DRUG, HANDGUN WARS ABOUND

It's interesting the editorial pages have been dominated by marijuana
and guns recently.

So far there have been seven pro-handgun letters and three gun-control letters.

There have also been three letters concerning marijuana.

Guns and drugs have a lot in common.

Many parents don't want either marijuana or handguns legalized
because they know their children will be much better off if they
don't get involved with illegal guns and don't waste their youth
getting stoned.

It is also widely acknowledged that much of the gun crime in Canada
is drug-related.

Contrastingly, even though they both contain a degree of risk, guns
and drugs give some people a sense of contentment. Many people
believe they have a personal right to use both guns and drugs, and
believe a prohibition on either will do more harm than good.

Many of the people who are profiting the most from handgun sales are
lobbying the hardest to prevent gun control.

Similarly, a militant anti-drug policy probably greatly helps the gun
industry and keeps privatized jails running at capacity in the U.S.
Many of these same guys are lobbying hard to maintain the
criminalization of marijuana.

In 1921, Albert Einstein wrote, "The prestige of the U.S. government
has undoubtedly been lowered by the (alcohol) Prohibition law.
Nothing is more destructive of respect for the government and the law
of the land than passing laws which cannot be enforced. It is an open
secret the dangerous increase in crime in this country is closely
connected with the Prohibition."

It seems obvious in hindsight, but ironically half the population
would probably scorn Einstein if he said the same thing about marijuana today.

Admittedly, Einstein should have also considered how ending the U.S.
Prohibition would affect domestic violence, car accidents, fetal
alcohol syndrome, liver problems and other medical conditions.

In 2002, after interviewing dozens of Canadian, American, Swiss and
Dutch drug experts, doctors, pharmacologists, psychiatrists, police
officers, customs agents and addiction councillors, Canada's Senate
concluded "Scientific evidence overwhelmingly indicates that cannabis
is substantially less harmful than alcohol and should not be treated
as a criminal issue."

It's sobering to ask doctors, nurses, psychiatrists and even police
officers how many marijuana patients they treat each week, compared
to alcohol patients.

Even though it is widely used, comparatively few people seem to
suffer from marijuana-induced injuries or diseases.

All laws are based on precedents, consistency and fairness.

Jack Lozier (People not guns need controlling, Jan. 8, 2006) argued
he has a right to own a handgun because gun crime leads to fewer
deaths than car accidents. It can be argued equally well that
marijuana should be legalized because it leads to fewer deaths than
either alcohol, guns or cars.

Many people worry, however, that even though marijuana isn't as
harmful as alcohol (see the above senate report), it still creates
some health problems.

Similarly, even though registered handguns are relatively safe,
former RCMP officer Paul Drescher mentioned they are still currently
responsible for 16 per cent of the gun crime (Handgun ban won't end
violence, Jan. 8, 2006).

Rick Wager (Target the smuggled guns, Dec. 25, 2005) is probably
right that confiscating legally owned handguns is not necessary.

The argument gun crime went up in Britain and Australia following its
ban is, however, at best a statistic. The UK government stresses the
apparent rise in violent crime merely reflected better reporting and
recording of offences.

Because of the handgun ban, several people were recently charged with
the new crime of simply possessing handguns. Both the UK and
Australia are also suffering from lots of internal strife and
violence from being at war in Iraq.

It's also notable Toronto is experiencing a 400 per cent increase in
gun deaths since 1998 even though it has not had a gun ban.
http://www.petervanloan.com/doc2005-10-24a.html

I agree with both Wager and Drescher that there should be stronger
laws against gun crime. They also convinced me that severely
regulating the sale of handguns will help prevent their proliferation.

I'm also convinced that regulating the sale of marijuana will
significantly reduce both gun crime and gang violence. Legalized
marijuana, like tobacco products, should be strictly controlled and
packaged to detail its toxicity.

This would eliminate most of the problems associated with variable
strengths of pot and pot laced with other drugs and chemicals. It
would also relieve toker's paranoia of being arrested or mistreated
by the thugs who are currently selling it.

Decriminalizing pot without licensing producers and distributors (or
allowing tokers to grow their own plants) will only ensure long-term
profits for organized crime. It will also do nothing to prevent drug
sales to children or eliminate contaminated drugs, grow-ops and gang violence.

If people believe marijuana is completely different than alcohol
because "it affects your mind," they should give their kid an IQ test
while he's hammered and puking up a storm.

The precedent of legalizing marijuana wouldn't necessarily force the
legalization of everything from crystal meth to cherry-scented
sniffing glue. It's reasonable to use alcohol at a tolerable limit.
Drugs that are more harmful than alcohol would remain banned. Those
clearly less harmful than alcohol, could be legalized.

The other consistent, fair and precedent-setting option is to ban
alcohol and bring it into line with other drug laws. Few people,
however, would willingly give up their right to have a cold beer
after work or glass of wine with dinner.

Graham Gerry

Quesnel