Pubdate: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 Source: Winnipeg Sun (CN MB) Copyright: 2010 Canoe Limited Partnership Contact: http://www.winnipegsun.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/503 Author: Mike Sutherland Note: Mike Sutherland is the head of the Winnipeg Police Association. Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/opinion.htm (Opinion) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mjcn.htm (Marijuana - Canada) SPARKING DEBATE As both a mother and police officer, St. Boniface MP Shelly Glover expressed her concern last week over comments by Michael Ignatieff in regards to marijuana use and the law in its current form. For her efforts Glover was attacked by Liberal justice critic Marlene Jennings, stating she was unworthy "to wear the uniform of a police officer." The remarks centred on Glover's condemnation of this Ignatieff statement: "I've never felt that marijuana use or, for example, possession of small amounts of marijuana are to be criminalized or that anybody should suffer consequences for personal recreational uses of marijuana." I recognize the whole marijuana debate has been ongoing for years. It's often punctuated by "smoke ins" where many congregate and light up with no arrest or other legal consequence imposed. Most cops recognize small amounts of marijuana aren't the crime of the century, and there's been many times when the odd non-confrontational toker has been made to flush the goods and sent on their way with merely a warning. There has also been many times that inquiring into a seemingly simple and small possession complaint resulted in an arrest for much more serious offences. Most cops have an issue with declaring carte blanche decriminalization. Doing so removes all remaining discouragements and ensures an overt usage, as well as steady, and maybe even growing numbers of customers for the gangsters and other organized crime figures who are the major suppliers and profiteers for this product. If decriminalization were to occur, does anyone really think societal acceptance and usage wouldn't increase, particularly among the young? So what about workplaces, schools, public events? Is anyone really happy about the prospect of increased usage in relation to any or all of these places? Let's not even consider the potential workplace hazards or other concerns. What about the rights of those who don't want them or their children inhaling marijuana if someone decides to legally "light up" nearby? Must they be forced to pack up and head home? What about driving? Currently there's no reliable scientific measure of THC intoxication, other than perhaps a blood test, which the courts find too intrusive except for the most severe circumstances. Without an objective scientifically reliable test, the matter will rely solely upon the subjective assessment of police, which renders it more vulnerable to acquittal. Of course there's always the concern about today marijuana, what's tomorrow? Cocaine? Meth? Ecstacy? Before publicly condoning its use, Mr. Ignatieff, might have instead provided solutions to some of the questions and issues surrounding the consequences of his view. Also had MP Glover not called him on it, she'd be much more vulnerable to Jenning's criticism. Despite her status as MP, Shelly's still a cop and a mom. We'd expect her to come out swinging when there are issues surrounding comments supportive of narrow policy positions that fail to consider the serious ramifications of this tentative proposition. - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake