Pubdate: Sat, 20 Jul 2002
Source: Northwest Florida Daily News (FL)
Copyright: 2002 Northwest Florida Daily News
Contact:  http://www.nwfdailynews.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/313

BRITISH HAVE BETTER IDEA FOR MARIJUANA

Great Britain's decision to change its laws on cannabis, or marijuana, 
almost to the point of decriminalizing simple possession of the plant by an 
adult is not as drastic as some news stories have suggested — and may, in 
fact, be so modest as not to achieve some of the hoped-for benefits of 
decriminalization.

Nonetheless, it's an important step that will create a record U.S. 
officials should study.

Roger Howard, chief executive of DrugScope, Britain's leading nonprofit 
organization dealing with drug policy issues, told Freedom Communications 
that the 1971 Misuse of Drugs Act has three categories: Class A includes 
heroin, cocaine and other "hard drugs," Class B includes methamphetamine 
and (until now) cannabis, and Class C includes benzodiazepine and other 
tranquilizers.

The policy change announced by Home Secretary David Blunkett will move 
cannabis to Class C. It will ensure that for most adults simple possession 
of cannabis will not mean arrest, though they may face a fine or a civil 
penalty.

In the United States, under the 1970 Controlled Substances Act, there are 
five "schedules" for controlled drugs. Schedule I, which prohibits any use 
(even under medical supervision), includes heroin, LSD and marijuana. Drugs 
on the other schedules (morphine, methamphetamine and cocaine are on 
Schedule II) can be prescribed under limited circumstances.

Based on science and relative dangers, marijuana has no business being on 
Schedule I (see the 1999 Institute of Medicine report, "Marijuana and 
Medicine," for documentation), but for political reasons it remains there.

Why has Great Britain decided to institute policies guided more by science 
than political expediency?

Peter Lilley, a Conservative member of Parliament who served in the 
cabinets of Margaret Thatcher and John Major, noted that three years ago 
the House of Lords approved a report recommending decriminalization of 
marijuana. That got the debate started.

"I had no particular interest in the issue until I talked more intensively 
with my constituents," Mr. Lilley told Freedom Communications. "They 
convinced me that the current law was unenforceable and, after some 
research, I concluded that the arguments for maintaining the status quo 
simply could not be defended."

Mr. Lilley wrote a pamphlet arguing that marijuana's legal status should be 
changed so as to break the link with dealers of hard drugs.

Because the new policy does not set up legal channels for distribution of 
marijuana, he fears that it might not have the desired beneficial effect. 
But he is pleased to see this much of a move toward common sense.

The main difference between Britain and the United States seems to be that 
some British officials have paid attention to official scientific reports.

Maybe U.S. citizens should require politicians, DEA honcho Asa Hutchinson 
and other officials to read and pass a test on the 1999 Institute of 
Medicine report and the 1972 Shafer Commission Report before discussing 
marijuana again in public.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom