Pubdate: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 Source: Toronto Star (CN ON) Copyright: 2013 The Toronto Star Contact: http://www.thestar.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/456 Author: Joe Fiorito Cited: Canadian Drug Policy Coalition: http://drugpolicy.ca/ Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?214 (Drug Policy Alliance) FINALLY, SOME SOBER TALK ABOUT DRUGS WORTH HEARING We go about our business, early and late, meeting and talking, glancing off each other, unaware of the hum as we pass by. But if we were to get close enough to listen, we might learn a thing or two. Here is a bit of what I heard a while ago, when Donald MacPherson and Ethan Nadelmann were in town. MacPherson is the director of the Canadian Drug Policy Coalition. And Nadelmann is the founder of the Drug Policy Alliance, an American non-profit organization which he also directs. Between them, they carry a question in their travels: will there ever be a ceasefire in the war on drugs? There is no one better than MacPherson to answer this question in Canada. He is the author of the city of Vancouver's Four Pillars Drug Policy. You might know that the pillars are: harm reduction, prevention, treatment and enforcement. You might also know that the Four Pillars approach is used in many cities around the world, and has generally resulted in the lessening of street use of drugs, fewer overdose deaths and a reduction in drug related illness. The Four Pillars approach is used here in Toronto, after a fashion. As for Nadelmann, he can talk a mile a minute, and he is also as smart about American drug policy as anyone has ever been smart about anything. Here is some of the hum. In Canada, MacPherson said, "We're going backwards, federally; harm reduction has stalled. Insite is 10 years old, why aren't there more?" Insite, as you know, is Vancouver's safe-injection site. The Conservatives don't like it, don't understand it and don't want it reproduced. He said, "The Americans are legalizing marijuana, and leading the way in overdose prevention." Oh, rats; we in Canada used to lead the way. Nadelmann said, "I'll try not to rub it in." "Ha, ha," said the assembled. MacPherson said, "In B.C., we're going to recommend a regulated market for cannabis." He also said, "Where there has been decriminalization, nothing bad has happened." He cited Portugal, where moderate possession of most drugs is no longer a crime. Portugal, who knew? And then Nadelmann talked about his organization, and his work. He said, "Who are we in the drug policy reform movement? Opponents say, 'They're people who want to get high.'" He did not duck. "There's some truth to that; many of us enjoy our weed; it's not causing any problems. Even other drugs, people figure out how to use them in controlled fashion; why is that government business? Get out of my life, as long as I'm fulfilling my obligations as a citizen, as a parent." Oh, there are times when my heart swells with fondness for good, old fashioned American libertarianism. And then Nadelmann said, "We're also the people who hate drugs, who've seen what drugs do; we see mothers get Hep C, and parents who are alcoholic - we dream of a drug free society - but we know the war on drugs is wrong." Why? Because it puts too many people in jail, and wastes too many resources on law enforcement. To the critics who say members of his coalition don't give a damn about drug use, he has a well-timed volley: "What about Ritalin, coffee, Prozac?" He also said, "We care about fiscal responsibility; we don't like pouring dollars down a sinkhole. We care about prison, disease and corruption in law enforcement." The result of the recent decriminalization of marijuana in some American states? Nadelmann said, "The for-profit entities are getting ready, piggy-backing on the work we did." He paused and said, "I'll take agribiz over organized crime any day." Me, too. "But will this be the Budweiserization of marijuana?" He answered his own question. "I think it will lead to micro-breweries." I said there was hum. I meant buzz. - --- MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom