My late father was born early enough to remember mail-order catalogues offering THC capsules to people who were having trouble sleeping or eating.

It worked, obviously. THC, or tetrahydrocannabinol, is the active ingredient in cannabis, and while the term "the munchies" didn't exist in rural Ontario during the first two decades of the 20th century, that's what the catalogues were selling. That, and a nice buzz.

Anyway, Dad said it was elderly people, farmers worn out by a life of hard labour, who used the capsules, and no one connected the drug to murder, insanity, death or the rape of white women by members of other races.

Then, in 1923, Canada lost its mind, bought the murder, rape and insanity thing, and criminalized cannabis, and for the next 93 years — to this very day — has persecuted heaven knows how many people, ruining lives, ending careers, denying comfort to the ill, and actually sending people to the horror of prison, all for something most smart people knew all along is a piddling, victimless act.

Lives ruined

Of course, most victims of this were young people, who are more easily caught than adults with private homes. Or minorities, because they're shaken down far more often by police.

And the stinking hypocrisy was that plenty of politicians, including prime ministers, and plenty of police, and plenty of judges had, at one time or another, smoked a joint themselves, but remained willing to continue wrecking other people's lives for doing the same thing.

Few had the courage to speak out.

Twenty years or so ago, doing a documentary on cannabis, I spoke to a man who, as a university law student in 1979, had persuaded the Joe Clark government to propose decriminalization in the speech from the throne. (When I asked Clark many years later what happened to that initiative, he answered: "Ronald Reagan happened.")

But would that former law student talk on the record? Umm, no. Because, you see, he'd become a Crown attorney, and although he assured me his views had not changed, the police wouldn't appreciate them.

I also called a judge (later to become a much more senior and famous judge) who, in her student days, had advocated for reform of marijuana laws. Would she speak? Please don't mention me, she said.
Ditto a federal public servant who'd once headed the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) in 1979. He was just plain scared by 1993; he hung up on me.

I even approached former justice minister Kim Campbell, running for prime minister at the time, to ask if she'd ever smoked pot. Yes, she said haughtily, but if you understand the law, Mr. Macdonald, you'll know I never violated it, because I never possessed the drug. It was passed to me. (The Mounties instantly disagreed with her legal opinion.)

It was a variation on Bill Clinton's not inhaling. Ridiculous, almost cowardly. Or Barack Obama, who admitted cocaine use in a memoir, then oversaw national crackdowns on pot.

Which brings us to Justin Trudeau. Let's be clear here: He openly acknowledged having used cannabis, and decided not just to decriminalize it, but to outright legalize it.

Good for Justin Trudeau. That took guts. That's called courageous leadership.

• Pot task force releases recommendations
• Shares of marijuana companies rise

Conservatives, of course, will screech about this, until they shut up and accept it, the way they've given up fighting gay marriage.

But the weird thing is that legalization of marijuana is, strictly speaking, a conservative idea. Conservatives are, or are supposed to be, laissez-faire.

It's liberals who desperately want to use government to protect people from themselves.

Disclosure here: I enthusiastically smoked cannabis for years, until I stopped. It weirds me out now, and I can't handle it. It never made me want to try heroin, though, or rape anybody, or steal to get my pot fix. I am 100 per cent sure alcohol and tobacco, the single most preventable cause of cancer, did me far more damage. Let the government outlaw tobacco if it's so concerned about public health.

Big money

We are still in bizzaro world, by the way. We're supposed to be so much more progressive than the Americans, and yet hundreds of millions of Americans live in states where possession of cannabis is completely legal, or an offence that merits nothing more than a traffic ticket. At the same time, the Americans will bar a Canadian from the U.S. for life for admitting ever having smoked dope, and may continue to do so, especially under their bizarro-world new president.

And don't forget, there's a hell of a lot of money at stake here. Police, who have for decades inflated their budgets by busting kids for pot during the "war on drugs," are no doubt having urgent discussions with their political masters about keeping those budgets intact.

And of course other public servants are licking their chops at the prospect of enlarging their departments.

The Liquor Control Board of Ontario is already waving its hand around anxiously. The recommendation of the federal task force that marijuana be sold in a separate facility from alcohol is even better; new LCBOs (MCBOs?) can be built, and all sorts more staff hired, thereby grossly inflating the price of a joint. It's the Canadian way.

No doubt some LCBO executives are already planning glossy monthly magazines suggesting pairings of Thai-stick or Maui Wowee with a nice leg of lamb or a risotto. The governments that sent people to prison for pot will be promoting it. Shamelessness always pays.

You can bet a month's pay that conservative corporate Canada is already planning to elbow aside the funky little shops selling things like "purple kush" and the "edibles" bakeries, the sort that operate in Colorado and Washington. We don't want to be having too much fun.

