WHAT ABOUT ENDING DRUG PROHIBITION?

It's not often that gang warfare makes its way into the legislature
as the main topic of debate, but that's exactly what happened this
month as the Lower Mainland seemed to morph into something out of The
Untouchables.

Gangland shootings - almost a dozen deaths in recent weeks - have
dominated the headlines and newscasts, and politicians on both sides
of the house found themselves grappling with an issue usually far
from their bailiwick.

There was a lot of talk about amalgamating police forces in the Lower
Mainland into a cohesive regional force, the need for tougher
sentences for gang members and frustration about immigration polices
that allow some convicted gang leaders to avoid deportation.

But one issue wasn't raised: whether or not the legalization of drugs
might at least be considered a viable option in the face of apparent
unstoppable growth of organized crime and gang activity in B.C.

Neither the BC Liberals nor the New Democrats want to go down that
road, and prefer to yell at each other about which party is tougher
on criminals.

The police, and Solicitor General John Les, initially tried to
downplay the outbreak of violence as nothing more than an unfortunate
statistical spike in such behaviour. After a few days their attitude
seemed to change, culminating in a showy news conference featuring
all kinds of police officers trooping into the same room to show they
have a united front against the bad guys.

But does anyone actually believe the police are winning this war? Law
enforcement authorities themselves have acknowledged that organized
crime and illegal gangs are increasing their presence.

Drug trafficking is the economic backbone of those organizations.
There are enormous profits to be had in the procurement and sale of
illegal substances, and the primary reason for those profits is the
fact they are illegal in the first place.

The recent spate of gang shootings invoked more than one comment that
the Lower Mainland was becoming like Chicago of the 1920s. Most of
those comments were made tongue-in-cheek, but the comparison is apt
in an important way - back then, the illegal substance fuelling the
criminal empires of people like Al Capone was alcohol.

When Prohibition was repealed, the gang wars died down. When the
illegality of alcohol was gone, so too was the profit margin for the gangs.

And now one has to wonder whether the current war on drugs is doing
more harm than actual use of those drugs. Can the police really point
to huge success stories in their relentless, ongoing clash with drug
kingpins and low-lifes?

More importantly, who should control the use and distribution of
drugs - criminal organizations or the government?

These are not idle questions. In fact, key people in both health and
law enforcement circles are advocating a radical new attitude toward drugs.

In the United States, a group of current and ex-police officers have
created an organization called Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
(L.E.A.P.; check out their website at www.leap.cc).

And the controlled use of drugs has crept onto the public health
scene in recent years. The safe injection site in Vancouver is an
example of the tacit acknowledgement there is a role for the state in
controlling the use of certain drugs.

The amalgamation of police forces may indeed help combat the
activities of gangs and organized crime. But then again, it may prove
to be no more effective than what is being done now.

However, eliminating the profit margin from the gangs' core economic
activity - drug trafficking - may do a heck of a lot more than
shuffling the police bureaucracy.