Pubdate: Fri, 16 Sep 2011
Source: Morning Star, The (CN BC)
Copyright: 2011 The Morning Star
Author: Dave Kennedy


With regard to the lucrative illegal drug market and the violence it
spawns: there is something in common between the seemingly polar
positions of Prohibition vs Legal Regulation.

Both positions advocate drug-free lifestyles, and the minimization of
the harms from drug addiction.

The difference is that the legal regulation group says you can never
totally get rid of addictions and freely made lifestyle choices, and
that, provided that there is no criminal harm to others, this is a
matter of health.

The legal regulation position emphasizes a Four Pillar Approach which
is Prevention, Treatment, Harm Reduction, and Enforcement.

Those who advocate Prohibition wish to eradicate the problem entirely
using a three-pillar approach, Prevention, Treatment, and

Enforced Prohibition is necessary in this approach and will maintain
the black market, violence, and gangs.

We need to realize that there are no 'perfect solutions' here only
'least bad ones', and that unfortunately as we have learned in the
past with alcohol, Prohibition is the worst solution.

When you prohibit you cannot regulate -- just look at the excellent
progress we have made in the last 50 years in reducing smoking, which
is legally regulated.

It is time for our federal government to move ahead and develop the
necessary policy for legal regulation.

Dave Kennedy

- ---
MAP posted-by: Richard R Smith Jr.