Pubdate: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 Source: Edmonton Sun (CN AB) Copyright: 2007 Canoe Limited Partnership. Contact: http://www.edmontonsun.com Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/135 Author: Mindelle Jacobs Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/people/Mark+Kleiman (Mark Kleiman) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/decrim.htm (Decrim/Legalization) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mjcn.htm (Cannabis - Canada) DRUG WAR ABOUT DAMAGE CONTROL Public policy experts are often at odds with governments on how best to handle complex social issues and it was no different yesterday at a national addictions conference in Edmonton. There is no evidence that tough enforcement of drug laws either reduces the availability or increases the price of illicit drugs. Yet the U.S. has consistently maintained its hardline stance on drugs over the years and the Harper Conservatives just announced that Canada, too, will impose stricter sanctions for certain drug crimes. The Tories, for instance, plan to bring in a two-year minimum sentence for running a pot grow-op of 500 plants or more. The keynote speaker at yesterday's conference, however, stirred the pot by adding his voice to a growing list of drug-policy reformers who propose that we just legalize pot. Marijuana should be legalized for personal use and free distribution, Mark Kleiman told delegates at the 2007 conference of the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse. "Not everybody has a green thumb, so you could get your pot from your friend," Kleiman, a professor of public policy at UCLA, said in a later interview. "Do I think people would sell it? Of course they'd sell it and I couldn't care less. I don't want the billboards." The goal of drug policy should be to limit the damage from drugs -- such as disease, accidents, crime and social functioning -- not to wage "cultural warfare" on drug users, Kleiman said. TARGETS To that end, he offered several other prescriptions. Drug sentencing should be based on the behaviour of the drug dealer, not the particular drug or amount being sold. The most dangerous and violent dealers are the ones police need to target, he said. "You want the (additional sentence) for having a gun to be sufficiently large compared to the original sentence that a drug dealer will consider not having a gun because he wants to avoid that sentence," he said. "You want to create competitive disadvantage for the most obnoxious dealing styles. And, unfortunately, routine drug law enforcement creates competitive advantage for the most obnoxious dealing styles." In the U.S., for example, the minimum sentences for selling small amounts of drugs are already so lengthy that another few years tacked on for the use of a weapon has no impact on a dealer's conduct, he said. Tougher sentences for the most violent dealers won't shrink the volume of illicit drugs on the streets, but they will at least reduce the amount of damage done, Kleiman said. "Most of the users are going to find a way to get their drug. But you can save the neighbourhood from the side effects of dealing." He also proposes routine random testing of drug offenders on probation and parole and a two-day stint in jail every time they test positive. "Anybody who's trained a puppy understands these principles," he said. "That will dramatically reduce the amount of drugs they use." Alcohol may be legal, but 20% of the beds in acute care hospitals are filled by patients with a booze-related disorder of some kind, Kleiman added. He recommends a multi-pronged approach to encouraging people to drink responsibly. He'd scrap the drinking age, prohibit anyone under 21 from driving with any alcohol in their system and raise booze taxes. As well, doctors should be screening patients for alcohol and drug use and giving them advice if needed, he added. Agree or not with Kleiman's stance, you have to admit that drug policy experts are, at least, realists. Politicians are usually the blinkered ideologues. - --- MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom