IT'S TIME FOR PROPER DEBATE ON MARIJUANA

There is a growing movement in Britain to decriminalize the use of cannabis
for medical purposes and for personal use. The London Independent recently
stated that the new Labour govt. would like to legalize the drug, but
fears a backlash from the middle class.

Many people still carry the "reefer madness" stereotype when it comes to
marijuana, failing to distinguish this soft drug from harmful, addictive
drugs such as heroin and opium.

Proponents of decriminalization say the old idea of cannabis as a "gateway"
drug which leads to the use of hard drugs is based only on prejudice and
fear. They point to the Dutch experience. In Holland, where the use of
cannabis is now legal, licensed "coffee houses" serve marijuana in edible
form or for smoking to anyone over 16.

A recent Dutch report shows that very few young people in Holland who use
cannabis go on to take hard drugs. In fact, the use of hard drugs has
actually fallen since cannabis was legalized. Also, solvent abuse and glue
sniffing among teenagers is now unheard of.

An editorial in a leading British medical journal, the Lancet, goes so far
as to say, Cannabis per se is not a hazard to society, but driving it
further underground may well be."

Many advocates of decriminalization, in our own country as well as Britain,
point out that the law has not proved any more effective in trying to stop
the use of cannabis than prohibition was in trying to stamp out the use of
alcohol. The so called "war on drugs" has simply resulted in an expanded
illegal drug empire and the enrichment of criminals.

The biggest irony in this whole situation is the fact that patients who
need marijuana for medical purposes are unable to get the drug legally when
it is so readily available on the black market.

Last July, the British Medical Association voted overwhelmingly for
cannabis to be made available for medical reasons. There is a large body of
evidence that marijuana helps reduce tremors in MS patients and that it is
useful in the treatment of glaucoma.

Scientists are being frustrated in their research on the medical benefits
of cannabis because its medical use is unlawful. Clearly, to deny the use
of a drug which may be beneficial and have fewer side effects than those
used for the same conditions seems a disservice to society. Furthermore, to
block scientific research in this area is counter-productive.

As the debate over the legalization of cannabis for recrea- tional and
medical purposes heats up in Britain, we can expect some ripple effects in
North America, particularly in the event the movement for decriminalization
succeeds.

We will certainly see a growing interest here in reviving the debate over
whether marijuana should be legalized. It is a debate long overdue, and it
deserves good, honest argument which focuses on issues and facts rather
than emotion.