Pubdate: Tue, 22 Jul 2014
Source: Vancouver Sun (CN BC)
Copyright: 2014 Postmedia Network Inc.
Contact:  http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/477
Author: Daphne Bramham
Page: A1

CITIZENS, NOT POLICE, SHOULD DECIDE ON POT'S DE FACTO LEGALIZATION

Election debate: Time is right for discussion on Vancouver's approach

There's a world of difference between what's going on in Denver and
Seattle when it comes to the sale of marijuana and what's happening
here in Vancouver.

In Colorado and Washington, voters decided that they wanted to
legalize its sale. Then, legislators formulated all kinds of
regulations and levied hefty taxes on the growers, processors, sellers
and buyers.

Here, there's been none of that, and possession, sale and distribution
of marijuana are criminal offences in Canada. There's been no vote to
change that and, of course, there are no regulations.

Yet, 45, so-called, medical marijuana dispensaries operate in
Vancouver. That's a five-fold increase in just four years.

All it takes to buy the drug - as the Sun's Mike Hager found recently
- - is (at most) a fee that ranges from $25 to $90 for a quick
consultation with a naturopath or psychologist and then, the price of
a membership.

This is happening even though under provincial law, naturopaths and
psychologists are not allowed to prescribe cannabis. But neither of
the professions' government bodies is enforcing the
regulations.

As for the Vancouver Police Departments, not only isn't it enforcing
the law when it comes to the dispensaries, its policy of
non-interference extends to the annual, open drug markets held on July
1 and April 20 outside the Vancouver Art Gallery.

Earlier this month, two giant "joints" puffed out harmless smoke that
circled around the former courthouse. Below, the air was redolent as
buyers lit up their purchases from a thick cluster of stalls where
hand-written signs advertised the sellers' products and, at all of
them, baggies of weed were openly exchanged for cash.

VPD media relations officer Brian Montague says it's left to the
discretion of individual officers to enforce the sections of the
Criminal Code related to marijuana based on their interpretation of
the department's drug policy.

The VPD's drug policy is more than a decade old, and centres on
intravenous drug users and safe-injection sites as part of the city's
promised four-pillars plan, which has never fully materialized.

"Vancouver has become the jurisdiction in which drug policy issues and
different approaches to substance abuse are implemented, evaluated and
debated," it says in the introduction.

But I don't recall a wide-ranging public debate over the de-facto
legalization of marijuana. And, I would remember because I'm all for
having an evidence-based debate on marijuana and its effects.

Here are some things I'd like to know: Is second-hand smoke from it is
as harmful as it is from tobacco? Is cannabis more harmful to teens
and young adults than older adults? Are there neurological studies on
long-term use and, if so, what do they conclude?

In the absence of any legal method for roadside testing, how will
police keep us safe from marijuana-impaired drivers? The VPD's drug
policy does, after all, does say that public safety is a top priority.

And, even before Vancouver's de-facto legalization, cannabis
impairment has proven fatal in B.C.

A recent analysis of 226 workplace fatalities between 2003 and 2007
done by a WorkSafeBC researcher found that cannabis - not alcohol -
was most frequently the drug that impaired the workers' ability to
function properly.

Cannabis, not alcohol, was also the most frequently discovered
intoxicant among employees who were in vehicle accidents at work.

The VPD's policy says it will target street- and middle-level,
psychoactive-substance traffickers and preserve the lawful use and
enjoyment of public and private property.

"Enforcement," it says, "will be specifically directed at parks and
school grounds. Children, in particular, should not be placed at risk
by the negative behaviours associated with psychoactive substance abuse."

So the art gallery lawn isn't a park or a place where a lot of kids
might be on Canada Day?

But if there are only a handful of officers assigned to watch over
hundreds of buyers and sellers at a site, it's easy to understand why
the few would choose to stand by and watch the many.

The double standard for legal drugs versus illegal is
breathtaking.

You almost wonder why brewers, wineries and distillers don't band
together to beg the provincial government (or at very least the VPD)
to be treated as outlaws.

Then, they'd have no responsibilities, no cops checking in and
enforcing municipal bylaws and no huge provincial bureaucracy telling
them that finally it's OK to have happy hour.

They could set up shop at the art gallery selling alcohol on the lawn
without having to build a fence.

Their products wouldn't have to be tested and labelled for their
alcohol content. They wouldn't have to hire servers, who had passed
government tests, or be liable for fines if they served someone under
the legal drinking age or someone who was intoxicated.

In democracies, laws and regulations are supposed to supposed to
develop out of informed debate with the aim of maintaining social
harmony, while taxes are assessed to pay for services for the common
good.

It's not supposed to be left to unelected police board members and
individual officers to decide what kind of drug policy is acceptable.

That should be left up to citizens.

And, with a municipal election in November, what better time than now
to have that debate.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Matt