THE BONG SHOW

I would like to thank all the aging dopers who have taken time to send me
e-mails over the past few days, wishing me everything from ill-health to
slow death and all manner of misfortunes in between.

When you are paid to express your opinions in public you expect feedback,
and over three decades of doing this I've found it to be one of the more
interesting and rewarding aspects of the job. Usually, but not so much when
people like Bob from Red Deer make disparaging comments about my parentage.

What prompted all the feedback was a column in the wake of the Mayerthorpe
tragedy, in which I took at face value reports that the major reason for
the Mounties being at James Roszko's farm was the discovery of a marijuana
grow-op.

My mistake. Media reports have variously put the number of marijuana plants
in Roszko's shed at anywhere from 20 to 300, but by now it's clear that
this was not some sophisticated operation involving organized crime.
Marijuana was involved only peripherally in the sad events at Mayerthorpe.

So I'm happy to correct my earlier comments, but before anyone is inclined
to light up in celebration, let me say that I stand by everything else I
said in that column. Liberalization of official attitudes towards marijuana
is a bad idea, and the justice system needs to take a tougher line with the
people who have turned its cultivation into a multibillion-dollar illegal
enterprise.

Put that in your bong and smoke it.

Actually, I've developed a pretty thick skin and being called names by
strangers is not something I lose sleep over. What does bug me are the
hypocritical and self-serving comments of some of my colleagues in the media.

If I used the Mayerthorpe tragedy to illustrate my biases regarding drug
policy in this country, I am willing to admit it. It would be nice if those
on the other side of the argument returned the favour.

Frankly, I don't trust a lot of the commentary I read that argues for
legalization of marijuana in Canada. Too many of the people who hold those
views are themselves closet smokers who don't have the guts to say so in
public.

And I'm talking about the mainstream media here, not some pro-pot
newsletter being produced out of somebody's garage.

When you use your position to argue for a change in public policy, yet fail
to mention that you have a personal stake in the matter, that's grossly
unprofessional. Just once I'd like to see supporters admit that a major
reason they favour legalizing marijuana is that, having reached their
middle years, they're fed up with being furtive about a habit they've
enjoyed for decades.

As for the substance of the argument in favour of marijuana, it is that
this is a "soft" drug with few if any detrimental effects - for the
individual or for society. If we allow cigarettes and booze, why be so hard
on pot?

Well, as usual, the Americans have done more work on that question than we
have. Despite the fact that marijuana use is actually declining among
younger people south of the border (while it's rising in Canada), the
number of Americans admitted to hospital with marijuana-related problems
has doubled in five years from 60,000 a year to 120,000.

In an interview last week, John Walters, director of the White House Office
of National Drug Control Policy, estimated that about 20% of Americans aged
12 to 17 who use marijuana eventually need "intervention" or medical
treatment. We don't even track those numbers in Canada, but we're going to
decriminalize use of the drug anyway.

Part of the problem, according to Walters, is the increasing potency of
marijuana. Years ago, most pot used to contain perhaps 2% THC, the active
ingredient. These days high-test Canadian product contains eight to 20% THC.

As a society we are far less tolerant of smoking than we used to be, for
health reasons rather than on moral grounds. Alcohol is without doubt the
most abused substance on the planet, but its sale and use is regulated by
government and subject to social constraints developed over centuries.

Why we would want to add another recreational drug to this list with all
the associated medical and social risks is beyond me. But if you want to
make that argument, go ahead. Just do us all the favour of being honest
about your reasons.