Should any other types of objections to Cannabis retail shops be considered?

Allow for 16 year olds to enter and purchase marijuana for themselves.

The regulation regarding the distance from the church or schools are ridiculous. We have a lot of churches and schools on the island. Perhaps written approval from the prior mentioned institutions could allow considerations of an applicant's licensure?

• Reducing access and visibility of cannabis to youth is a stated purpose of Canadian cannabis regulation. To that end, cannabis retail stores are required to be a minimum distance away from school yards in most cases. • Other objections could include proximity to places of worship, daycare centres, hospitals or other sensitive structures. This is especially important to consider because under the Bermuda Cannabis scheme, cannabis stores will serve as hubs for public consumption of cannabis and will therefore emit smell from cannabis smoke and will be a source of intoxicated individuals. • Consideration of cannabis store densities in specific locations or jurisdictions. Objections may arise if too many cannabis retails stores or consumption sites are located in close proximities to one another in a given location or jurisdiction. Consider whether a cap should be placed on the number of retail store licensed.

Cannabis retail shops should be limited to a certain amount per geographic area or within proximity to each other.

No opposition to it as a drug, essentially I look at it like alcohol. One major difference is that alcohol cannot be shared involuntarily, alcohol is contained in a glass - SMOKE is not. It is illegal now but yet I've been hot boxed in public places and gotten a little high - I didn't want to get high, not even a little. It's not my drug of choice. An emphasis should be made to contain the smoke - maybe larger penalties for smoking in public, explicit language to consider/protect neighbors, and/or limit legal use to edibles and vape pens... And, like drinking alcohol, it's not fair to kids and their developing brains to smell marijuana smoke. I DON'T MIND YOU SMOKING IT, BUT I DON'T WANT TO

Please consider only allowing cannabis retail businesses to be set up in EEZ's. This would benefit the areas with added visitors and provide and economic boost. Plus. EEZ'S already have tax easement for new businesses in these areas.

I believe that the government is simply trying to appease the churches. Treat the cannabis ass you do the alcohol...One cannot drink (smoke) in public; i am not sure of the rules in that area. I truly dont understand why this discussion is getting to be so complicated. This is a money maker for the government's coffers., NOW. lets not be the last country to introduce the : weed" What is the plan for adverting this to the world, tourist will come simply for the "weed". First of all, why are you proposing such an exhorbitant fee to cultivate. Most people are not interested in plants, certinly not at that price, they would prefer to buy from a coffee house, for the variety and convenience RE: Alcohol drinkers like to have different forms of the alcohol as it comes as neat or mixes/mixtures. For instance: wine, Beer, aperatives, cocktails, after dinner drink and more, a range in potency 2% beers, 5% beer, 12-14% wine, 40% rums, 100% rums and other Why , if we cultivate, do we have to have the same weed; just as in the alcohol options there should be no restriction as to what is being consumed personally. Not everyone will smoke, there are any forms of edibles so one does not have to inhale smoke Licensed coffee houses should not allow patrons to consume cannabis and alcohol together, they do not mix. Have separate rooms, offer water only. Re: the mild derivative. Put the canabadiol, that is being sold behind the counters, back to over the counter many many. For one, none claim accuratley prescribe this harmless derivative from the cannabis plant, thus the public should make up there own mind as to what to choose. Certainly less toxic that swallowing a bottle of tylenol , drinking rubbing alcohol.or ibuphrofen (can cause damage to the liver) . Apart from that, why are only a few companies allowed sell to canabadiol, its harmless, but does wonders for headaches and inflammation ; to name a few of the befits. So much to tell!!

I honestly don't understand why there is an exemption for Churches in the first place. It's a joke to think that there is no intersection between church-goers and cannabis users, or that churches should have greater protections under the law than the general population does. It should be noted that, in addition to churches and schools, the proposed Act specifically references the "increased penalty zones" already codified in the Misuse of Drugs Act 1973. This will also mean that private usage within 100m of parks, youth centres, playgrounds, public pools, hospital etc will also be criminalized, in addition to churches and schools. I am sure that any residences within that range will be displeased to know that, even in the privacy of their own property, the law will consider their activity illegal because they live near close to the Railway Trail. A way around this is to simultaneously amend the Misuse of Drugs Act to specifically exclude Cannabis and Cannabis derivatives and/or carve out an allowance for usage on "private property" even within the increased penalty zone.

GOOD DAY 😊 ALL CANNABIS IS MEDICINAL= STRAINS + POTENCIES. "HOW TO TURN SKEPTICS INTO BELIEVERS" " I HAD BEEN BRAINWASHED" - DR. LESTER GRINSPOON. PSYCHIATRIST, HARVARD MED SCHOOL PROFESSOR, AUTHOR, INTELLECTUAL LEADER/ADVOCATE FOR CANNABIS LEGALIZATION. DR. GRINSPOON ONCE STATED THAT "I HAD BEEN BRAINWASHED" - REFERRING TO CANNABIS. IN 1967 DR. GRINSPOON SET OUT TO RESEARCH THE PLANT TO CONVINCE HIS BEST BUD- ASTRONOMER CARL SEGAN - 'TO STOP SMOKING SO MUCH. " " I WAS CONVINCED THAT CANNABIS WAS A VERY HARMFUL DRUG." CONCERN TURNED INTO INSPIRATION WHEN HE CONCLUDED THAT WHAT HE THOUGHT HE KNEW ABOUT THE PLANT WAS LIES AND PROPAGANDA. IT WASN'T HARMFUL. QUITE THE OPPOSITE. AND ARRESTING FOLKS FOR WAS." THANKS TO DR. GRINSPOON DID SOMETHING ABOUT IT. IN SERVICE OF SCIENCE AND TRUTH! 🙏 IN 1971 DR. GRINSPOON PUBLISHED "MARIJUANA RECONSIDERED." THE LANDMARK "LEGALIZATION BIBLE" THAT MADE CASE FOR MARIJUANA'S LEGITIMATE VALUE. BEYOND STONER STEREOTYPES- INTO THE REALM OF SCIENCE. OUR HONORABLE PREMIERE AND HONORABLE ATTORNEY GENERAL HAD BEEN REPEATEDLY USING 2 WORDS THAT HAS EXCITED MANY CANNABIS ADVOCATES. "CANNABIS LEGALIZATION."

We should not be moving in this direction Bermuda wiĺ be the worse for it n u will look back at a bad decision just like u do concerning alchol