Here's something else you can count on: tax, and lots of it. This week's task force recommendations even proposed taxing more potent pot more heavily. For everyone's safety, of course.
Nothing ever really changes.

Oh, and one other thing: once legalization happens, anybody with a marijuana-related criminal record should be pardoned.

• Canadians evenly split on recreational marijuana: Survey

This column is an opinion. For more information about our commentary section, please read this editor's blog and our FAQ.

Al Larocque says he's always been truthful when crossing the border.

But if the Fruitvale, B.C., resident is asked by U.S. border agents if he's ever smoked marijuana, he knows what he's going to do.

"I'm going to lie," he said Tuesday.


But a report Monday— about Estevan, Sask., residents being refused entry into North Dakota after admitting to past cannabis use — has Larocque spooked about his next southbound trip next month.

"I don't want to lie. And I'm going to lie. And that is unfortunate. Because I am a truthful person and I think most Canadians are," he said.

Larocque is worried about getting cut off from his second home.

Still, he should rethink his plan, say lawyers consulted by CBC News.

"Do not do that. Trust me," said Henry Chang, a partner at the Toronto law firm Blaney McMurtry LLP who specializes in immigration law and practises in both Ontario and California.

The repercussions of being caught lying to a U.S. border agent outweigh the potential gain of fibbing without detection, Chang said — namely, you could be permanently banned from entering the U.S.

'People don't understand' the rules: lawyer

There are two other things that could get you banned from the U.S. in the post-Canadian legalization age, according to Chang.

The first is a prior conviction for marijuana possession.

The second is admitting to having used marijuana before its recreational use was legalized by the Canadian government on Oct. 17.

"If you say, 'Yeah, I smoked marijuana when I was 18, but it's not a problem, right?'— it is problem. You are barred for life, as if you had been convicted back then. People don't understand that," said Chang.

"Legalization doesn't cure prior problems," he added.
Medical marijuana users with a valid prescription are exempt from this category, though they still can't import any marijuana into the U.S.

What about recreational users who admit to doing marijuana after it was legalized?
"It's not as black and white," said Chang.

If it was a one-time tryout by a curious newbie involving cannabis bought from a legal Canadian seller, "you should be OK," he said.

Medically examined for signs of addiction

But a person who admits to using cannabis repeatedly could still be barred from entering the United States, said Chang.

"If they conclude that you're a drug abuser [or addict], you're barred [on] that ground, separate and apart from whether it's legal or not."

That conclusion can't be reached, however, until a Canadian panel physician approved by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) examines someone following a detention.

"You will be temporarily banned until you get the medical exam done," said Chang, adding that the findings are shared directly with CBP, not with the patient.

"If they tell you [at your next border trip] you're not getting in, you know what the medical exam said," he said.

People barred on this ground aren't necessarily banned for life, however, thanks to what Chang called a "remission provision." The panel physician (either in Vancouver, Toronto or elsewhere) may re-examine someone and find they no longer meet the definition of addict or abuser.

"But it can bar someone for several years until they have proven that they no longer use drugs, including legal cannabis," said Chang.

People with a prior pot possession conviction have an option too.

They can apply to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for a waiver (form I-192) that would essentially see the U.S. government overlook a past offence.

• U.S. border patrol warns 'amnesty' for pot convictions doesn't guarantee entry

People have to provide a criminal record check and references, pay a $1,200 Cdn fee and periodically get their waiver renewed.

"It's a cumbersome process," said Andrew Mason, a Saskatoon-based defence lawyer.

And it's not to be confused with a pardon from the Canadian government, which may not do any good anyway, Mason added.

"It doesn't erase the fact that you had committed the offence in the past."

Their advice? Delay

Given all these strict rules, what should marijuana users do when questioned by border agents?

"That's a question I get a lot," said Chang. "It's a no-win situation for anyone who gets asked the question.

"If you admit to using controlled substances prior to legalization, you are barred," he continued. "If you lie and say you've never smoked it and they find out, it's a permanent bar for material misrepresentation, which is also quite serious."

Chang and Mason agree it's better to take a take a third, if imperfect, approach.

Delay.

"Refuse to answer the question. Say it's irrelevant. Say you don't know why this question is being asked," said Chang.

It won't get people to their destinations — and they'll merely be confronted with the same question next time —  but at least they can consult a lawyer, he said.

That lawyer may even be able to resolve the situation directly with CBP "without you having to make an actual admission," said Chang.

"Because once you've admitted it, it's done. You're barred. Nothing anybody can do except apply for a waiver."

A diplomatic solution 

Mason is hopeful another solution can be worked out.

"I expect the governments of Canada and the U.S will get together and make it so that most people who have smoked it in the past but who are not likely to break U.S. drug laws will not be disallowed in the United States.

"But that's going to take a bit of negotiation and discussion."