Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Any Canadian Busted?

Expand Messages
  • rye_junkie1
    ... Probably the best person to ask would be Ian Smiley. I had asked him a similar question over a year ago now and he didnt seem all that concerned about the
    Message 1 of 19 , Sep 2, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, "mstehelin" <mstehelin@...> wrote:
      >
      > Howdy all,
      > I'm just wondering if any one has any 1st hand Knowledge of Any one in
      > Canada Getting Busted for distilling. My understanding of it all is
      > that personal distilling is a gray area, and that as long as you are
      > not selling the stuff you are ok. Any Thoughts?
      > Cheers
      > M
      >
      Probably the best person to ask would be Ian Smiley. I had asked him
      a similar question over a year ago now and he didnt seem all that
      concerned about the Canadian situation. Apparently he is not even
      required to keep records of his Still sales. Those guys here in the
      US do which is one of the reasons I decided to build in the beginning.

      Mason
    • Derek Hamlet
      ... My friend, the law in Canada is very clear. Distilling alcohol for consumption is illegal. It is not a gray area at all at all. Having said that, we do
      Message 2 of 19 , Sep 2, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        At 10:17 AM 9/2/2008, you wrote:

        >--- In
        ><mailto:Distillers%40yahoogroups.com>Distillers@yahoogroups.com,
        >"mstehelin" <mstehelin@...> wrote:
        > >
        > > Howdy all,
        > > I'm just wondering if any one has any 1st hand Knowledge of Any one in
        > > Canada Getting Busted for distilling. My understanding of it all is
        > > that personal distilling is a gray area, and that as long as you are
        > > not selling the stuff you are ok. Any Thoughts?
        > > Cheers
        > > M

        My friend, the law in Canada is very clear. Distilling alcohol for
        consumption is illegal. It is not a gray area at all at all.
        Having said that, we do not have an arm of the law that is dedicated
        to the task of "taking down stills".
        If you are a Canuck then you know that policing is either carried out
        by local police forces, the RCMP, OPP in Ontario and the Quebec counterpart.
        These are very busy people. They are not going after the little guy
        pulling off some vodka or corn whiskey for their own consumption.
        Boast about it all over the bar or at work or at the church social
        and perhaps someone will submit a complaint and then "they" might be
        forced to investigate.
        It's a little like the folks who keep a little baggie of smoke or
        perhaps grow six plants a year. The police and the courts know the
        public sentiment and do not want to get involved in something that
        takes up their time, clogs the courts and takes their time away from
        serious policing matters.
        Enjoy your hobby and be circumspect.



        Derek
        "What are all those black and whites doing in my driveway"
      • anthony547357
        ... speak up? My local supplier says much the same thing, but it s difficult getting knowledge as people are either few and far between - or genuinely
        Message 3 of 19 , Sep 2, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, Derek Hamlet <derekhamlet@...>
          wrote:
          >Since this subject is of interest in the UK, would anyone care to
          speak up? My local supplier says much the same thing, but it's
          difficult getting knowledge as people are either few and far between -
          or genuinely secretive.

          Tony
          > At 10:17 AM 9/2/2008, you wrote:
          >
          > >--- In
          > ><mailto:Distillers%40yahoogroups.com>Distillers@yahoogroups.com,
          > >"mstehelin" <mstehelin@> wrote:
          > > >
          > > > Howdy all,
          > > > I'm just wondering if any one has any 1st hand Knowledge of Any
          one in
          > > > Canada Getting Busted for distilling. My understanding of it
          all is
          > > > that personal distilling is a gray area, and that as long as
          you are
          > > > not selling the stuff you are ok. Any Thoughts?
          > > > Cheers
          > > > M
          >
          > My friend, the law in Canada is very clear. Distilling alcohol for
          > consumption is illegal. It is not a gray area at all at all.
          > Having said that, we do not have an arm of the law that is
          dedicated
          > to the task of "taking down stills".
          > If you are a Canuck then you know that policing is either carried
          out
          > by local police forces, the RCMP, OPP in Ontario and the Quebec
          counterpart.
          > These are very busy people. They are not going after the little
          guy
          > pulling off some vodka or corn whiskey for their own consumption.
          > Boast about it all over the bar or at work or at the church social
          > and perhaps someone will submit a complaint and then "they" might
          be
          > forced to investigate.
          > It's a little like the folks who keep a little baggie of smoke or
          > perhaps grow six plants a year. The police and the courts know the
          > public sentiment and do not want to get involved in something that
          > takes up their time, clogs the courts and takes their time away
          from
          > serious policing matters.
          > Enjoy your hobby and be circumspect.
          >
          >
          >
          > Derek
          > "What are all those black and whites doing in my driveway"
          >
        • rpk@gvtc.com
          I asked a similar question over a year ago now and he didnt seem all that concerned about the Canadian situation. Apparently he is not even required to
          Message 4 of 19 , Sep 2, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            I <> asked <> a similar question over a year ago now and he didnt seem all that
            concerned about the Canadian situation. Apparently he is not even
            required to keep records of his Still sales. Those guys here in the
            US do which is one of the reasons I decided to build in the beginning.

            Right and wrong are most often governmed by local custom. One regulator may have a blind eye and another a telescope. If you want to have a commercial manufacturing enterprise which advertises and plays by the rules then you can sleep better at night. I understand that the fee to register a manufacturing site for distilleries is about $3500 in Canada, but don't quote me.

            P.
          • Rob Macrobert
            My partner and I were going to be down $7500 in APPLICATION fees, and the requirements before applying make sure you can not legally apply. Example: You must
            Message 5 of 19 , Sep 2, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              My partner and I were going to be down $7500 in APPLICATION fees, and the requirements before applying make sure you can not legally apply.
              Example:
              You must have a facility, fully set up and ready to run, for inspection of equipment and process before a license is granted.
              You can not legally set up that facility without having the license that legally allows you to own "...a device, or mechanism, for the purpose of distillation of alcohol by application of  heat, cold, vacuum, or any other method....".
              That last part I'm paraphrasing from memory.

              Every other requirement is equally contradictory.

              New Zealand, here I come..

              Cheers,



              ----- Original Message -----
              From: rpk@...
              To: Distillers@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: [Distillers] Any Canadian Busted?
              Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 14:26:41 -0700


              I <> asked <> a similar question over a year ago now and he didnt seem all that
              concerned about the Canadian situation. Apparently he is not even
              required to keep records of his Still sales. Those guys here in the
              US do which is one of the reasons I decided to build in the beginning.

              Right and wrong are most often governmed by local custom. One regulator may have a blind eye and another a telescope. If you want to have a commercial manufacturing enterprise which advertises and plays by the rules then you can sleep better at night. I understand that the fee to register a manufacturing site for distilleries is about $3500 in Canada, but don't quote me.

              P.

              __


              --
              Be Yourself @ mail.com!
              Choose From 200+ Email Addresses
              Get a Free Account at www.mail.com!
            • KM Services
              No hassles here in New Zealand as long as you don t sell the stuff and if you are a smoker you can also legally grow your own tobacco if you want with the same
              Message 6 of 19 , Sep 2, 2008
              • 0 Attachment

                No hassles here in New Zealand as long as you don’t sell the stuff and if you are a smoker you can also legally grow your own tobacco if you want with the same restriction.

                Hopefully your governments will wake up one day? And let the police concentrate on more important activities. Here we do not have “moonshiners” as such, I am sure there are some who sell to mates?

                There is no demand for “Shine” here as you can buy stills and supplies openly and make your own with all the help you want, plus an industry has grown which allows for off the shelf purchase products of the highest standard for us to use which generates taxes for the state plus employment. Sensible really as our government was persuaded by many of these groups founders that it was a waste of time and energy trying to stop people wanting to distill and grow tobacco as it boiled down to not a safety issue but Revenue from Excise tax.

                 

                This is my opinion and if I am wrong I will be corrected I am sure...

                Cheers

                Ken Mc

                 


                From: Distillers@yahoogroups.com [mailto: Distillers@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Rob Macrobert
                Sent: Wednesday, 3 September 2008 12:49 p.m.
                To: Distillers@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: [Distillers] Any Canadian Busted?

                 

                My partner and I were going to be down $7500 in APPLICATION fees, and the requirements before applying make sure you can not legally apply.
                Example:
                You must have a facility, fully set up and ready to run, for inspection of equipment and process before a license is granted.
                You can not legally set up that facility without having the license that legally allows you to own "...a device, or mechanism, for the purpose of distillation of alcohol by application of  heat, cold, vacuum, or any other method....".
                That last part I'm paraphrasing from memory.

                Every other requirement is equally contradictory.

                New Zealand , here I come..

                Cheers,


              • Eric Yendall
                Actually the law in Canada is NOT so clear. I have read the Excise Act which is written from the standpoint of collecting taxes from commercial operations, not
                Message 7 of 19 , Sep 3, 2008
                • 0 Attachment
                  Actually the law in Canada is NOT so clear. I have read the Excise Act which is written from the standpoint of collecting taxes from commercial operations, not forbidding the private production of alcohol for personal consumption or the private possession of a still. Of course this is only an interpretation but that is why we have courts. I have yet to find an example of anyone being charged and subsequently convicted for operating a personal still. Apart from the police authorities having bigger fish to fry, they would first have to find you; then get a warrant to search; they would have to prove that you were producing alcohol and not distilled water; and then they would have to win the case in court. I have searched the internet for case law and come up empty and would be very interested in an answer to the original poster's question.

                  In politics and government, never attribute to conspiracy what can be adequately explained by stupidity.
                • anthony547357
                  -What s the situation in the UK? ... Act which is written from the standpoint of collecting taxes from
                  Message 8 of 19 , Sep 3, 2008
                  • 0 Attachment
                    -What's the situation in the UK?





                    -- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, Eric Yendall <eric_yendall@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Actually the law in Canada is NOT so clear. I have read the Excise
                    Act which is written from the standpoint of collecting taxes from
                  • harisaki2004
                    And here in Australia you can apply free through the tax office to manufacture alcohol. All you need to do is make/purchase your still. The fill out yards of
                    Message 9 of 19 , Sep 3, 2008
                    • 0 Attachment
                      And here in Australia you can apply free through the tax office to
                      manufacture alcohol.

                      All you need to do is make/purchase your still. The fill out yards of
                      forms, they then come and inspect you and give you a license.

                      Of course you have to report your volumes of alcohol used/sold and pay
                      the excise.
                      There is no excise on alcohol used to fortify wines.

                      regards
                      Hari.


                      --- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, "KM Services" <km_services@...> wrote:
                      >

                      > New Zealand, here I come..
                      >
                      > Cheers,
                      >
                    • bbornais
                      Actually the law in Canada is Very clear. If you had read the Excise Act like you said you did, then you would have found this: Ref: Excise Act, 2001 ( 2002,
                      Message 10 of 19 , Sep 3, 2008
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Actually the law in Canada is Very clear. If you had read the Excise
                        Act like you said you did, then you would have found this:

                        Ref: Excise Act, 2001 ( 2002, c. 22 )

                        Prohibition — production and packaging of spirits

                        60. (1) No person shall, except in accordance with a spirits licence
                        issued to the person, produce or package spirits.

                        Exception

                        (2) Subsection (1) does not apply to
                        (a) the packaging of spirits from a marked special container by a
                        purchaser at a bottle-your-own premises; or

                        (b) the production of spirits for the purpose or as a consequence of
                        the analysis of the composition of a substance containing absolute
                        ethyl alcohol.

                        2002, c. 22, s. 60; 2007, c. 18, s. 89.

                        Prohibition — possession of still

                        61. No person shall possess a still or other equipment suitable for
                        the production of spirits with the intent of producing spirits unless
                        the person

                        (a) is a spirits licensee;

                        (b) has a pending application for a spirits licence; or

                        (c) possesses the still or equipment solely for the purpose of
                        producing spirits for the purpose or as a consequence of the analysis
                        of the composition of a substance containing absolute ethyl alcohol.

