T
The420Guy
Guest
Heavy-Handed Law Creates Backlash As United States Falls Behind The Rest Of
The World, Which Is Moving Toward Decriminalizing The Drug
The Canadian government recently introduced legislation that would ease
penalties for marijuana possession. The Bush administration's response was
swift and heavy-handed. U.S. drug czar John Walters warned Canada that if
the bill passed, the result would be increased security and lengthy delays
at the border. Never mind that such a step would hurt American
manufacturers -- especially the Big Three automakers -- far more than
Canada's pot growers.
Judging from Washington's reaction, one might think Canada is about to
become the Netherlands of North America, complete with "coffee shops" on
Windsor's Ouellette Avenue and rolling papers and water pipes at duty-free
boutiques.
But Canada's proposal is hardly radical. It would decriminalize possession
of half an ounce or less; violators would be fined $150 in Canadian
currency (about $115 U.S.), and would not be given a criminal record. That
is a far cry from a Canadian Senate panel's recommendation last year that
marijuana be legalized like alcohol and tobacco, with a minimum legal age
of 16.
Canada's approach is also in step with much of the industrialized world. A
number of European countries, including Italy and Spain, have eliminated or
reduced penalties for possessing small amounts. For years, the Netherlands
has had an official policy of tolerating small-time users. Several
Australian states have effectively decriminalized the drug.
And on July 1, a law downgrading possession to a non-arrestable offense
took effect in Britain.
Even some U.S. states have decriminalized possession of small amounts;
California, for instance, classifies it as a violation punishable by a $100
fine.
States that relaxed their marijuana laws did so in the wake of the Shafer
Commission's recommendation, in 1972, that penalties for possession of
small amounts be eliminated. The panel found that harsh marijuana laws were
the result of racial prejudice (the nation's earliest users were Chinese,
Mexicans and blacks) and based on the mistaken belief that the drug was
highly addictive, drove users to commit violent crimes and inevitably led
to harder substances like heroin. The commissioners were hardly
soft-on-crime liberals; they were appointed by President Richard Nixon and
chaired by a former GOP governor.
For a while, it appeared that lawmakers might follow the commission's
advice and make marijuana penalties more proportional to the crime. In
1977, President Jimmy Carter asked Congress to ease penalties for possession.
But after Ronald Reagan's election, the debate over marijuana came to an
abrupt halt. The national policy became "just say no" and has remained that
way under both Republican and Democratic administrations. While other
countries moved toward decriminalization, penalties in the United States
have become harsher; they now include loss of student financial aid,
suspension of driving privileges, and the forfeiture of assets such as cars
and boats.
The Bush administration has taken the anti-marijuana crusade even further.
It has run ads linking pot use to the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks;
brought federal charges against providers of medical marijuana, which is
legal in a number of states; and staged a nationwide crackdown on
paraphernalia dealers. State and local authorities are also taking a tough
stance: Last year, more than 600,000 Americans were arrested on marijuana
charges, most for simple possession.
Administration officials reject decriminalization because they view
marijuana as a moral issue. They are determined to eliminate its use,
regardless of what it costs to catch and punish offenders or how much
Americans' lives and careers are disrupted and their civil liberties
curtailed. Other countries have concluded such an approach is impractical.
Rather than aim for zero use, they are trying to eliminate the worst
consequences, such as impaired driving and use by young teenagers.
Despite the ongoing anti-marijuana crusade, a growing number of Americans
are starting to question their government's hard-line approach. Opinion
polls show overwhelming support for medical marijuana, and even a majority
in favor of decriminalizing the drug. Support for outright legalization is
higher now than it was during the 1970s; and, in recent years, proposals to
legalize pot for adults won almost 40 percent of the vote in Alaska and
Nevada.
If Canada decriminalizes marijuana, criticism of America's zero-tolerance
policy is likely to intensify. That is the last thing the Bush
administration wants to happen. In opposing Canada's move to liberalize its
laws, Washington warns of a flood of drugs across our borders. But what it
really fears is a renewed debate at home over marijuana policy, and it
seems willing to go to great lengths to stop that debate before it starts.
