CHILDREN ALREADY GETTING WRONG MESSAGE

Dear Editor,

Bryanna Anderson makes some points that would be interesting if they
were not so sadly misinformed [Legalization not the answer, April 9
Letters, www.langleyadvance.com].

As for "...sending out the wrong message to children," what kind of
message does subsidizing organized crime and usurping the public's
basic right to choose send them?

What kind of message does criminalizing a plant with dozens of medical
applications tell them?

What kind of message do they take from an arbitrary, dysfunctional,
and outrageously counterproductive drug "war"?

What kind of message do they receive when they hear a cop say pot is a
dangerous narcotic, but the government allows it's use for medical
purposes? New science shows that pot fights cancer, but Bryanna
Anderson feels it should remain illegal because we don't want to let
kids think that using pot is okay?

What crazed nonsense. What utter balderdash and piffle. Also, pot is
already legal: on Dec. 10, 1997, our marijuana laws were declared
unconstitutional by Justice Patrick Sheppard in a ruling that was
upheld by the Ontario Court of Appeal, July 31, 2000. The decision was
not appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, and government has not
re-enacted Criminal Code statute upon marijuana. Therefore marijuana -
possession, cultivation, and sales - is legal, and has been for about
10 years.

Just like the prohibitions on same-sex marriage, medical marijuana,
and abortion, the law died in court, not Parliament. Every pot bust
since then has been legally invalid. Anderson says that "allowing hard
drugs such as cocaine and heroin to be sold in pharmacies and clinics
is criminal."

Those drugs are statistically far safer than either alcohol or
tobacco, and if they were made by professional labs, they would be
safer still. Junk food kills many times more Canadians each year than
all illegal drugs combined - even more than booze or smokes - yet we
sell that to kids right in schools!

As for addicts, if we spent even one fifth of the money we waste each
year on cops and their toys, we would have the "addiction" problem
wrapped up pretty quick. But then, cops - and cop lovers - think
policing is the best cure/deterrent for any and all behaviour.

When the only tool you own is a hammer, every problem looks like a
nail. As for "...the education the children and teenagers receive,
legalizing drugs would give them contradicting views." Kids are
already being given wildly exaggerated and lie-filled "education" when
it comes to drugs. We live in a culture that glamourizes sex, fun,
danger, thrills, law-scoffing, risk-taking, rule-breaking, power,
wealth-acquisition, and authority-resisting. We advertise booze, fast
cars, fast food, violent movies and video games, and drugs of all
kinds right on TV!

Then we tell kids that "drugs are bad." Does anyone still believe that
kids don't notice this wild hypocrisy? A ruse by any other name...

Anderson's straw man arguments go against all known science and
history on the subject, and don't hold any more water than they did
for the past 100 years. But I will finish with this: if we accept that
the government can tell us what we can and cannot do with our own
bodies, then we must accept their ownership. That means the government
owns us all - like pets, cattle, or slaves - and that we have only the
rights that they grant.

Anyone willing to accept that deserves no rights at
all.

Russell Barth, Federally Licensed Medical Marijuana User