APPEALING THIS RULING WOULD BE WASTE OF TIME

Editor:

Borden-Carleton Police Chief Jamie Fox misunderstands the most recent court
decision to concur that our laws prohibiting the possession of 30 grams or
less of cannabis are invalid. (Police chief urges appeal of marijuana case
decision', March 18, 2003).

Remarked Fox, "This matter is no different than the provincial government
making allowances for some people who have a medical condition under the
Highway Traffic Act regarding the wearing of seat-belts."

Fox's analogy would be correct if it remained illegal to obtain a car that
allowed people to drive without a seat-belt and if those who sought
seat-belt exemptions had to find a general practitioner and two specialists
willing to state that the benefits of driving without a seat-belt exceed
the risks, despite warnings from their insurers and the Canadian Medical
Association that making such statements would expose them to legal liability.

The Ontario Court of Appeal gave the federal government one year to craft
both an exemption and a distribution system that actually work.

Not only was the federal response inadequate, it has since been ruled
unconstitutional because it does not include a mechanism for legally
obtaining cannabis. These decisions are quite sound and appealing them
would be a further waste of court time and tax dollars.

Matthew M. Elrod,

Victoria, B.C.