WEEDING OUT BILL 30

Want To Cut Organized Crime Profits? How About Legalizing, Regulating And
Taxing Marijuana?

With a fair degree of fanfare -- a major press conference, a couple of
big-city police chiefs at his side -- Ontario Attorney General David Young
recently heralded the arrival of a new law giving courts the power to choke
off the lifeblood of organized crime.

The lifeblood of criminal cartels, of course, is the money -- the profits,
the up-front capital investment and the establishment of the necessary
infrastructure hierarchy.

Seize the pot of gold at the end of the gangster rainbow, seize the assets
that assist in an operation's success, and the syndicate will die as surely
as a snake with its head lopped off.

That, in precise form, is the goal of Bill 30, officially tabled as "An Act
to Provide Civil Remedies for Organized Crime and Other Unlawful Activities."

And, if there were ever an optimist when it comes to this bill, it is
surely David Young himself.

"I sincerely believe this (legislation) will cause organized crime and
those behind it to fold up their operations," he said.

This, without question, is a pretty bold statement considering organized
crime has been around as long as there's been a crooked buck to be made.

Nonetheless, while he would not go as far as to state this legislation
would be the be-all and end-all when it comes to fighting organized crime,
Toronto Police Chief Julian Fantino did provide some backup for the
attorney general by indicating Bill 30 is a "quantum leap forward in our
ability to take the profit out of crime, which is the reason crime exists."

That, it's fair to say, is a more tempered and realistic approach.

Recent columns in this space have focused on the illegal cultivation of
marijuana in this province -- the hydroponic operations run mainly by Asian
gangs, as well as the rural plantations -- that have pushed cannabis crops
to nearing the No. 1 financial position within the agriculture sector.

This led a great many readers, some of them recreational dope-smokers, to
once again ask the eternal question: Why not legalize it?

Soft Drugs

As Eric J. wrote, via e-mail: "While we all know inhaling smoke of any kind
is bad for our lungs, we allow tobacco which is far more addictive and
deadly. The package of Viscounts in front of me warns of a host of
industrial chemicals added while the baggy of unaltered pot from a closet
farmer contains nothing worse than nature intended."

When it comes to soft drugs such as marijuana, millions upon millions are
spent annually on law enforcement, millions and millions more in court and
legal costs (with the majority of offenders receiving small fines and/or
suspended sentences), while there are billions of dollars awaiting
provincial coffers if marijuana is legalized, sold through licensed
outlets, and taxed like alcohol and tobacco.

Not only that, it would all but eliminate the violence associated with
organized crime -- the contract killings, the turf wars, the tit for tat.

As another reader argued: "What's so criminal about coming home from work
and smoking a joint rather than crawling into a six-pack? Is it not
preferable to be euphoric and self-deprecating, rather than aggressive and
self-pitying?"

Opponents will argue, of course, that marijuana is a "gateway" drug and
that, if legalized, will lead to our street corners being overrun with
heroin junkies and cocaine addicts.

Trouble is, there is no hard evidence -- socially or medically -- to
support such an opinion.

Thirty long years ago, the government-appointed LeDain Commission was a
cautious advocate for taking simple possession of marijuana out of the
Criminal Code and, more cautiously, of allowing the government to control
the sale of drugs in the same fashion as alcohol.

Less Dangerous

And, for 30 long years, successive governments have worked diligently at
totally ignoring all the recommendations that commission chairman Gerald
LeDain put forward -- including his contention that pot smokers are less
dangerous on the road than those drunk on booze because they tend to be
more cautious than aggressive, lead-footed drinkers.

Last Wednesday in Ottawa, a former lawyer permitted to smoke pot for
medicinal purposes appeared in court to set a date for trial after he was
pulled over by the OPP while smoking a joint.

Rick Reimer, who suffers from multiple sclerosis, will eventually argue
that marijuana makes him a better driver, and not the reverse.

"I know I drive well, if not better, after I have smoked," he said.

After 30 years in the making, the courts of this country could soon be down
to the short strokes on what it means to be one toke over the line.