Pubdate: Tue, 29 Jul 2003
Source: Detroit News (MI)
Webpage: Detroit Local News - Michigan News - Breaking News - detroitnews.com
Copyright: 2003, The Detroit News
The World, Which Is Moving Toward Decriminalizing The Drug
The Canadian government recently introduced legislation that would ease
penalties for marijuana possession. The Bush administration's response was
swift and heavy-handed. U.S. drug czar John Walters warned Canada that if
the bill passed, the result would be increased security and lengthy delays
at the border. Never mind that such a step would hurt American
manufacturers -- especially the Big Three automakers -- far more than
Canada's pot growers.
Judging from Washington's reaction, one might think Canada is about to
become the Netherlands of North America, complete with "coffee shops" on
Windsor's Ouellette Avenue and rolling papers and water pipes at duty-free
boutiques.
But Canada's proposal is hardly radical. It would decriminalize possession
of half an ounce or less; violators would be fined $150 in Canadian
currency (about $115 U.S.), and would not be given a criminal record. That
is a far cry from a Canadian Senate panel's recommendation last year that
marijuana be legalized like alcohol and tobacco, with a minimum legal age
of 16.
Canada's approach is also in step with much of the industrialized world. A
number of European countries, including Italy and Spain, have eliminated or
reduced penalties for possessing small amounts. For years, the Netherlands
has had an official policy of tolerating small-time users. Several
Australian states have effectively decriminalized the drug.
And on July 1, a law downgrading possession to a non-arrestable offense
took effect in Britain.
Even some U.S. states have decriminalized possession of small amounts;
California, for instance, classifies it as a violation punishable by a $100
fine.
States that relaxed their marijuana laws did so in the wake of the Shafer
Commission's recommendation, in 1972, that penalties for possession of
small amounts be eliminated. The panel found that harsh marijuana laws were
the result of racial prejudice (the nation's earliest users were Chinese,
Mexicans and blacks) and based on the mistaken belief that the drug was
highly addictive, drove users to commit violent crimes and inevitably led
to harder substances like heroin. The commissioners were hardly
soft-on-crime liberals; they were appointed by President Richard Nixon and
chaired by a former GOP governor.
For a while, it appeared that lawmakers might follow the commission's
advice and make marijuana penalties more proportional to the crime. In
1977, President Jimmy Carter asked Congress to ease penalties for possession.
But after Ronald Reagan's election, the debate over marijuana came to an
abrupt halt. The national policy became "just say no" and has remained that
way under both Republican and Democratic administrations. While other
countries moved toward decriminalization, penalties in the United States
have become harsher; they now include loss of student financial aid,
suspension of driving privileges, and the forfeiture of assets such as cars
and boats.
The Bush administration has taken the anti-marijuana crusade even further.
It has run ads linking pot use to the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks;
brought federal charges against providers of medical marijuana, which is
legal in a number of states; and staged a nationwide crackdown on
paraphernalia dealers. State and local authorities are also taking a tough
stance: Last year, more than 600,000 Americans were arrested on marijuana
charges, most for simple possession.
Administration officials reject decriminalization because they view
marijuana as a moral issue. They are determined to eliminate its use,
regardless of what it costs to catch and punish offenders or how much
Americans' lives and careers are disrupted and their civil liberties
curtailed. Other countries have concluded such an approach is impractical.
Rather than aim for zero use, they are trying to eliminate the worst
consequences, such as impaired driving and use by young teenagers.
Despite the ongoing anti-marijuana crusade, a growing number of Americans
are starting to question their government's hard-line approach. Opinion
polls show overwhelming support for medical marijuana, and even a majority
in favor of decriminalizing the drug. Support for outright legalization is
higher now than it was during the 1970s; and, in recent years, proposals to
legalize pot for adults won almost 40 percent of the vote in Alaska and
Nevada.
If Canada decriminalizes marijuana, criticism of America's zero-tolerance
policy is likely to intensify. That is the last thing the Bush
administration wants to happen. In opposing Canada's move to liberalize its
laws, Washington warns of a flood of drugs across our borders. But what it
really fears is a renewed debate at home over marijuana policy, and it
seems willing to go to great lengths to stop that debate before it starts.
Pubdate: Tue, 29 Jul 2003
Source: Detroit News (MI)
Webpage: Detroit Local News - Michigan News - Breaking News - detroitnews.com
Copyright: 2003, The Detroit News
