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.
Do You remenber all in the family ?
archie bunker always had passionate arguments with his worthless pinko liberal son in law mike stivek.
Archie always referred to him as "meathead".
It's too bad rob reiner is that way in REAL LIFE.
He probably would have been a fan of the democrapic underground if the internet was around at that time.
Meathead was ALWAYS wrong side of everything.
He was the typical east coast liberal new york democrapic type that advocated legalized drugs homosexual rights and free unabated abortions for women.
This was back in 1971 or 1972.
Most of these things have been totally dicredited.
If YOU have been paying attention public attitudes and tolerance of drug abuse have been antidrug since the eighties.
Most of the american public is AGAINST legalized drugs.
Do You remember Nancy Reagan ?
I always liked her attitude about drug abuse.
JUST SAY NO TO DRUGS!!
"Well, if the police are losing the battle over pot, and the solution would be to legalize it, why not legalize crime? After all, isn't that a losing battle? Civilized societies have been fighting crime since man was created.......and we still have crime.
It is not a question of practicality. It is a question of what is right and what is wrong.
What a doofus. "
If government says something is wrong, do you accept it at that?
prior to the 21st amendment, consumption of almost all alcohol was illegal. Would you have used this argument against legalization of drink using? If not, why not? What is the relative harm to society of legal alcohol versus that created by the black market and its attendant elements, organized crime and corruption?
Put these same questions in the context of legal marijuana? What great harm will be done to society versus the harm having it (and other items) illegal now is doing?
As always, follow the money.
"What a doofus."
What a twofus.
I didn't. Although the simplistic 'just say no' campaign wasn't the pack of lies to which the war on drugs devolved. Oh wait, she based her campaign on those lies, too. Nevermind. The war on drugs has made the drug abuse in this country what it is today. Archie Bunker was a jerk. Typical of a troll, a liberal pig pretending to be an arch-conservative.
I think for some it is just matter of cause and effect, not to mention supply and demand. People WANT these products, and having an artificial black market has created unbelievable wealth in organized crime, here and abroad, which one can be sure has been used to good effect compromising public officials everywhere, including here. Illegal substances must be one of the 10 top retail sellers in the US. Does anyone think it is just a bunch of folks in s. america who are getting rich? It seems obvious that with a market in the 12 digits annualy, there are powerful folks in america with a vested financial interest in having this continue.
This is without even addressing the legal issues in this country, where this subject is being used to create legal precedent for an end-run around the fourth amendment.
You are presuming I am basing my views on by the governments standards. I am not.
It is a moral judgement.
As I stated in my previous post, it is not a question of practicality. To compare marijuana's impact versus other illicit drugs on society is irrelevant.
.... " says Eugene Oscapella, an Ottawa University criminology teacher who co-founded the Canadian Foundation for Drug Policy. " ... uh huh.
Needs a better title ... like "Pothead Prof wants his illicit habit legalized" .... this man is not some unbiased source but a crusader against drug laws and is also in Canada's version of the ACLU. "Eugene Oscapella sits as a volunteer on several boards dealing with legal and social policy issues. He is a founding member of the Canadian Foundation for Drug Policy, the Canadian board member of the International Foundation for Drug Policy and Human Rights, and a member of the policy committee of the Canadian Criminal Justice Association. He also belongs to the Canadian Civil Liberties Association and the Drug Policy Foundation (Washington)."
So the biased article makes it sound like some informed Professor has reached some conlcusion based on evidence. NO. An advocate is doing his preaching from a professorship. No real news here.
The news is he hates America. This meathead calls the US a violator of international law .. why? "The affidavit documents the extensive evidence of abuse of women in US prisons, in violation of international law."
http://www.cfdp.ca/eoaff.htm
Smoking a joint is not the same as molesting a child, or drunk driving, or murder, etc. because those things are reckless and/or harm other people.
It is a nanny state mentality to ban weed, because weed is a benign drug, at least much more so than alcohol, and smoking in and of itself only harms the user. Prohibition didn't work, and the drug war is failing as well. Honestly, don't you see that smoking weed and tobacco or whatever is a personal choice? There is much logic in my argument, but none in yours because you want to make specious comparisons to confuse the issue.
"It is a moral judgement. "
"As I stated in my previous post, it is not a question of practicality. To compare marijuana's impact versus other illicit drugs on society is irrelevant."
This is my point as well, that no judgement is in fact being responibly made regarding the negative impact on society such laws have. When there is no regard for the real-world consequences of enacting morality into law, the end result in fact can be far worse and even more immoral than the behavior that force (from the point of a gun) is trying to eliminate.
Do you care if it is legal or not?
"UN Report Puts World's Illicit Drug Trade At Estimated $321 Billion"
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1434311/posts
IIRC, that's somewhere in the neighborhood of 15% of the dollar value of world oil consumption. It would be interesting to compare that $321 billion to the figures for the top 10 traded commodties. That's prohibition.
"is not the same"
It is the same in that it is illegal, first of all, and it is harmful to society. Lawful behavior versus unlawful behavior is also a personal choice.
Laws are established to protect the freedom and rights of law abiding citizens. Illegal drug use harms the individual as well as the fabric which binds our society.
You and I obviously differ in our views on the harmful effects of marijuana. In this matter, we must agree to disagree.
Good night.
Yes, I do care.
"morality into law"
Do you believe in univeral law? Is murder only murder in some societies and not others? Is it relative?
I believe in universal law. And more specifically a law which is designed by God. If mans law should violate God's law, I am compelled to ignore mans law, such as the legalization of abortion, or more appropriately expressed, the legalization of murdering an unborn child.
With regard to the legalization of marijuana, the Lord tells us to be sober of mind and body. Morally and practically speaking, I have witnessed the negative effects of drug use, including the use of marijuana. An individual can consume alcohol and never get drunk or even a buzz. I enjoy wine and can attest to this truth. Not so if one should use marijuana.
I will say that my personal experiences do not automatically qualify my point. But it is not just my experiences. Our societies struggles with those who sell and use drugs, and the innocent "caught in the crossfire" are well documented.
The solution is not to legalize marijuana, but rather to continue prosecuting those who choose to brake the law. They are the ones who are hurting their families and society. Not law enforcement or our government.
Respectfully,
TJI
I respect your well-worded and politely stated opinion, and appreciate communicating in civil discourse, something too often absent on FR.
We disagree, obviously, on this topic.
It is called a "civil forfeiture" and violates the Constitution but the cops and judges don't care because they are fighting the "War on Drugs". It's for your own good because you are an idiot and are just too stupid not to kill yourself if they let you smoke pot.
Also, please explain why it is "wrong" to smoke pot but okay to drink alcohol.
Why did the federal government need the 18th Amendment to outlaw alcohol but only a law to outlaw other drugs?
Should we continue our current policy of willful ignorance of the damage being done to the republic by continuing to involve the federal government in aspects of our lives never intended to be handed over to them, "regulating commerce" with a wink and a nod? The drug war is the bastard child of the New Deal.
>>>What better argument for the ineffective, intrusive, and illogical nature of government than a multi-billion dollar, life-wrecking, police-corrupting crusade against a humble weed.>>>
Well hell, we've been battling kudzu here in Georgia for decades. ;o)
A million dollars a plant?
(Where can I buy seeds?)
Absolutely. Look at who is getting the money (and the power that comes with it) from making pot and other drugs illegal: the people who sell it, the politicians who make the laws, and the LEO's who enforce the laws.
If drugs were made legal, the drug kings who rule by murder and intimidation would retire or find other illegal activities, but you can safely bet your last dollar that they are supporting the pols who favor keeping them illegal.
"I believe in universal law. And more specifically a law which is designed by God. If mans law should violate God's law, I am compelled to ignore mans law"
GOD MADE HERB
GOD SAW THAT IT WAS GOOD
GOD GAVE IT TO MAN
Genesis 1:11
Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, and the fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind, whose seed is in itself, on the earth"; and it was so.
Genesis 1:12
And the earth brought forth grass, the herb that yields seed according to its kind, and the tree that yields fruit, whose seed is in itself according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
Genesis 1:29
And God said, "See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food.
"Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God?" --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virginia, 1782.
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.
Galatians 6-7
Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things. Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
Romans 9:32
Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith,
but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at
that stumbling stone;
Matthew 15:11
Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.
Romans 14: 2-3
For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs. Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.
Proverbs 15:17
Better is a dinner of herbs where love is, than a stalled ox and hatred therewith.
Puleeze! The whole purpose of drinking is to obtain a certain chemical change in the brain, however mild it may be. You can also just have a puff or two of marijuana and get a very mild buzz. Besides, when was the last time you heard of someone smoking a doobie and beating up his girlfriend? Marijuana has many fewer undesireable side affects than alcohol.
This has MUCH less to do with "right or wrong" than it has to do with the government seeking more control over people. If you look up the history of the anti-drug movement in the US you will NOT find that the main supporters were leigons of prudish Victorian matrons that pushed for Prohibition. What you will find is racist Southern Democrats looking for another excuse to put black men in jail. And just as the original gun control laws were meant to disarm blacks, they quickly got around to opressing everyone.
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.