Pubdate: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 Source: Record, The (CN QU) Copyright: 2016 The Sherbrooke Record Contact: http://www.sherbrookerecord.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/3194 Author: Mike McDevitt Page: 6 SMOKE AND MIRRORS Last week, on April 20 no less, the federal government announced that legislation legalizing and regulating the recreational use of marijuana will be ready next spring. It's been a long time coming. The history of marijuana prohibition is a long and complicated one, but its origins can be summarized as a part of a widespread movement of white middle class progressives who believed in the benefits of social engineering based on ethnic, class, and Victorian moral grounds. It was a movement designed to 'uplift' society and advocated for things like women's suffrage, improved working conditions, and public health and education reform. Sadly, they also supported things like eugenics, and forced sterilization, and residential schools. Throughout the pre-WW2 era, marijuana usage was largely confined to southern blacks and jazz musicians but occasionally popped into public consciousness as a public menace threatening the very fabric of society - not to mention the purity of our sons and daughters. The weed came into mainstream popular culture in the 1960s in the wake of the Beatles, long hair, the anti-war movement, and free love and was the most benign face of a concoction of recreational substances that included a number of addictive and dangerous drugs to which it bore no similarity. In the face of the sudden, almost explosive adoption of marijuana by the nation's youth, the Liberal government of Prime Minster Pierre E. Trudeau mandated a Parliamentary Committee under the Chairmanship of future Supreme Court Justice Gerald LeDain to investigate the non-medical use of drugs in Canada and, in reference to pot, suggested that it be legalized and regulated for personal use similar to the way in which we mange alcohol. Despite their general popular acceptance, the recommendations of the Commission were put aside, as the United States was enlarging its own war against the social movements there that were associated with marijuana use - notably opposition to the Vietnam War. Although, it is difficult to find an objective reason for the prohibition of cannabis, its criminally contraband status has produced a well-established, organized, and profitable criminal network that has virtually captured marijuana distribution. This network, ubiquitous and unregulated, operates in a code of underworld morality in which 'the public good' plays no role (It's like the banks that way) and which controls billions of untaxed dollars. Despite best efforts from governments and police, marijuana use has remained an extremely popular activity and its regulated legalization makes sense in a broad sense, but as the saying goes, the devil is in the details and, as yet, those details are extremely vague. The government has stated that its legislation will focus on protecting the young as studies have indicated that its use among children and adolescents (and maybe young adults) might be associated with abnormal brain development and even the triggering of schizophrenia. Although these studies are not conclusive, they do indicate the need for some rigorous control, as a matter of public health. The government will also have to deal with the idea of 'impairment.' Like alcohol, a generally far more dangerous substance, cannabis is a mood altering substance that can interfere with a number of cognitive functions. However, it has never been categorically demonstrated that uncontrollable giggling, an insatiable appetite for snacks, or an appreciation of the divine aspects of the Beatles' White Album actually constitutes 'impairment' when it comes to things like driving (probably not) or brain surgery (definitely). So far, the technology available for detecting marijuana cannot establish exactly when a person partook, how stoned he or she is, or even how either of those things contributes to impairment. Establishing a '.08' tolerance level will not be easy, if it's to be fair. As they say, a drunk driver will speed through a stop sign; the stoned one will wait for it to turn green. The biggest question for all concerned, of course, is what a future legal marijuana market will look like. For many, the solution is to remove marijuana from the list of controlled substances altogether and to let the chips fly where they will. You could grow your own, exchange with friends, or purchase from your local farmers' market. That isn't going to happen. There is way too much money to be made and too many 'legitimate' people eager to get their share. There are also all those experts who have illicitly transformed a mild little weed into a myriad of strains with a wide variety of properties and characteristics. They too will want to enjoy the fruits of their labour. Big business will want its share too, of course, and small businesses will get bigger; all of which adds up to considerable revenue for government. But which government are we talking about? How will the spoils of billions of dollars worth of transactions be divided? Should each province set up its own rules with pot available in convenience stores in one province and government-owned outlets in others? How will quality and potency be categorized and controlled? How will regulations be enforced and by whom? A recently published government report suggested that organized crime might be able to infiltrate a legal marijuana market but, headlines' aside, it is difficult to understand how a market partially infiltrated by criminal organizations is worse than one completely controlled by one. But as the case of tobacco illustrates, this is not a baseless concern. Black market tobacco has infiltrated the legal tobacco market to an extraordinary extent with estimates placing its market share in some regions at close to 40 per cent. This is a result of contradictory desire of government to curtail the use of another lethal, but legal, substance while maintaining the revenues in the form of taxes imposed throughout the lines of distribution. Contraband tobacco products exist because legal ones are too expensive for most nicotine addicts and if an alternative is available, they'll use it. The result is obvious and should serve as an example to our governments of what not to do. There is no doubt that Canada has to emerge from the dark era of marijuana criminality, and we certainly should reexamine our entire drug control policy, but this is a complicated process that involves countless issues and a large cast of players, not all of whose interests converge. It's good that we have a year to sit back, grab some chips, and think about it... There's a Cheech and Chong movie on somewhere. - --- MAP posted-by: Matt