Pubdate: Thu, 26 Apr 2012
Source: Fairview Post (CN AB)
Copyright: 2012 Fairview Post
Contact: http://www.fairviewpost.com/feedback1/LetterToEditor.aspx
Website: http://www.fairviewpost.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/3369
Author: Jacquie Maynard

MARIJUANA PROHIBITION: REQUIRED OR RIDICULOUS?

Recently, the Huffington Post ran an article stating that according 
to more than 300 economists, the U.S. government could potentially 
save $13.7 billion dollars by not enforcing the prohibition and 
taxing it like tobacco and alcohol.

As someone who has always been pro-legalization, I found this 
interesting and saw it as a ray of light through the thunderstorm 
that is this ridiculous marijuana prohibition.

So, if it could potentially save the States billions of dollars, what 
about Canada?

According to the 2009 Angus Reid poll, 53% of Canadians were in 
favour of legalizing cannabis.

Obviously, possession, trafficking and growing of marijuana is 
illegal in Canada.

Simple possession (anything under 30 grams) can result in a maximum 
$1000 fine or six months in jail, and trafficking can result in 
anything from a slap on the wrist and a fine to jail time.

Drug prohibition in Canada started in 1908 with the Opium Act. It 
forbade the sale, manufacture and importation of opium for anything 
other than medical use, and it later expanded to include morphine and 
cocaine in 1911.

It wasn't until 1923, when the Opium and Narcotics Act came in, that 
cannabis was added to Confidential Restricted List.

While it was criminalized in 1923, it didn't start getting attention 
until the 1930s, and the first arrest wasn't made until 1937. Even in 
the next two or three decades, it was barely a blip on police radar.

Between 1946 and 1966 cannabis only accounted for 2% of drug arrests in Canada.

In 2002, Jean Chretien's Liberal government introduced a bill that 
would have decriminalized the possession of small amounts of 
marijuana. Possession of a half ounce or less would have only 
resulted in a fine, and those possessing up to a full ounce would be 
either ticketed or charged. Up to seven plants for personal use would 
have also become a summary offence, but any more than that would have 
a more severe punishment.

It looked like the bill might have been able to pass, too, but it 
died when Parliament prorogued.

Not only that, but the DEA supposedly put a lot of pressure on our 
government, threatening to slow down border-crossings along the 
border just in case someone decided to try to smuggle our legal weed 
into their country. As if that wasn't happening already.

An identical bill was introduced again in November 2004 by Paul 
Martin's Liberals, but it got shot down too.

So should it be illegal?

There are reports of cannabis use for medicinal purposes as far back 
as 2727 BC in China and apparently even Queen Victoria used cannabis 
to relieve her menstrual cramps.

In 1937 it is criminalized in the United States, and by 1965 over 1 
million Americans had tried it, and that number jumped to 24 million by 1972.

Now, marijuana is America's number one cash crop, raking in around 
$36 billion per year.

In 1996, California introduced Proposition 215, making marijuana 
legal for medicinal use, and since then around 14 other states, and 
Canada, have followed.

Of course, it's not as easy as just flipping a switch and legalizing 
it. There are a few things that would need to be considered: what 
about the price? The quality?

It makes sense that the illegality of the substance has influence on 
the price because of the risk factor. If it was legal, would the price go down?

Would the government employ growers that are already in operation? 
And will the quality increase or decrease if the government gets 
their hands on it?

Recreational marijuana users and those who need compassionate care 
services (medical marijuana - for more information, visit 
www.medicalmarijuanacure.com) obviously want it to be legalized, and 
I would have to say that I agree with them.

Sure, weed is a drug, but so are alcohol and tobacco. People are 
getting smarter since the "Reefer Madness" days, where everyone was 
afraid that one toke of weed would turn their poor innocent children 
into raving homicidal maniacs.

Anyone who has ever ingested the drug knows how false those claims are.

Marijuana is not physiologically addictive like alcohol or cocaine; 
it can be habit-forming but normally users do not report withdrawal 
symptoms like those of alcohol or other narcotics.

Also, to those of you that say that if it's legal, more people will 
use it, I have this to say: In Holland, where marijuana is legal, it 
was reported that once it became legal, usage of marijuana and hard 
drugs dropped significantly.

As it is, there is practically unlimited access to weed whether it's 
legal or not, so people are going to get it no matter what.

If it was legalized, the soft drug trade would stop feeding organized 
crime, stop congesting our prison system with nonviolent offenders 
and make obtaining the drug safe and risk-free, especially for those 
looking for compassionate care.

The way I see it, marijuana is just like alcohol. Some people come 
home and relax on the couch with a beer, and some do it with a joint.

It has even been proven that alcohol does more damage to your body 
than marijuana does, and there have been no recorded deaths that 
could be directly attributed to using marijuana.

Besides, I don't know about you, but I would rather be in a room full 
of stoned people than a room full of drunk people.

You never hear of a marijuana user getting high and coming home and 
beating his wife and children; the most damage he is likely to do is 
to his refrigerator.

So what do you guys think? Should it be legalized, decriminalized, or 
should the laws stay the way they are?
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom