DAVID BRATZER AND LAW ENFORCEMENT AGAINST PROHIBITION HAVE FOUGHT IN
THE TRENCHES OF THE WAR ON DRUGS AND WANT TO END IT

If you really want to know about a war, ask the soldiers on the
ground. In the case of the four-decades-old War on Drugs, those
soldiers would be the police officers charged with busting dealers
and users. And, though they may not represent a majority within their
profession, some cops are beginning to break ranks, to publicly
question the wisdom and effectiveness of drug prohibition.

Take David Bratzer, a Canadian police officer and a member of Law
Enforcement Against Prohibition [LEAP], an international nonprofit
organization made up of current and former law enforcement officials
who support the legalization and regulation of marijuana and other drugs.

We asked Bratzer--who was recently on Maui--to talk about LEAP,
legalization and what the drug war looks like from the trenches.

You're a law enforcement officer advocating for the legalization of a
substance that's a Schedule One narcotic in the United States. Isn't
that a contradiction?

Not at all. We need to consider what drug prohibition has done to the
vital profession of law enforcement. It has divided police officers
from the communities we serve, alienated us from young people, sent
our call loads through the roof, placed huge financial strains on
police budgets and, sometimes, my colleagues have been injured or
murdered while enforcing these drug laws. Every police officer should
question whether the War on Drugs is worth fighting, particularly
when there are other policy options that would result in less crime,
addiction, disease and death.

What was the turning point that led you to support legalization?

It was a gradual process. During the police academy my instructors
didn't focus on the issue and they certainly didn't encourage
recruits to think outside the box. One turning point was the recent
gang war in Vancouver over control of the drug trade. That was eye
opening. As I attended various patrol calls I began to ask myself:
was this incident related to drug use or was it related to the
prohibition of drugs? And usually it was the latter. I began to
research drug policy on my own.

I was surprised to discover that even though I was a police officer,
I didn't know as much about drugs as I thought I did. I publicly
joined Law Enforcement Against Prohibition in November 2008 after
speaking with my police chief. It's a fantastic organization and I
have no regrets about joining.

Do you think the War on Drugs has been lost?

The War on Drugs is an unmitigated disaster. In the past four decades
the United States has spent more than one trillion tax dollars on
drug enforcement and made 39 million arrests for non-violent drug
offences. And for what? Illegal drugs are now cheaper, stronger and
more available than they were at the start of the drug war. Inner
cities throughout the United States have been devastated by the War
on Drugs. Mexico is in danger of becoming a failed state because of
the drug cartel violence. Opium profits are funding the insurgency in
Afghanistan. Would any rational person consider this a success?

What would a sensible marijuana policy look like?

LEAP doesn't have an official position on how drugs should be
regulated. We simply point out that drug prohibition does not work.
That said, there are some organizations doing fantastic work in this
area. In particular, the Transform Drug Policy Foundation just
released a free online book titled After the War on Drugs: Blueprints
for Regulation. It examines a wide range of drug policy options and I
highly recommend it.

OK, let's run through a few classic anti-legalization arguments.
First, legalization will make it easier for kids and teens to get pot.

I disagree. Look at a place like the Netherlands. They have
decriminalized marijuana, meaning that small quantities are legal for
the end-user to purchase. Their population has a lifetime usage rate
of marijuana that is half that of the United States. That is [based
on] data from the World Mental Health Surveys, as compiled by the
World Health Organization. So why is this? First, the Netherlands has
managed to make drug use boring for young people. There is nothing
rebellious about smoking a joint in Amsterdam. Second, the
Netherlands uses regulatory measures to control the sale of marijuana
to consumers. For example, the cannabis coffee shops have age
minimums, alcohol is banned and advertising is prohibited. It's not a
perfect system but it's far more effective than what we're doing in
the United States and Canada.

Second, marijuana use will erode the moral character of people and communities.

The moral position here would be a compassionate drug policy based on
scientific evidence. Consider this: the United States has some of the
harshest penalties in the world for drug offenders and yet its
lifetime incidence of marijuana use is among the highest in the
world. If that is an indicator of moral character then the United
States is behind Nigeria, Lebanon, France, Germany, Mexico and Italy
and many other nations. However, I don't think that's the case. I've
traveled throughout the United States and I believe this is a great
country with strong values. We need to move away from framing the
debate around the morality of drug use. Drug use may be moral or
immoral but that's not an argument for criminalization. It would be
like saying that cheating on your spouse should be an arrestable
offence. We know that behavior is wrong but a police officer doesn't
throw someone in jail for it. Instead, we should be asking ourselves
questions like these: what is an effective drug policy? What actually
works? How do we minimize the potential harm from drug abuse?