                        2002, c. 22, s. 61; 2007, c. 18, s. 90.

                        And the PUNISHMENTS:

                        PART 6
                        ENFORCEMENT
                        Offences and Punishment
                        Unlawful production, sale, etc., of tobacco or alcohol

                        214. Every person who contravenes section 25, 27 or 29, subsection
                        32.1(1) or section 60 or 62 is guilty of an offence and liable

                        (a) on conviction on indictment, to a fine of not less than $50,000
                        and not more than $1,000,000 or to imprisonment for a term of not
                        more than five years, or to both; or

                        (b) on summary conviction, to a fine of not less than $10,000 and not
                        more than $500,000 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than 18
                        months, or to both.

                        2002, c. 22, s. 214; 2008, c. 28, s. 60.



                        Seems pretty clear to me,

                        Bryan.


                        --- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, Eric Yendall <eric_yendall@...>
                        wrote:
                        >
                        > Actually the law in Canada is NOT so clear. I have read the Excise
                        Act which is written from the standpoint of collecting taxes from
                        commercial operations, not forbidding the private production of
                        alcohol for personal consumption or the private possession of a
                        still. Of course this is only an interpretation but that is why we
                        have courts. I have yet to find an example of anyone being charged
                        and subsequently convicted for operating a personal still. Apart from
                        the police authorities having bigger fish to fry, they would first
                        have to find you; then get a warrant to search; they would have to
                        prove that you were producing alcohol and not distilled water; and
                        then they would have to win the case in court. I have searched the
                        internet for case law and come up empty and would be very interested
                        in an answer to the original poster's question.
                        >
                        > In politics and government, never attribute to conspiracy what can
                        be adequately explained by stupidity.
                        >
                      • Zapata Vive
                        Did I read that wrong, or is it perfectly legal to make and analyze absolute ethanol? That s what it looks like it says. If I wanted to analyze my wine to
                        Message 11 of 19 , Sep 3, 2008
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Did I read that wrong, or is it perfectly legal to make and analyze absolute ethanol?  That's what it looks like it says.  If I wanted to analyze my wine to see if and how much absolute ethanol was in it, then I'd be perfectly ok to do so.  Or am I confused?  What's the deal with that exception?  Reflux stills are ok, but whiskey stills aren't?  Doesn't seem so clear to me...
                           
                          ----- Original Message -----
                          From: bbornais
                          Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 10:11 AM
                          Subject: [Distillers] Re: Any Canadian Busted?

                          Actually the law in Canada is Very clear. If you had read the Excise
                          Act like you said you did, then you would have found this:

                          Ref: Excise Act, 2001 ( 2002, c. 22 )

                          Prohibition — production and packaging of spirits

                          60. (1) No person shall, except in accordance with a spirits licence
                          issued to the person, produce or package spirits.

                          Exception

                          (2) Subsection (1) does not apply to
                          (a) the packaging of spirits from a marked special container by a
                          purchaser at a bottle-your- own premises; or

                          (b) the production of spirits for the purpose or as a consequence of
                          the analysis of the composition of a substance containing absolute
                          ethyl alcohol.

                          2002, c. 22, s. 60; 2007, c. 18, s. 89.

                          Prohibition — possession of still

                          61. No person shall possess a still or other equipment suitable for
                          the production of spirits with the intent of producing spirits unless
                          the person

                          (a) is a spirits licensee;

                          (b) has a pending application for a spirits licence; or

                          (c) possesses the still or equipment solely for the purpose of
                          producing spirits for the purpose or as a consequence of the analysis
                          of the composition of a substance containing absolute ethyl alcohol.

                          2002, c. 22, s. 61; 2007, c. 18, s. 90.

                          And the PUNISHMENTS:

                          PART 6
                          ENFORCEMENT
                          Offences and Punishment
                          Unlawful production, sale, etc., of tobacco or alcohol

                          214. Every person who contravenes section 25, 27 or 29, subsection
                          32.1(1) or section 60 or 62 is guilty of an offence and liable

                          (a) on conviction on indictment, to a fine of not less than $50,000
                          and not more than $1,000,000 or to imprisonment for a term of not
                          more than five years, or to both; or

                          (b) on summary conviction, to a fine of not less than $10,000 and not
                          more than $500,000 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than 18
                          months, or to both.

                          2002, c. 22, s. 214; 2008, c. 28, s. 60.

                          Seems pretty clear to me,

                          Bryan.

                          --- In Distillers@yahoogro ups.com, Eric Yendall <eric_yendall@ ...>
                          wrote:
                          >
                          > Actually the law in Canada is NOT so clear. I have read the Excise
                          Act which is written from the standpoint of collecting taxes from
                          commercial operations, not forbidding the private production of
                          alcohol for personal consumption or the private possession of a
                          still. Of course this is only an interpretation but that is why we
                          have courts. I have yet to find an example of anyone being charged
                          and subsequently convicted for operating a personal still. Apart from
                          the police authorities having bigger fish to fry, they would first
                          have to find you; then get a warrant to search; they would have to
                          prove that you were producing alcohol and not distilled water; and
                          then they would have to win the case in court. I have searched the
                          internet for case law and come up empty and would be very interested
                          in an answer to the original poster's question.
                          >
                          > In politics and government, never attribute to conspiracy what can
                          be adequately explained by stupidity.
                          >

                        • bbornais
                          The exception is for research institutions that are regognized holders of Canadian funding for applied research (example: NSERC). So the answer is no. Unless
                          Message 12 of 19 , Sep 3, 2008
                          • 0 Attachment
                            The exception is for research institutions that are regognized
                            holders of Canadian funding for applied research (example: NSERC).

                            So the answer is no. Unless you have a regonized research facility
                            operating out of your home!

                            --- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, "Zapata Vive" <zapatavive@...>
                            wrote:
                            >
                            > Did I read that wrong, or is it perfectly legal to make and
                            analyze absolute ethanol? That's what it looks like it says. If I
                            wanted to analyze my wine to see if and how much absolute ethanol
                            was in it, then I'd be perfectly ok to do so. Or am I confused?
                            What's the deal with that exception? Reflux stills are ok, but
                            whiskey stills aren't? Doesn't seem so clear to me...
                            >
                            > ----- Original Message -----
                            > From: bbornais
                            > To: Distillers@yahoogroups.com
                            > Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 10:11 AM
                            > Subject: [Distillers] Re: Any Canadian Busted?
                            >
                            >
                            > Actually the law in Canada is Very clear. If you had read the
                            Excise
                            > Act like you said you did, then you would have found this:
                            >
                            > Ref: Excise Act, 2001 ( 2002, c. 22 )
                            >
                            > Prohibition - production and packaging of spirits
                            >
                            > 60. (1) No person shall, except in accordance with a spirits
                            licence
                            > issued to the person, produce or package spirits.
                            >
                            > Exception
                            >
                            > (2) Subsection (1) does not apply to
                            > (a) the packaging of spirits from a marked special container by
                            a
                            > purchaser at a bottle-your-own premises; or
                            >
                            > (b) the production of spirits for the purpose or as a
                            consequence of
                            > the analysis of the composition of a substance containing
                            absolute
                            > ethyl alcohol.
                            >
                            > 2002, c. 22, s. 60; 2007, c. 18, s. 89.
                            >
                            > Prohibition - possession of still
                            >
                            > 61. No person shall possess a still or other equipment suitable
                            for
                            > the production of spirits with the intent of producing spirits
                            unless
                            > the person
                            >
                            > (a) is a spirits licensee;
                            >
                            > (b) has a pending application for a spirits licence; or
                            >
                            > (c) possesses the still or equipment solely for the purpose of
                            > producing spirits for the purpose or as a consequence of the
                            analysis
                            > of the composition of a substance containing absolute ethyl
                            alcohol.
                            >
                            > 2002, c. 22, s. 61; 2007, c. 18, s. 90.
                            >
                            > And the PUNISHMENTS:
                            >
                            > PART 6
                            > ENFORCEMENT
                            > Offences and Punishment
                            > Unlawful production, sale, etc., of tobacco or alcohol
                            >
                            > 214. Every person who contravenes section 25, 27 or 29,
                            subsection
                            > 32.1(1) or section 60 or 62 is guilty of an offence and liable
                            >
                            > (a) on conviction on indictment, to a fine of not less than
                            $50,000
                            > and not more than $1,000,000 or to imprisonment for a term of
                            not
                            > more than five years, or to both; or
                            >
                            > (b) on summary conviction, to a fine of not less than $10,000
                            and not
                            > more than $500,000 or to imprisonment for a term of not more
                            than 18
                            > months, or to both.
                            >
                            > 2002, c. 22, s. 214; 2008, c. 28, s. 60.
                            >
                            > Seems pretty clear to me,
                            >
                            > Bryan.
                            >
                            > --- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, Eric Yendall <eric_yendall@>
                            > wrote:
                            > >
                            > > Actually the law in Canada is NOT so clear. I have read the
                            Excise
                            > Act which is written from the standpoint of collecting taxes
                            from
                            > commercial operations, not forbidding the private production of
                            > alcohol for personal consumption or the private possession of a
                            > still. Of course this is only an interpretation but that is why
                            we
                            > have courts. I have yet to find an example of anyone being
                            charged
                            > and subsequently convicted for operating a personal still. Apart
                            from
                            > the police authorities having bigger fish to fry, they would
                            first
                            > have to find you; then get a warrant to search; they would have
                            to
                            > prove that you were producing alcohol and not distilled water;
                            and
                            > then they would have to win the case in court. I have searched
                            the
                            > internet for case law and come up empty and would be very
                            interested
                            > in an answer to the original poster's question.
                            > >
                            > > In politics and government, never attribute to conspiracy what
                            can
                            > be adequately explained by stupidity.
                            > >
                            >
                          • subsonic40grain
                            ... The production of alcohol in the UK via illicit distillation is illegal full stop. Home brewing and wine making is not, provided you do not sell. No
                            Message 13 of 19 , Sep 3, 2008
                            • 0 Attachment
                              > -What's the situation in the UK?

                              The production of alcohol in the UK via illicit distillation is
                              illegal full stop. Home brewing and wine making is not, provided you
                              do not sell. No licence is required to make beer at home, although
                              prior to 1963 this was the case. To sell you need a licence.

                              In terms of prosecution for illegal home distillation, I seem to
                              recall that the offence is a civil one as opposed to a criminal one
                              (my memory may be wrong mind as this is not my precise field). That
                              said, it would not be a good thing either way. I looked at the
                              relevant page on the UK customs and for those who wish to see the
                              full English version paste the link below into your browser. Next
                              time you tip a dram you may well appreciate the other 'effort' that
                              went into producing it! i'm not sure if the law in Scotland is the
                              same mind. If anyone REALLY wanted to know more I could find out,
                              but the bottom line is that its illegal.

                              Subsonic

                              http://customs.hmrc.gov.uk/channelsPortalWebApp/channelsPortalWebApp.p
                              ortal?
                              _nfpb=true&_pageLabel=pageExcise_ShowContent&id=HMCE_CL_000245&propert
                              yType=document
                            • subsonic40grain
                              I never quite understand the hyperlink pasting on this site! I screwed up somewhere..... The link is this, but paste the lot in one line, if that makes sense.
                              Message 14 of 19 , Sep 3, 2008
                              • 0 Attachment
                                I never quite understand the hyperlink pasting on this site! I screwed
                                up somewhere.....

                                The link is this, but paste the lot in one line, if that makes sense.
                                Apologies for the screw up. If anyone reads the whole document you get
                                a gold star and 10/10 from me :-))

                                Subsonic

                                http://customs.hmrc.gov.uk/channelsPortalWebApp/channelsPortalWebApp.por
                                tal?
                                _nfpb=true&_pageLabel=pageExcise_ShowContent&id=HMCE_CL_000245&propertyT
                                ype=document#P364_27455
                              • Eric Yendall
                                Yes I did read this and I remain unconvinced. It all hinges on the context i.e. the rest of the act. The issue is the definition of a still and the definition
                                Message 15 of 19 , Sep 4, 2008
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Yes I did read this and I remain unconvinced. It all hinges on the context i.e. the rest of the act. The issue is the definition of a still and the definition of a "person". Since the act is concerned with licensing and regulation of commercial operations, then one can argue that it does not apply to individuals producing alcohol for their personal use. If the law is not ambiguous, where are the convictions? Just one is needed to prove your contention. I have yet to find one. It would not be difficult to come up with a list of Canadian personal distillers: all they would have to do is raid Ian Smiley's operation, which is run quite openly and apparently legally.

