Pubdate: Thu, 05 Mar 2015 Source: National Post (Canada) Copyright: 2015 Canwest Publishing Inc. Contact: http://drugsense.org/url/wEtbT4yU Website: http://www.nationalpost.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/286 Page: A8 HALF WAY TO ENLIGHTENMENT The Conservatives inched closer to supporting marijuana decriminalization this week, while insisting they by no means support decriminalizing marijuana. "Our government is still considering ... creating a new ticketing proposal for possession of small quantities," Justice Minister Peter MacKay's office said in a statement. "To be clear," it continued, "any proposed changes would not decriminalize or legalize cannabis possession." Earlier musings from Mr. MacKay suggest criminal offences would remain on the books; police would have the option to lay charges or to issue a ticket. This idea, long supported by the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, would represent a small and, on balance, positive step. But the only difference between the "decriminalization" proposal the Conservatives virulently opposed in the 2000s, when the Liberals proposed it, and what the Conservatives are now considering adopting as their own policy is the matter of police discretion. And that sole difference makes it a worse idea. Police already have discretion - to charge or to look the other way. And we know how they use it. Deliberately or otherwise, they use it inconsistently: In 2012, in hippie haven Tofino, B.C., police laid marijuana charges at a rate of 588 per 100,000; in hippie haven Nelson, B.C., often called Canada's "pot capital," the rate was roughly half that. When criminal charges and tickets are totted up, it's easy to imagine who's going to get the pointy end of the stick, deliberately or otherwise. A 2002 study of more than 10,000 drug arrests in Toronto found black suspects were far more likely than whites, even after other factors had been accounted for, to be taken in to a police station (rather than released at the scene), and even more likely to be held overnight pending a bail hearing. It's not just race, either. "In criminal law we used to call it the 'I didn't-respect-the-officer-enough' offence. If you apologized enough you were unlikely to be charged," Derek Corrigan, a former defence attorney and now mayor of Burnaby, B.C., told a pro-legalization event in 2013. "I found that to be reprehensible." Indeed. Circumstances aggravating marijuana possession can be written into law. Otherwise, other things being equal, it is not clear why police should be afforded this level of discretion. At the 2012 Summit of the Americas in Colombia, Stephen Harper conceded "the current approach [to the war on drugs] is not working. But it is not clear what we should do." Being open to marijuana law reform is one thing it is clear the Conservatives should do, and it's good news they've come this far - even if it's only in response to Liberal leader Justin Trudeau's embrace of a legalization-and-regulation model. Still, a party notionally dedicated to free markets must realize the absurdity inherent even in the new, quasi-enlightened policy they're entertaining. It would leave the marijuana trade in the hands of sometimes violent criminals. It would continue to lumber some Canadians with criminal records for simple possession of a product that's considerably less harmful than alcohol and tobacco, products we have been relatively successful at keeping out of children's hands through regulation and which we tax to highly lucrative effect. In short, the Conservatives should be looking miles beyond this timid proposal they're considering. If they're not yet ready to contemplate Mr. Trudeau's position, they can at least commit to closely monitor the legalization experiments currently under way in several American states. They know the status quo doesn't work. It's time they started working in earnest toward a coherent new approach. - --- MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom