Posted on 09/21/2005 7:07:58 PM PDT by Know your rights
Police are losing the war against pot and it’s time to make it legal and regulate the cultivation and use of it, says Eugene Oscapella, an Ottawa University criminology teacher who co-founded the Canadian Foundation for Drug Policy.
Police say the number and size of local marijuana operations they’re discovering is increasing.
In the last several weeks, police have laid charges after discovering more than $43-million worth of marijuana, mostly from four big busts. Monday West Grey police discovered another $1.3-million worth of marijuana growing south of Flesherton.
The biggest of recent busts have often involved young, Asia men. Police here can’t say if there are local links to Asian crime gangs. Last week, New Brunswick police blamed Asian gangs for moving east and setting up for large-scale grow operations in their province.
But regardless of who’s growing it, police say some of the larger marijuana grow operations are linked to organized crime.
Oscapella says people shouldn’t be misled into thinking these high-profile drug seizures which police present at news conferences will stem the tide much.
“Typically, they probably only get five to 10 per cent of the drugs that are coming into the country or being produced in the country,” said Oscapella, who lectures on drug policy issues to third-year criminology students at Ottawa University.
“These seizures make virtually no difference into the availability of the drug after a period of time. What they might do is take a few players out of the market, then others will move in.”
Oscapella is an Ottawa lawyer who has served on government commissions, chaired the Law Reform Commission of Canada’s drug policy group and is director of law reform for the Canadian Bar Association. He helped found the Canadian Foundation for Drug Policy, an independent organization to study Canada’s drug laws and policies.
He says police and courts have failed to stop marijuana growers and traffickers and their futile efforts have wasted hundreds of millions of dollars.
Half of all high school students in Ontario have tried marijuana by the time they graduate, he said. Fifty to 80 per cent of the students in his university classes have probably tried it too, he said.
The auditor general in December, 2001 determined the federal government spends $500 million a year dealing with drugs, 95 per cent of which goes to law enforcement.
“The people who are rigidly prohibitionist, they think that the police have the answer . . . and they trust the police,” he said. “Basically I trust the police but on drug policy issues, the police organizations are flat wrong.”
Oscapella says the same thing has happened with the cultivation and sale of illegal marijuana as happened when alcohol was prohibited early last century.
“The use of the criminal law to prohibit the production and sale of drugs like marijuana creates a fantastically profitable black market.”
He says a bushel of marijuana costs little more than a bushel of tomatoes to produce. “By criminalizing it, by prohibiting it on the black market, we have made it worth more than its weight in gold in some cases.”
Oscapella said the criminalization of marijuana use and production encourages the development of modern day Al Capones.
He favours a model proposed by a Senate special committee on illegal drugs in September, 2002. It basically recommended legalizing and regulating marijuana. It would be sold much like alcohol is today, with minimum ages for purchase at state-licensed outlets, like the Liquor Control Board of Ontario, including in some specially designated stores. Penalties for driving under the influence of marijuana already exist.
There would also be a licensing system for commercial marijuana growers, like large-scale alcohol distillers require. But anyone could grow small amounts in their own gardens.
“Yes, some people are harmed by marijuana,” he said. “People are harmed by jogging, by rock climbing, by snowmobiling — big in Owen Sound. People are harmed by many, many things. But do we ban those other things?”
Owen Sound Police Chief Tom Kaye said the reason police don’t have the upper hand on drug-growers is because of lenient court sentences.
“There is a huge amount of money involved in it, with little in the way of penalty that’s being handed out by the courts — not that the penalties aren’t on the books — but it’s just that the courts have taken a very laissez-faire approach,” to sentencing.
The 2004 former Molson factory marijuana grow operation in Barrie produced sentences of about 18 months, Kaye noted. That was touted as Canada’s biggest ever marijuana grow operation, with 30,000 plants which police said would be worth $30 million on the street.
“Down in the United States, the average sentencing down there for a grow op of much less is seven years in the penitentiary. So who’s got the bigger problem with grow ops? We do.”
Kaye, a former head of the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police, said that organization is having second thoughts about endorsing the federal government’s intention to decriminalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana, which would remove the threat faced by young people who smoke a joint. Under the bill, possession of up to 15 grams of marijuana could lead to a fine of up to $150. Growing more than 50 plants could attract a prison term of up to 14 years.
Kaye said the police association is concerned that the legalization lobby has moved beyond decriminalization and is pushing to make the use of marijuana legal and it’s confusing the public. Even if people could grow marijuana in their backyards, he thinks governments would still be spending lots of money for police to chase marijuana growers, just like police are fighting contraband cigarette producers — to protect tax revenue.
Kaye said legalizing marijuana would be asking for trouble. He called it a “proven gateway drug,” meaning its use leads to harder drug use and polls show most people don’t want it legalized.
Oscapella says he’s never used marijuana and he’s not seeking to relax laws to allow him to start now. But using the law to enforce social policy doesn’t work, he argues.
“Why do some people use methamphetamines? Why do some use heroin? Why do some use cocaine? Prohibition never asks those questions, it just punishes everybody. It never looks at what we call the root causes of harmful drug use.”
Money would be better spent preventing the “small percentage” of people who are harmed by these drugs through education and understanding root causes, Oscapella said.
Play games all you like. ANY alcohol in the bloodstream causes a chemical reaction in the brain. Why do you think that recovering alcoholics avoid it altogether?
Believe me, it the government even THOUGHT that you could get high smoking dandelion or thistle, they would outlaw it.
PS. So are you admitting that if mariuana is smoked for a religious or social or celebratory occassion then it is okay so long as your primary purpose isn't to get high?
Mr. Kotter! Mr. Kotter! Ask me! Mr. Kotter!
Hmmmmm.
Because we do not base drug illegality on the degree of harm. If we did, all chemotherapy would be illegal.
No.
Why?
Because it would be silly to penalize people for quitting drugs.
" Ephesians 6:12
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood,
but against principalities,
against powers, against the rulers
of the darkness of this world,
against spiritual wickedness in high places. "
Talk about being taken out of context...I dont see how this supports legalization of Weed...Infact I think it detracts...
Paul is explaining it is not men who oppose us but Satan and the fallen angels and it is by there will Governments oppose christianity and the law of god...
"1 Thes 5:6-8-THEREFORE LET US NOT SLEEP, AS DO OTHERS; BUT LET US WATCH AND BE SOBER. FOR THEY THAT SLEEP SLEEP IN THE NIGHT; AND THEY THAT BE DRUNKEN ARE DRUNKEN IN THE NIGHT. BUT LET US, WHO ARE OF THE DAY, BE SOBER, PUTTING ON THE BREASTPLATE OF FAITH AND LOVE; AND FOR AN HELMET, THE HOPE OF SALVATION."
And god (Holy Spirit) through Paul tells us to remain sober and be full in spirit. Naturally legalization of this behavior would be in direct opposition to what the Holy Spirit commands and thus against god.
As well you should.
You see, Know your rights is notorious for leaving important things out. He lies, in other words. He assumes you won't question his words.
The survey he cites asks if you agree with the statement, "Some people say the government should treat marijuana more or less the same way it treats alcohol: it should regulate it, control it, tax it and only make it illegal for children."
Hell, even I agree some people say that!
But let's look at that 41% he cites. Here's the truth:
Strongly agree with legalization -- 23.5%.
Somewhat agree with legalization -- 17.4%.
Somewhat disagree with legalization -- 11.4%.
Strongly disagree with legalization -- 45.3%.
Nearly half the public strongly opposes legalization, and less than a quarter strongly supports it.
Take that jerkoff with a grain of salt -- I do.
8
Because they cannot stop with one sip or one drink. The concept of "social" drinking is an alien one.
Uh-huh. The same way I believe marijuana is fine for strictly medical reasons.
(Wasn't peyote approved for religious ceremonies?)
But he said he quit drugs.
You said, "I think it is relevant to know what penalties you advocate for others who do the same."
Now, if he were still doing drugs yet wanted it illegal for others, well, maybe you'd have a point.
This is coming from the biggest liar to participate in the drug threads. You've no credibility.
There are valid arguments for legalizing pot, even though I disagree. The fact that we are "losing the battle" is not a good reason. We wouldn't apply that to the crime of murder, for example, or robbery. In a related realm, we don't apply that argument to the abortion issue, even though we are losing that battle, it could be argued.
The increase was observed in Amsterdam, not the entire Dutch population; and it was characterized as small but growing:
"Successive population surveys in Amsterdam in 1987, 1990, 1994, 1997 en 2001 show that a small but growing group of the Amsterdam population used illegal drugs."
"Drug use figures are higher in Amsterdam than in the rest of the Netherlands;"
_________________________________________
Let's compare Amsterdam to the US:
"Since the first Amsterdam survey was conducted in 1987, the proportion of the Amsterdam population ever having used cannabis (the most popular illegal drug), has increased from 23.2% to 38.1% in 2001."
The same "ever-used" stat in the US was: 30.6% in 1988 and 36.9% for 2001. The figure for 2003 was 40.6%.
http://www.briancbennett.com/charts/nsduh/ever-used.htm
Looks like Amsterdam is faring about the same as the entire US with respect to mj use.
Well, he did say he never wanted it legal, even while he was doing all that harm to society by avidly smoking mj.
He has reasoned that stiff fines and incarceration (and therefore a criminal record) are appropriate reparations to pay for such harm. Then he goes on to say that he has already repaid society. I'll bet he let himself off cheaper than what he advocates for others.
Potis illegal because the people made it that way through elected officials. You may disagree, but that is why pot is illegal.
Not that you can name one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.