                                  In politics and government, never attribute to conspiracy what can be adequately explained by stupidity.
                                • Brendan Keith
                                  I think your distinction between person and commercial operation is flawed. It is blanketedly illegal unless you are a licensed commercial operation or
                                  Message 16 of 19 , Sep 4, 2008
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Message
                                    I think your distinction between "person" and "commercial operation" is flawed. 
                                     
                                    It is blanketedly illegal unless you are a licensed commercial operation or research institution.
                                     
                                    You don't really think they'd leave a loophole that large, do you?
                                     
                                     

                                    --

                                    Brendan Keith

                                    bkeith@...

                                     

                                    -----Original Message-----
                                    From: Distillers@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Distillers@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Eric Yendall
                                    Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 12:25 PM
                                    To: Distillers@yahoogroups.com
                                    Subject: [Distillers] Re: Any Canadian Busted?

                                    Yes I did read this and I remain unconvinced. It all hinges on the context i.e. the rest of the act. The issue is the definition of a still and the definition of a "person". Since the act is concerned with licensing and regulation of commercial operations, then one can argue that it does not apply to individuals producing alcohol for their personal use. If the law is not ambiguous, where are the convictions? Just one is needed to prove your contention. I have yet to find one. It would not be difficult to come up with a list of Canadian personal distillers: all they would have to do is raid Ian Smiley's operation, which is run quite openly and apparently legally.

                                    In politics and government, never attribute to conspiracy what can be adequately explained by stupidity.

                                  • Eric Yendall
                                    We ll let the courts decide, shall we? Never attribute to conspiracy what can be adequately explained by stupidity.
                                    Message 17 of 19 , Sep 5, 2008
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      We'll let the courts decide, shall we?


                                      Never attribute to conspiracy what can be adequately explained by stupidity.
                                    • Dave Lineback
                                      Hey, boys and girls, it s ALL legal until you are busted. So, burn a clean fire, cover your tracks, distract the crows with a dead cat, and keep your mouth
                                      Message 18 of 19 , Sep 5, 2008
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        Hey, boys and girls, it's ALL legal until you are busted. So, burn a clean fire, cover your tracks, distract the crows with a dead cat, and keep your mouth shut.

                                        Dave iNC

                                        Brendan Keith wrote:

                                        I think your distinction between "person" and "commercial operation" is flawed. 
                                         
                                        It is blanketedly illegal unless you are a licensed commercial operation or research institution.
                                         
                                        You don't really think they'd leave a loophole that large, do you?
                                         
                                         

                                        --

                                        Brendan Keith

                                        bkeith@sympatico. ca

                                         

                                        -----Original Message-----
                                        From: Distillers@yahoogro ups.com [mailto:Distillers@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Eric Yendall
                                        Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 12:25 PM
                                        To: Distillers@yahoogro ups.com
                                        Subject: [Distillers] Re: Any Canadian Busted?

                                        Yes I did read this and I remain unconvinced. It all hinges on the context i.e. the rest of the act. The issue is the definition of a still and the definition of a "person". Since the act is concerned with licensing and regulation of commercial operations, then one can argue that it does not apply to individuals producing alcohol for their personal use. If the law is not ambiguous, where are the convictions? Just one is needed to prove your contention. I have yet to find one. It would not be difficult to come up with a list of Canadian personal distillers: all they would have to do is raid Ian Smiley's operation, which is run quite openly and apparently legally.

                                        In politics and government, never attribute to conspiracy what can be adequately explained by stupidity.


                                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.