News (Media Awareness Project) - CN NS: Editorial: Caution, Cauchon |
Title: | CN NS: Editorial: Caution, Cauchon |
Published On: | 2002-07-18 |
Source: | Halifax Herald (CN NS) |
Fetched On: | 2008-01-22 23:06:51 |
CAUTION, CAUCHON
FEDERAL JUSTICE MINISTER Martin Cauchon makes it sound so simple. He is 39
years old, he told reporters Tuesday, and "of course" he has smoked
marijuana, "obviously."
Frankly, we see nothing all that obvious about the question. Many people of
his generation and younger have never smoked dope. Many have.
To Mr. Cauchon, the benefits of decriminalizing simple possession of
marijuana also seem obvious. He suggested this week that too many law
enforcement resources are tied up in the courts prosecuting such offences
and charges are laid unevenly across the country. Furthermore, saddling
otherwise law-abiding citizens with criminal records for smoking pot has
long-term effects that are disproportionate to the severity of the offence.
Therefore, Mr. Cauchon is contemplating removing simple possession from the
Criminal Code and relegating it to the status of a traffic violation
punishable by a fine. It would still be illegal, although no longer a
criminal offence.
Does this move make sense? If you buy the argument that marijuana is mostly
harmless, then it does. More than 1.5 million Canadians admit to being
semi-regular pot smokers; most of them are not addicts, nor do most go on
to become hard-core drug users. We all know recreational marijuana smokers.
Besides having trouble getting their act together on a Monday morning,
they're no worse than your average Joe who comes to work hung over from
imbibing too much alcohol.
Yet if you look at the issue honestly, breaking the law by smoking a joint
is not the same thing as breaking the law by going over the speed limit.
These are two different categories of offences. The former involves, at the
very least, aiding and abetting a criminal enterprise; the latter does not.
Dope-smoking advocates often choose to ignore the fact their indulgence
fuels organized crime. The hydroponic marijuana industry in B.C. alone is
estimated to be a $6-billion business, most of it destined for export to
the United States. And that business, while it often recruits growers who
have no criminal records, is ultimately controlled by vicious biker or
Asian gangs. These people are not mostly harmless. They are a threat to
society.
Obviously, the best way to neutralize these criminals would be outright
legalization of marijuana, as was done with alcohol and gambling. But are
Canadians really ready for that? Pot houses, like coffee houses, could
spring up on your street and there'd be nothing to prevent marijuana from
being advertised like beer.
For now, decriminalization is the only palatable alternative to the status
quo. In many respects, of course, decriminalization is already a fait
accompli. In many jurisdictions throughout Canada, police no longer bother
even fingerprinting people caught with less than 30 grams of cannabis on
them. They have bigger fish to fry, namely traffickers. In other
jurisdictions, the letter of the law is applied.
Given that police now enjoy a fair amount of latitude in dealing with
small-time pot offenders, formalizing decriminalization might actually
compromise their larger war on drugs. With more lenient penalties for pot
possession, police would no longer be able to threaten to lay criminal
charges to get suspects to squeal on their supplier. That can only help
traffickers.
Perhaps a compromise can be found where the law can remain a reasonable
deterrent while giving small-time offenders a break.
For example, could "pot school" do for marijuana users what "john school"
does for clients of prostitutes? Instead of paying a fine, what if
first-time offenders caught in possession of small quantities of marijuana
had the option of paying a fee to attend a course where they'd be lectured
on the implications of their behaviour on their health, mental acuity,
career path and on society at large? The alternative would be to go to
court and risk being stuck with a permanent criminal record.
This might free up more resources for police to go after the "real
criminals" while reducing demand for cannabis, which is the root of the
problem in the first place.
FEDERAL JUSTICE MINISTER Martin Cauchon makes it sound so simple. He is 39
years old, he told reporters Tuesday, and "of course" he has smoked
marijuana, "obviously."
Frankly, we see nothing all that obvious about the question. Many people of
his generation and younger have never smoked dope. Many have.
To Mr. Cauchon, the benefits of decriminalizing simple possession of
marijuana also seem obvious. He suggested this week that too many law
enforcement resources are tied up in the courts prosecuting such offences
and charges are laid unevenly across the country. Furthermore, saddling
otherwise law-abiding citizens with criminal records for smoking pot has
long-term effects that are disproportionate to the severity of the offence.
Therefore, Mr. Cauchon is contemplating removing simple possession from the
Criminal Code and relegating it to the status of a traffic violation
punishable by a fine. It would still be illegal, although no longer a
criminal offence.
Does this move make sense? If you buy the argument that marijuana is mostly
harmless, then it does. More than 1.5 million Canadians admit to being
semi-regular pot smokers; most of them are not addicts, nor do most go on
to become hard-core drug users. We all know recreational marijuana smokers.
Besides having trouble getting their act together on a Monday morning,
they're no worse than your average Joe who comes to work hung over from
imbibing too much alcohol.
Yet if you look at the issue honestly, breaking the law by smoking a joint
is not the same thing as breaking the law by going over the speed limit.
These are two different categories of offences. The former involves, at the
very least, aiding and abetting a criminal enterprise; the latter does not.
Dope-smoking advocates often choose to ignore the fact their indulgence
fuels organized crime. The hydroponic marijuana industry in B.C. alone is
estimated to be a $6-billion business, most of it destined for export to
the United States. And that business, while it often recruits growers who
have no criminal records, is ultimately controlled by vicious biker or
Asian gangs. These people are not mostly harmless. They are a threat to
society.
Obviously, the best way to neutralize these criminals would be outright
legalization of marijuana, as was done with alcohol and gambling. But are
Canadians really ready for that? Pot houses, like coffee houses, could
spring up on your street and there'd be nothing to prevent marijuana from
being advertised like beer.
For now, decriminalization is the only palatable alternative to the status
quo. In many respects, of course, decriminalization is already a fait
accompli. In many jurisdictions throughout Canada, police no longer bother
even fingerprinting people caught with less than 30 grams of cannabis on
them. They have bigger fish to fry, namely traffickers. In other
jurisdictions, the letter of the law is applied.
Given that police now enjoy a fair amount of latitude in dealing with
small-time pot offenders, formalizing decriminalization might actually
compromise their larger war on drugs. With more lenient penalties for pot
possession, police would no longer be able to threaten to lay criminal
charges to get suspects to squeal on their supplier. That can only help
traffickers.
Perhaps a compromise can be found where the law can remain a reasonable
deterrent while giving small-time offenders a break.
For example, could "pot school" do for marijuana users what "john school"
does for clients of prostitutes? Instead of paying a fine, what if
first-time offenders caught in possession of small quantities of marijuana
had the option of paying a fee to attend a course where they'd be lectured
on the implications of their behaviour on their health, mental acuity,
career path and on society at large? The alternative would be to go to
court and risk being stuck with a permanent criminal record.
This might free up more resources for police to go after the "real
criminals" while reducing demand for cannabis, which is the root of the
problem in the first place.
Member Comments |
No member comments available...