from restore-L Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 11:11:24 -0700 From: "D. Paul Stanford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Canada: Decriminalizing marijuana a no-brainer Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Newshawk: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Source: London Free Press (CN ON) Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pubdate: August 4, 2000 Author: David Dauphinee, The London Free Press Decriminalizing marijuana a no-brainer Ten-month-old Dylan Clay is making happy little baby noises while his dad Chris talks expectantly of a day when the family can visit Disneyland. Realistically, any travel by Clay outside Canada will be a long way off. Like 600,000 other Canadians who have fallen victim to Canada's senseless and futile efforts to prohibit marijuana use, the 29-year-old former Londoner has a criminal record that severely restricts travel. The United States, with its war on drugs so conveniently papering over a host of social ills from decaying cities to lousy test scores for students, will be off-limits for some time. But, unlike the Canadians who chalk up a pot bust to a youthful indiscretion or hide it from friends and bosses, Clay doesn't care who knows. The law is wrong and he's out to change it. The Ontario Court of Appeal knocked the socks off the federal government this week when it ordered the law changed to permit medical use of marijuana -- or face court- imposed cancellation of all prohibitions. Of course marijuana should be available to treat the symptoms of illnesses such as AIDS or epilepsy. The fact Ottawa challenged this issue defies comprehension. If marijuana makes patients feel better, and it does, government should merely figure out how to make it available. Canadians should have access to their choice of medicine. In the words of Osgoode Hall professor and lawyer Alan Young, who argued the case, the medical use issue is a "no-brainer." At the same time, the court passed judgment on an even more important case that was all but overlooked in the media scramble to manufacture what-if scenarios from the medical marijuana decision. The appeal court's stockpile of bravery exhausted on medical marijuana, it upheld a decision prohibiting Clay from possessing pot for recreational purposes. Clay's argument there are no harmful effects and that criminalization poses a greater threat was received sympathetically, but to no avail. No one really expected the decision to be the end in either case. Clay's is one of three marijuana cases moving slowly to the Supreme Court of Canada. Another, the medical marijuana case, will no doubt be appealed by the feds if only to buy more time than the one-year deadline. The other is in British Columbia. Steadily, persistently, almost from the day London cops swooped down May 17, 1995, on his King Street shop -- the Great Canadian Hemp Emporium -- Clay has fought to end the criminalization of marijuana users. "They came at the end of the day, about 20 police officers, and they took me straight to jail and held me for the night," he recalls. "They went through my home the next morning and really trashed it -- it looked like somebody had broken in. All the drawers were emptied out, all the closets, it was a disaster. "They also charged friends of mine who were staying at the house and employees who were at the store." Five years and $40,000 later -- lawyers, including Young, are working for free -- he predicts his case will be at the Supreme Court about this time next year. Along the way, he has been helped by many contributors, including another ex-Londoner. Former City Lights book store owner Marc Emery, who has carved out a niche selling pot seeds, has promised to contribute $5,000 to the upcoming fight -- on top of thousands he has already contributed, says Clay. There's a high cost to acting on principle. Photocopying alone has cost more than $10,000. Another $30,000 went to things like expert witnesses, flying them in, putting them up in hotels, and occasional honoraria. Over those five years under a microscope, Clay has sensed a shift in public opinion. "Prohibition has done nothing to stem the marijuana trade, it is everywhere and people can easily find it." More than one-quarter of Canadians admit to having smoked grass at some point. When that many Canadians say the law is an ass and disobey it, when a majority support decriminalizing it, when the courts downgrade sentences to a fine or suspended sentence, the need for a change should be apparent to even the most skittish Ottawa politician. As it stands, Young argues the law has only a political purpose -- it protects Ottawa from retaliation by our southern neighbour for whom drugs are a bogeyman. And a drug that's so ubiquitous is a perfect foil for police in chasing other concerns. The worst part is that prohibition brings so many Canadians in contact with organized crime. Pot costs about the same to grow as tomatoes, says Clay. But a pound of tomatoes sells for $2 to $3, while marijuana costs $3,000. The untaxed difference goes to a black market and organized crime. And in the hands of crooks, there's no such thing as quality control, so potency has ratcheted up. Age limits? Sure -- how about the same as for booze. And hit drivers impaired by pot as hard as you would those wrenched from reality by Pernod or Percodan. But there's no longer any policy or scientific justification for arguing booze and smokes are OK but users of a less harmful substance should get slapped with a criminal record. David Dauphinee ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) is a writer with The London Free Press. His column appears Fridays. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 11:12:33 -0700 From: "D. Paul Stanford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Canada: Column: Pot breakthrough overdue Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Newshawk: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Source: Edmonton Sun (CN AB) Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pubdate: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 Author: Mindelle Jacobs Pot breakthrough overdue The government's recently released annual review of crime in Canada provides yet more ammunition for the growing number of people who believe marijuana should be decriminalized. The story of the day, when the Statistics Canada report came out earlier this month, was that crime fell in 1999 for the eighth consecutive year, resulting in the lowest crime rate in 20 years. There was lots of good news. All major categories of crime dropped last year, including homicide, attempted murder, assault, sexual assault and robbery. There were also declines in property crime (like break-ins and car theft) and youth crime. But one category stuck out like a sore thumb - drug crime - and it didn't get much play in the media. Bucking the trend, drug offences have actually increased 32% since 1993, primarily due to increases in possession and cultivation of marijuana. Although cocaine arrests fell by 3% and heroin offences dropped slightly by 1% last year over 1998, cannabis-related charges jumped a whopping 16%. In fact, offences involving marijuana accounted for three-quarters of the almost 80,000 drug-related incidents in 1999. Of more significance is that two-thirds of the marijuana charges laid last year were for possession (as opposed to 17% for trafficking, 15% for cultivation and 2% for importation.) Is anybody shocked? You shouldn't be. Pot use has been steadily growing for the past decade despite all our drug awareness education programs and police enforcement. It's been sort of a rite of passage since the flower-power days of the 1960s. Everyone from your plumber to your MP has probably smoked it and who cares? Certainly not the majority of Canadians who have repeatedly said in polls that they favour the decriminalization of pot possession for personal use. The stats show 19% of those charged with possession of marijuana were youths, so the anti-drug message isn't getting through to large numbers of young people. But look at the bright side. It's safer than what your kids could be taking - like ecstasy, cocaine or heroin. And as Ontario's Centre for Addiction and Mental Health has pointed out, most pot use is sporadic and not likely to have negative consequences. The centre is the latest professional body to call for the removal of criminal sanctions for personal pot possession. Other groups supporting such a move include the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police and the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse. (The Alberta Alcohol and Drug Abuse Commission has not taken a position on the issue.) Let's hope they're not just cries in the wilderness. Based on evidence from other jurisdictions, decriminalizing marijuana possession won't lead to increased use. And we already know that criminal sanctions aren't working, so the police are wasting resources that could be better used hunting down real criminals. An RCMP drug report released in March noted that pot is the most popular illicit drug in terms of both consumption and trafficking and that most of the large growing operations are run by outlaw bike gangs. Independent growers are sometimes even coerced into working for the bikers, according to the RCMP. Simply legalizing pot for those over 18 would take a huge bite out of the proceeds of organized crime. Canadians may not be ready for such a move. But they clearly want to give pot users a break. The Senate committee now reviewing our drug laws has a three-year mandate though. So don't expect the smoke to clear for a while. ------------------------------ __________ EcoNews Service - Alternative News: Ecology, Consciousness & Universe Politics mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] USA http://www.earthradioTV.com/index2.html CZECH http://mujweb.cz/www/ecologynews/ UK http://members.tripod.co.uk/ecologynews/ Canada http://www.ecologynews.com/index2.html <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
