy. That's a bit surprising. A cynical person might think that they were just too slow to come up with such a policy and that there might be one showing up later. Cannabis is not explicitly mentioned in the regulations and is lumped in with any drug, legal or not, that can cause impairment.