BRITAIN'S PENDING CANNABIS DECRIM WILL ALLOW FOR SOME ARRESTS

The British government's glacially-paced reclassification of cannabis
from a Class B to a Class C drug, now expected to take place in
January, will allow police officers to make arrests for possession in
some circumstances. According to guidelines for the new regime
developed by the Association of Chief Police Officers
(http://www.acpo.police.uk), marijuana possession "will not ordinarily
be an arrestable offense," but there are significant exceptions:

Smoking in public Smoking near schools and playgrounds Repeat offenses
"Creating fear of a public disorder" "The new guidance recommends that
there should be a presumption against arrest," said Andy Hayman, Chief
Constable for the Norfolk Police, who drafted the guidelines. "In
practice, this means that in the majority of cases officers will issue
a warning and confiscate the drug. That said, despite
reclassification, it remains illegal to possess cannabis." The
guidelines follow Home Secretary David Blunkett's decision, replete
with much wailing and moaning and gnashing of teeth, last year to
reclassify cannabis.

Under the rescheduling, cannabis possessors remain theoretically
liable for a two-year prison sentence, down from five years for Class
B drugs.

But because the government has changed penalties for sales of Class C
drugs -- it was only five years -- the maximum 14-year sentence for
marijuana distribution remains unchanged.

For British drug reform advocates the changes add up to much of a
muchness, to use a twee Britishism, or in plain American, not much of
a change at all. "We don't see much difference with the current
situation," said Danny Kushlick, executive director of Transform Drug
Policy Institute (http://www.tdpi.org.uk), a leading British drug
policy nonprofit organization. "What this does is codify police
discretion in making arrests. Most police will choose not to arrest
people for simple possession," he told DRCNet.

For British Member of the European Parliament Chris Davies
(http://www.chrisdaviesmep.org.uk), a stalwart of drug policy reform
who once had himself arrested for cannabis possession as an act of
civil disobedience, the pending reclassification is a case of one step
forward, two steps back. "Hundreds, indeed millions, of people have
been arrested, fined or even imprisoned for the possession of
cannabis, and these new guidelines show that it has all been a
complete folly -- using up police resources and wrecking the lives of
many cannabis users who have done no harm to anyone other than
themselves," said Davies.

But Davies was harshly critical of the stiff penalties for dealing.
"These new police guidelines are a small step forward, but the Home
Secretary David Blunkett is about to take two steps backwards," he
argued. "If dealers are going to face 14 years in prison for the
supply of cannabis there is no incentive not to sell other drugs as
well. Cannabis users may be pushed into the hands of heroin dealers.

Instead the government should be working to break the link between
soft and hard drugs," he said.

Transform's Kushlick added that the ACPO guidelines will result in
differential enforcement depending on location. "What you will have is
postal code punishment," he said. "Your chances of being arrested and
prosecuted remain a lottery and continue to depend on which police
force is involved."

More importantly for Kushlick, reclassifying marijuana does not
address the burning drug issue now facing Britain. "They are
concentrating on the wrong drug," he said. "A lot of senior
policymakers, police officers, and members of the general public know
that the major issues in terms of the collateral damage from
prohibition arise from cocaine and heroin, not marijuana.

The Home Office says that half of all property crime is related to
supporting a crack or heroin habit.

Reclassifying cannabis won't make a big difference, and it isn't
tackling the major causes of damage associated with
prohibition."

Police argue that not arresting cannabis users will free up resources
to tackle the trade in hard drugs, but Kushlick isn't buying that
argument. "They can focus on heroin or cocaine dealing all they want,
but we all know that if you bust dealers, there is always someone to
take their place," he said.

When asked why police insisted on retaining the power of arrest for
cannabis possession, Kushlick suggested two reasons. "First, there is
the classic reactionary position of the police, that we should not
roll back laws against something that is banned," he said. "But there
is also a more cynical reason.

People who are criminals may also be cannabis smokers.

To the extent that police can't catch them committing real crimes,
they can at least arrest them for their stash, and then they can
search their house. They need an arrest to search the house."