ERASE THE HYPOCRISY OF CRIMINALIZED MARIJUANA

It seems to me there are a lot of reasons why it is long past time that we
decriminalized marijuana.

First of all, the disparity between the way we treat alcohol and the way we
treat pot.

I would suggest that the Canada Day riots in Edmonton would not have
happened had everybody been stoned rather than drunk.

Nor would a vast amount of property crime and domestic abuse.

Apparently, though, we as a society suffer from a leftover social morality
in which we mistakenly accept that there is an unbroken line between
marijuana and drugs such as heroine and cocaine, and that once we jump on
that train, it is only a short trip from pot to PCP.

We make no such assumptions about alcohol, in spite of the fact that its
addictive components have about as much chemical and psychological
similarity to hard drugs as marijuana.

If you want the economic argument, just look at the recent statistics
released by Vancouver's Organized Crime Agency.

They suggest that marijuana is now one of B.C.'s richest commodities. With
an annual production valued at $6 billion, pot growers allegedly bring in
more direct revenues than any of the traditional big-four: forestry,
mining, manufacturing and agriculture.

That $6 billion figure is misleading, of course. The unit price of pot is
held artificially high by the very fact that it is illegal. If it were to
be legalized, that net price would drop considerably. The "retail" price
likely wouldn't change much, of course, once the government got their tax
accountants involved.

But at least the money would be going back into the system, rather than
into the pockets of criminals and opportunists.

Which is another argument for decriminalization.

The "war on drugs" is self-perpetuating strategy that actually creates the
very criminals it purports to fight.

There is a sustained demand for pot that shows little sign of abatement. By
keeping marijuana illegal, that demand can only be satisfied through
illicit means.

We, as a society, are therefore developing employment for a legion of
criminals, rather than gainfully-employed individuals.

I realize that none of these arguments are without shortcomings. We, as a
society, would be legally condoning yet another addictive substance.

We would be making money off the self-destructive behaviours of people who
choose to use these substances.

The point is not, however, whether pot is good for you. It is, rather, how
can we manage it so as to do the least harm to ourselves as individuals and
as a society?

And, in the process, how can we erase some of the hypocrisy that currently
surrounds the complex issue of drug use and abuse?

Cam McAlpine