Pubdate: Thu, 16 Oct 2014
Source: Victoria Times-Colonist (CN BC)
Page: A11
Copyright: 2014 Times Colonist
Contact: http://www2.canada.com/victoriatimescolonist/letters.html
Website: http://www.timescolonist.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/481
Author: David N. Lyon
Note: David N. Lyon is a Victoria lawyer.
Referenced: CAMH releases new Cannabis Policy Framework:
http://mapinc.org/url/sCod1dXx

POT PROHIBITION BENEFITS THE WRONG PEOPLE

Those who refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
Alcohol prohibition was a dismal failure. We have not fared any better
with marijuana prohibition. This has now been acknowledged by the
Centre for Addiction and Mental Health. It is regrettable, but not
surprising, that the current government has chosen to reject the CAMH
position.

There is no question that alcohol is far more harmful that
marijuana.

Consider the following:

Alcohol can, and does, cause serious health problems.

Alcohol has a devastating impact on innocent third parties. Drinking
and driving kills people. That is not open to debate. Estimates will
vary, but the annual toll in Canada is somewhere in the thousands, and
in the U.S., it is in the tens of thousands. Most of us have
first-hand experience of the way in which alcohol impacts our ability
to drive, either through personal experience or having seen others.

Alcohol also brings out the worst in some people. Statistics in the
U.S. suggest that up to three million violent crimes are committed
annually by people who have been drinking. This is consistent with my
own experience of representing criminal defendants for over 25 years.
I have dealt with all manner of people who have committed violent
crimes while intoxicated. Many of these people were otherwise
productive, law-abiding citizens. It is very unlikely that they would
have committed violent crimes without over-indulgence in alcohol.

Innocent third parties include those who suffer from fetal alcohol
syndrome. This tragedy results from the consumption of alcohol.

On the other hand, there is no credible evidence linking the
consumption of marijuana with violent crime. There is, however,
considerable evidence linking violent crime with the distribution of
marijuana. This is because prohibition provides financial incentives
to those who have no allegiance to the values of a civilized society.

Prohibition also diminishes respect for the law. By now, most people
understand that the film Reefer Madness was a work of fiction. They
also, based on their experience with others, or on personal
experimentation, are aware that marijuana is relatively benign when
compared to alcohol. Every police officer I have ever spoken to would
far rather deal with a room full of stoners than a room full of drunks.

Prohibition is not, and never was, the answer. We should have learned
that a long time ago.

The answer is legalization with regulated distribution. This has a
number of benefits over other approaches. In addition to tax revenue,
purchasers have the assurance that the product is pure and
unadulterated. Available evidence suggests the price would be lower.
Who is going to pay double for a black-market product that may be
spiked with who knows what? For those who drink alcohol, have you ever
seriously considered checking out a more expensive black market
product with no assurance of quality?

It is unrealistic to think that legalization and regulation would
eliminate the use of marijuana by those who are underage. However,
under the present regime, marijuana is produced and distributed by
people who are willing to break the law without hesitation. Does
anyone seriously think these people check the ID of customers at the
door?

A legalized, regulated regime would include production and
distribution by people who are far more likely to respect the law, and
to refuse to sell to young people.

The choice then becomes: either expensive black market product, no
assurance of purity, no real information on the proportion of active
ingredients and ready access for young people; OR, less expensive
product, purity assured, proportion of active ingredients described
right there on the label and more effective restriction on access by
young people.

To summarize, prohibition is expensive and ineffective. It is
destructive, because it causes far more harm that it avoids. It causes
gang warfare, and innocent third parties die. It promotes disrespect
for the law, because people have come to understand that marijuana is
far less harmful than alcohol. It harms individuals, saddling them
with the stigma of a criminal record for engaging in an activity that
does not cause significant harm to innocent third parties, and forcing
users to take risks related to contamination.

Ask yourself: Who benefits the most from prohibition? The answer is
clear.

Those who benefit are those involved in the illegal production and
distribution of marijuana. Many of these people are utterly ruthless,
and have no allegiance to the norms of a civilized society. The
prohibition approach allows some of these people to become rich and
powerful. How does that make our society a better place? 
- ---
MAP posted-by: Richard