Finally, and most famously, marijuana is a "gateway drug" that opens
the door to other, harder drugs.

The gateway theory of drug use was discredited ages ago. I don't even
want to talk about it. However, the gateway theory of drug
trafficking is very much alive. That is, teenagers begin selling
marijuana in high school. It's a lucrative job and it guarantees them
money, friends and dating opportunities. As they get older they start
trafficking more dangerous drugs and in larger quantities. They
become entrenched in a criminal lifestyle as professional drug
dealers. Eventually they wind up dead or in prison. But consider what
would happen if all drugs were legal and regulated for adult use. One
might still see the occasional adolescent marijuana dealer, but the
career option of becoming a mid- or high-level criminal drug dealer
simply wouldn't exist. Being a teenage pot dealer would be a dead-end
job rather than an entry point for gang membership and a life of
organized crime.

So what is LEAP's stance on harder drugs?

[LEAP] believes that all drugs should be legal and regulated. The
argument in favor of regulating these drugs is not that they're
harmless, but rather that they're so dangerous they should be
controlled by the government. Remember that under prohibition the
government has no control. It's the violent drug dealer who decides
the price, purity, cutting agents, advertising methods, business
location and hours of operation. And these drug dealers certainly are
not asking kids for ID, or encouraging their customers to seek
addiction treatment. We need to move away from prohibition and begin
considering models that give the government control over the market
for these drugs.

How do other members of law enforcement react to you and you
organization? Do you feel ostracized by more mainstream or hard-line
anti-drug cops?

Most officers will admit that the War on Drugs has failed, although
there is broad disagreement on how to solve the problem. Some cops
believe that drug dealers should get the death penalty. But if you
examine a regime like Iran, for example, that strategy has not
worked. Tehran routinely executes drug traffickers and yet they have
the highest opiate addiction rate in the world. I should emphasize
that my volunteer work with [LEAP] is something I do while off-duty.
My views don't represent those of my police department. My colleagues
are well aware of my views but I still have a good working
relationship with them. When I'm on the job I still arrest people for
drug possession and trafficking. I do the job that taxpayers pay me
to do. My membership in LEAP is about changing laws that are
ineffective and harmful, not picking and choosing which laws I want to enforce.

If you had to guess, how long will it be before marijuana is legal in
the United States? Will it happen all at once or state by state,
through efforts like the one in California? How about in your native Canada?

I think it will happen gradually in the U.S and Canada. Hopefully
significant change will occur within my career as a police officer.
I'm a big supporter of incremental reform and that reform should be
based on scientific evidence and public consultation. Economic pain
will probably drive a lot of these changes. The United States is
spending roughly $69 billion a year on drug enforcement and my sense
is that your country can no longer afford the policy of prohibition.
That said, I'm not sure what the budget situation is like in Hawaii.
Perhaps your state has a lot of extra cash lying around that it can
use to prosecute non-violent marijuana offenders.

Nope. But speaking of Hawaii, our Governor, Linda Lingle, has spoken
out against the state's voter-approved medical marijuana law, citing
federal prohibition. Do you think as long as federal prohibition is
in place, it will undermine state and local efforts to legalize or
decriminalize marijuana?

I'm not sure when she made those remarks. But the memo issued on
October 19, 2009 by President Obama's Deputy Attorney General was
clear. It strongly discouraged federal prosecution of medical
marijuana operations that were in compliance with state law. This was
a green light from the administration for individual states to pass
medical marijuana laws if they desired. It removed a lot of the
uncertainty that existed before the memo. Full legalization of
marijuana at the state level is a different story, and the first big
test will be the California ballot initiative.

What's the nature of your trip to Hawaii?

I came here to get married. Maui is a beautiful island, by the way,
and I hope to come back here someday. I'm [also] traveling to Oahu
and the Big Island discussing drug policy for LEAP.

Tell me more about LEAP.

LEAP is a non-political volunteer organization of current and former
criminal justice professionals who seek to end the War on Drugs.
Members of the LEAP Speakers Bureau are a credible group who serve on
the front lines of the War on Drugs. We don't support or encourage
drug abuse, nor breaking the law. We volunteer our time by giving
drug policy presentations to Rotary clubs, church groups, chambers of
commerce and other civic-minded organizations. We try to speak with
ordinary working folks who may not be aware of the unintended
consequences of drug prohibition. We don't have any members from
Hawaii in our Speakers Bureau and so I'd like to encourage members of
law enforcement to consider joining. Eligible professionals include
current and former cops, judges, prosecutors as well as corrections
and parole staff. Visit our Web site [ www.copssaylegalizedrugs.com ]
or e-mail us [speakers@leap.cc]