HTTP/1.0 200 OK
Content-Type: text/html
Police Not To Blame For War On Weed
Pubdate: Tue, 04 Jan 2005
Source: Ladysmith-Chemanius Chronicle (CN BC)
Copyright: 2005 BC Newspaper Group & New Media
Contact: http://www.ladysmithchronicle.com
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1279
Author: Edward Hill
POLICE NOT TO BLAME FOR WAR ON WEED
In the few weeks before Christmas, Ladysmith Mounties busted a couple of
local marijuana grow-ops. One of the houses was a repeat offender, and the
other was discovered because some other drug dealer was trying to rub out
the competition.
All in all, the police hauled a few hundred plants off the street, after
the time-consuming process of surveillance, getting warrants, cataloguing
the grow gear and getting all the paperwork ready for the Crown prosecutor.
But in the end, after hundreds of hours of work, nothing much was gained in
Canada's half-baked war on the weed.
A reader of this newspaper argued in a letter that using police resources
against grow-ops is a waste of taxpayer money, and basically pot shouldn't
be illegal in the first place. To a point, I agree with this position.
Most people realize marijuana would be a fat cash cow for the government if
it were legal, and mercilessly taxed like tobacco or alcohol. Legalizing
something that is smoked and likely harmful to the lungs is a sticky
question, but even Health Canada has recognized its wide ranging medicinal
benefits. More than 60 per cent of Canadians support the idea that the
government control cultivation and distribution, according to a November
SES Canada Research poll, and this is solid across the demographic board.
Only retirees and Conservative Party members aren't crazy about legalization.
There are questions about what prolonged pot smoking will do to the mind
and body. I've known guys who have smoked daily for decades, and frankly,
they aren't about to do a lot of tricky long-division in their heads. But
it's safe to say pot hasn't been pegged to the smorgasbord of cancers
available from cigarettes, or the kind of social disasters linked to
alcohol abuse.
Even the stuffy, old Canadian Senate got into the game a few years back,
issuing a report denying pot as a "gateway drug" to heroin or cocaine. It
went as far to say all the time, money and efforts by law enforcement
seemed to make little difference. That's $500 million per year of little
difference, according to the auditor general.
But why the big fuss in the first place? The answer is nobody really knows.
In 1923, marijuana was added to a parliamentary bill amending the Opium and
Narcotic Drug Act. Persons unknown, for reasons unknown, added it at the
last minute. They may have been stoned. Parliament didn't debate the issue,
and in fact many MPs and the Canadian Medical Association didn't know
marijuana was illegal for almost a decade.
Attempting to reform what may have been a typo, present-day
parliamentarians are tackling pot laws with half measures, otherwise known
as Bill C-17. It calls for small amounts of personal stash to be
"decriminalized" and tougher trafficking penalties. This is designed to
appease many people - police, users, the American government - but will end
up pleasing none.
Until the politicians can find a spine and make drug laws sensible, pot
will be a commodity, benefitting mainly the criminal elements. Everybody
knows this. Grow-ops and their association with organized crime, not to
mention being a fire hazard, will continue to endanger neighbourhoods.
I support local police busting grows when necessary, but they shouldn't
have to bear the brunt of an entirely preventable 80-year political fiasco.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Elizabeth Wehrman