Pubdate: Tue, 20 May 2003 Source: Parklander, The (CN AB) Copyright: 2003 Hinton Parklander Contact: http://www.hintonparklander.com Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/782 Author: Erin Ottosen Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mjcn.htm (Cannabis - Canada) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/decrim.htm (Decrim/Legalization) DECRIMINALIZATION A GUTLESS WAY TO DEAL WITH MARIJUANA USE Smoking marijuana is a common habit in Canada. Just how common is it? Well, it's common enough that only the most innocent and sheltered Canadians would not be able to identify the smell of the smoke. It's common enough that most Canadians realize that growing it is one of B.C.'s major industries, right up there with forestry and tourism. And it's common enough that with a few well-aimed queries, a stranger could wander into virtually any town in Canada and buy some. Most significantly, it's common enough that plenty of our most intelligent, responsible, productive members of society smoke it, and I'm not just talking about college professors and artists. Lawyers smoke it, school teachers smoke it, doctors smoke it and architects smoke it. Not all of them smoke it, but if you think that none of them do, then you're either blissfully naive or the pot-smokers you know, like and respect are suitably subtle about their past-time. The federal government is on the verge of passing legislation that would decriminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana. In the near future, those caught with 15 grams or less of weed could receive a penalty similar to a speeding ticket. Possession in small amounts would no longer be a Criminal Code offence. Decriminalization is a sign that the Canadian government concedes, in a sort of underhanded way, that marijuana does less damage to our society than alcohol, that yes, there's plenty of folks out there who lead a perfectly honourable, law-abiding life except for those couple of times a year when they step outside at a summer barbecue and relax with a joint. The government's logic seems to be, 'Why should these peoples' jobs and reputations be at risk because of a light indulgence? They shouldn't, so let's cut them a break on possession.' Yet, the government is too afraid to go all the way with legalization because of the heat it would take from those, including a certain world power that is our closest neighbour, who are against that. So, decriminalization allows the government to sit on the fence, appeasing both sides somewhat but avoiding a clear stance on the issue. To me, that's worse than legalizing it or leaving the rules as they are. Decriminalization would shift marijuana use to a twilight zone that makes it sort of okay by the law sometimes, and substantially not okay the rest of the time. How much sense does it make that illegal activity could somehow translate to something legal? It's like saying that two wrongs make a right. The truth of the matter is, no one would be able to obtain 15 grams or less of marijuana without getting it, either directly or indirectly, from someone who had more than 15 grams - probably much more. Decriminalization is the government's way out of either attacking marijuana's widespread presence in our country head-on or allowing its presence to emerge from the underground into daylight. The federal government should study marijuana closely and then, after forming an educated judgment, choose what it deems as the best path. It should be able to answer yes or no to these questions: Is marijuana too much a health risk, too much of a detriment to our society to allow its legalization? Or, can people be trusted to make the decision of whether or not to smoke marijuana on their own, without legal influence? Is it a substance that can be used responsibly in moderation, that could raise handsome revenue for the government in the form of sales taxes because so many people have such affection for it? The government should decide either way, because decriminalization is a coward's way to deal with the problem. - --- MAP posted-by: Jackl