News (Media Awareness Project) - CN ON: LTE: Decriminalizing Marijuana May Prove Criminal |
Title: | CN ON: LTE: Decriminalizing Marijuana May Prove Criminal |
Published On: | 2004-11-29 |
Source: | Ottawa Citizen (CN ON) |
Fetched On: | 2008-01-17 08:34:13 |
DECRIMINALIZING MARIJUANA MAY PROVE CRIMINAL
Re: Big-business lobby urges delay in easing marijuana laws, Nov. 22.
Robert Fife's article notes concerns about decriminalizing marijuana
that I share from my personal experience.
In the past, I had to adjudicate a case, in accordance with Canadian
law, involving one of my technicians who had been charged with
possession of marijuana and trafficking.
The professional medical advice I received at the time made me
seriously concerned about how substance abuse can affect the lives of
people in the workplace. A degree of impairment was believed to be
precipitated by stress up to a week or two after an individual
indulged even moderately in the illicit practice of smoking marijuana.
The idea that marijuana residue stored in body fat can be dumped back
into the system by physical or psychological stress has apparently
been disproved. Yet, as the nature of my technical specialist's work
was highly complex and often stressful, I was mindful of the hidden
"soft drug" threats to the safety of all the members of my team.
Unlike the usually more obvious symptoms of alcohol abuse, impairment
caused by certain drugs is frequently more subtle and difficult to
detect.
I am not interested in making it easier for marijuana users to put our
lives at risk due to the insidious side-effects of the drug.
Undoubtedly, some think decriminalization would make marijuana use
more acceptable and desirable: If there is no risk of a criminal
record, more people may decide to try the substance or to use it more
often. This possibility is particularly worrying to business leaders
because it might make the habitual users in their employ think that
the new legislation makes their habits more acceptable. The results
could quickly go beyond productivity losses and accidents in the workplace.
If you are a passenger in a commercial jet just about to take off and
are glancing out the window at the airplane's engine, would you feel
safe knowing the technician who just worked on it is a habitual
marijuana user who felt sufficiently liberated by Canadian law to
"smoke up" that morning?
Our legislators need to think through many such examples: the threat
to Canadians at large from decriminalizing marijuana use could be a
real crime.
David Jurkowski,
Ottawa
Re: Big-business lobby urges delay in easing marijuana laws, Nov. 22.
Robert Fife's article notes concerns about decriminalizing marijuana
that I share from my personal experience.
In the past, I had to adjudicate a case, in accordance with Canadian
law, involving one of my technicians who had been charged with
possession of marijuana and trafficking.
The professional medical advice I received at the time made me
seriously concerned about how substance abuse can affect the lives of
people in the workplace. A degree of impairment was believed to be
precipitated by stress up to a week or two after an individual
indulged even moderately in the illicit practice of smoking marijuana.
The idea that marijuana residue stored in body fat can be dumped back
into the system by physical or psychological stress has apparently
been disproved. Yet, as the nature of my technical specialist's work
was highly complex and often stressful, I was mindful of the hidden
"soft drug" threats to the safety of all the members of my team.
Unlike the usually more obvious symptoms of alcohol abuse, impairment
caused by certain drugs is frequently more subtle and difficult to
detect.
I am not interested in making it easier for marijuana users to put our
lives at risk due to the insidious side-effects of the drug.
Undoubtedly, some think decriminalization would make marijuana use
more acceptable and desirable: If there is no risk of a criminal
record, more people may decide to try the substance or to use it more
often. This possibility is particularly worrying to business leaders
because it might make the habitual users in their employ think that
the new legislation makes their habits more acceptable. The results
could quickly go beyond productivity losses and accidents in the workplace.
If you are a passenger in a commercial jet just about to take off and
are glancing out the window at the airplane's engine, would you feel
safe knowing the technician who just worked on it is a habitual
marijuana user who felt sufficiently liberated by Canadian law to
"smoke up" that morning?
Our legislators need to think through many such examples: the threat
to Canadians at large from decriminalizing marijuana use could be a
real crime.
David Jurkowski,
Ottawa
Member Comments |
No member comments available...