WHAT'S NOT TO UNDERSTAND ABOUT CANADA'S DRUG LAWS?

Regarding Cheech and Chong, Just Say So Long (We Say editorial, The
Daily News, July 20).

And turning Marc Emery over to the Americans was a great display of
national sovereignty, right? "Bitchfest," indeed!

What gives them the right, the editorial asks! Probably the same right
that allowed the editorial staff to comment on Cheech and Chong's candour.

While Cheech and Chong might be challenged on where exactly Prime
Minister Stephen Harper's head is lodged, it is safe to say that
Cheech and Chong's analogy was apt and, of course the criticism is
just; not only is it justified, it's long overdue. Moreover, it is
absurd to think otherwise (unless, of course, the editorial staff is
of the ilk that expects running into a brick wall head first yet one
more time will accomplish anything different this time around.)

I, myself, would venture to say that Obama is the more likely
candidate. Moreover, the office (of prime minister) itself is brought
into disrepute not only by Stephen Harper but rather the antics of the
Conservative Party in general. It is not a question of liking or
disliking Stephen Harper, it is more the case of not liking what he is
doing to Canada, specifically in the area of drug policy.

There is a comprehensive study that was released April 27, 2010, by the
International Centre for Science in Drug Policy (ICSDP) entitled Effect of
Drug Law Enforcement on Drug-Related Violence: Evidence from a Scientific
Review that exposes an extensive correlation between drug-law enforcement
efforts and increased drug-related crime, homicide and gun violence. The
Executive Summary ( http://www.icsdp.org/ and
http://www.icsdp.org/research/publications.aspx ) demonstrates the
commonalities between violence and the illicit drug trade in relation to the
impacts of drug law enforcement interventions have on drug market violence.

So, what's not to understand?

Wayne Phillips,

Hamilton, Ont.