Pubdate: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 Source: Lindsay Daily Post (CN ON) Copyright: 2003 Lindsay Daily Post Contact: http://www.thepost.ca/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/2333 POT ACQUITTAL: WHAT A CONUNDRUM Editorial - The acquittal last week of a man charged with driving while impaired by marijuana has opened up a whole new can of worms in the entire pot decriminalization debate. The Pembroke man had a medical exemption to smoke marijuana as a treatment for his multiple sclerosis. But the judge in this case couldn't tell whether it was the pot smoke, the illness or some other factor that caused the accused to swerve over the centre line when driving, and to slur his speech and lose his balance when the police pulled him over. This driver obviously posed a real safety threat to other road users. According to the Canadian Safety Council, physicians have a responsibility to report to their provincial transportation authority those patients who are not fit to drive. We all know medical conditions and medications can affect a person's driving ability. The council suggests that similar situations would be more effectively dealt with under provincial traffic safety regulations rather than the federal criminal code. (Driving while impaired is a criminal offense, and conviction requires 'proof beyond a reasonable doubt'.) We think the Canadian Safety Council has an excellent point in this case. The man was driving erratically and he also had signs of impairment. If a conviction under the criminal code wasn't possible in this case (due to the court's inability to determine the cause of his impairment, whether it was the marijuana or the multiple sclerosis), then he should have - at the very least - been charged under Ontario's Highway Traffic Act with careless driving, improper lane changes or failing to keep the vehicle in the right lane. "People are less likely to fight a traffic ticket, which means that appropriate sanctions can be applied in the interest of public safety," the council states. We don't think the decriminalization of marijuana for medical purposes was meant to be used as an excuse for driving while under the influence. But then again, how can impairment by marijuana be accurately assessed or monitored, similar to a breathalyzer test for drunk driving? An interesting conundrum for the courts and law enforcement. - --- MAP posted-by: Larry Stevens