DANGERS OF CANNABIS PROPOSALS

Sir,

The Home Secretary, David Blunkett, announced on July 10 that he
intended to reclassify cannabis as a class C drug while raising the maximum
sentence on class C drugs from five to 14 years.

This will mean that although the maximum sentence for possession of
cannabis will be two years, instead of five, the maximum for supply of
cannabis will not change. The Home Secretary did not refer to sentences for
cultivation.

Cannabis will join a list of pharmaceuticals, such as valium and steroids,
as a class C drug under the 1971 Misuse of Drugs Act a " despite the fact
that it is a plant.

Many cannabis campaigners and professionals are disappointed with the
announcement and concerned that although there may appear to be some
progression in thought, the results may be negative, for there will still
be no legal supply routes and no safe place for users to interact socially,
as do people who choose to drink alcohol.

I cannot see how these changes will help anyone except maybe the police who
will save time through not having to arrest and process people caught with
small amounts of cannabis.

I find the proposals very unclear in the message. On the one hand, Mr
Blunkett is saying that although cannabis is a dangerous drug (offering no
evidence), it is less dangerous than other class B drugs, so penalties for
possession will be reduced; on the other hand, he is saying that the
penalty for supplying cannabis will become the same for class C as for class B.

Mr Blunkett seems to have forgotten that supply is driven by demand and is
uncontrollable if left outside of the law. It is also highly profitable and
untaxable. With a lesser penalty on possession, it is likely that more
people will smoke cannabis more openly, thus introducing it to more others.
This will lead to an increase in demand.

If users are not allowed to grow it, then they can only buy it illegally.
The question is: what sort of people are going to sell what sort of
cannabis? If we are not careful, the less discernable cannabis supplier
will find a gateway to offer hard drugs.

Only legislation a " bringing it within the law a " can separate cannabis
from hard drugs. This sort of half-measure and political appeasement will
achieve little a " especially little by delaying the change another 12
months. People should be allowed to grow it. I can only wonder what smoke
signals are the Government sending us?

Alun Buffry

Sir,

Home Office Secretary David Blunkett's move to downgrade cannabis
to Class C status is a step in the right direction.

However, there is a big difference between condoning cannabis use and
protecting children from drugs. Decriminalisation acknowledges the social
reality of cannabis. What's really needed is a regulated market. Unlike
legitimate stores that sell alcohol, drug dealers do not ID for age.

Separating the hard and soft drug markets is critical. Cannabis may be
relatively harmless, but cannabis prohibition is deadly.

As long as cannabis remains illegal and distributed by organised crime,
consumers of the most popular illicit drug will continue to come into
contact with sellers of hard drugs, like cocaine and heroin.

Politicians need to stop worrying about political messages and start
thinking about the children they claim to be protecting.

Robert Sharpe