cannabisnews.com: Where There's Toke ...










  Where There's Toke ...

Posted by CN Staff on September 08, 2002 at 08:38:19 PT
By Ben Mulroney -- For the Sun 
Source: Toronto Sun  

The House of Sober Second Thought has endorsed the outright legalization of marijuana. Prohibition advocates are clamouring to have their voices heard. Both camps have indoctrinated themselves to such a degree that when approached by legislators who wish to re-examine our nation's marijuana policies, they downshift into automatic, dogmatic, sound-bite machines. 
Senator Pierre Claude Nolin has said that "pot is certainly less grave than alcohol and tobacco as far as health is concerned." Pro-pot groups love using that argument. They promote the concept that marijuana is a benign recreational drug, far less deadly or addictive than cigarettes or alcohol. With respect, anyone who has spent time on a university campus in the past few years has gleaned enough empirical data to wholly refute that claim. As a freshman, I had a friend with a near-photographic memory and a desire to experiment with anything and everything. Four years later, he was nearly two years away from graduation, he had a world-class collection of bongs and he frequently forgot why he had even walked into a room. Deadly? Definitely not. Benign? Ask my friend. He's probably still in school, trying to graduate. We are told that if Canada legalizes pot and brings it under the umbrella of government regulation, there will be no more black market. There will be no more organized crime running the show and our kids will be safer. The funny thing about criminals is that they don't always agree with lawmakers. In a legalized Canada, the government would issue licences to growers and sellers, tax marijuana cigarettes at a hefty rate and regulate THC levels, the key ingredient in pot. The government would have instituted a system delivering high-priced, low-grade pot, the perfect framework for the creation of a brand-new black market. If you only listened to supporters of legalization, you'd think that all that ails our society is rooted in our drug laws: Loosen them up, and everyone would have jobs, schools would be safe and we'd all live forever. Such an idea is as ludicrous as total prohibition. The problem is that neither side has ever painted a realistic picture of the future. The Marijuana Party would have much more credibility in the eyes of the public if it conceded that legalization would have some negative effects on society. Meanwhile, prohibitionists should stop endorsing such an apocalyptic view of a marijuana-friendly Canada. In order to make informed decisions, legislators need more than battle lines drawn in the sand and catchy slogans from pressure groups. Canadians want to know how our border policy with the United States would change if our drug laws suddenly became less harmonized. Would every Canadian under the age of 30 be searched at the border? Would the cost of travel increase? Canadians want to know if medicinal marijuana would be covered by medicare and they want to know if smoking a joint behind the wheel is tantamount to drinking and driving. Without these details, we cannot take that great leap into a world of a more sensible and compassionate view of marijuana. The Senate committee has taken a bold first step in changing our drug laws, but until those seeking to legalize pot start painting a more realistic portrait of a Canada brimming with legal weed, legislators will tell them to take their recommendations, stick them in their collective pipe and smoke it. Complete Title: Where There's Toke ...Marijuana Law Debate Must Get RealisticSource: Toronto Sun (CN ON)Author: Ben Mulroney -- For the SunPublished: September 8, 2002 Copyright: 2002 Canoe Limited PartnershipContact: editor sunpub.comWebsite: http://www.fyitoronto.com/torsun.shtmlRelated Articles & Web Site:Marijuana Party of Canadahttp://www.marijuanaparty.org/Don't Legalize Pot, Decriminalize It http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14032.shtmlActivists, Experts Hail Senate's Report on Pothttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread13995.shtmlLegalize Marijuana, Senate Committee Sayshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread13989.shtml

Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help





Comment #10 posted by JR Bob Dobbs on September 08, 2002 at 12:39:45 PT
13%
I don't remember seeing 13% mentioned in the summary of the Senate report. Even if it is there, so f'n what? 3% is about average... and if anyone wants >13%, can't they just grow their own?
[ Post Comment ]

 


Comment #9 posted by JHarshaw on September 08, 2002 at 12:14:49 PT

Pot strength
The Senate Commitee recommended a limit on recreational Cannabis be set at 13% THC. There was no limit on potency mentioned for Medical Cannabis.I could live with the 13% limit and still smile allllll day!

[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #8 posted by JHarshaw on September 08, 2002 at 12:10:26 PT

Correction.
In my last message the last paragraph should read "I guess asking them to be a little creative would be out of the question, ( and, I suspect, beyond the abilities of most of the
    current crop of psuedo-journalists.)" instead of what I wrote. Just goes to show that you should always take the time to proofread your posts.There's no use making a brilliant point if noone else can figure out your meaning.Peace and pot

[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #7 posted by Phasetheory on September 08, 2002 at 12:05:02 PT

Think again
The Canadian Government wouldn't sell low-grade marijuana. There not as stupid as their American counter-parts. The reality is, high-grade marijuana is less dangerous.Any smoker would be able to tell you why. The less you have to smoke to get high, the smaller amount of smoke you inhale. And ergo less carcinagens and toxins.I also disagree that there would be damage done to the Canadian society. Much more damage is done by the current laws. And for some reason, no matter how many times that's repeated, the prohibs never get it. 
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #6 posted by JHarshaw on September 08, 2002 at 12:04:14 PT

"Where's There's Toke..."
How many more of these asinine pot joke headlines are we to be subjected to?They ceased to be funny sometime in the late 60's but the media keep hauling out the same tired old trash.I guess asking them to be a little creative would be out of the question, ( and, I suspect, beyond the abilities most of the current crop of psuedo-journalists.)

[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #5 posted by FoM on September 08, 2002 at 10:17:03 PT

I See One Negative Effect
The only negative effect I see if Cannabis was made legal is it will cause problems with what MTV called the Shadow Industry. I'm sure it happened when Alcohol Prohibition ended so we can expect that too I think. That's not enough reason to keep it illegal though. 
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #4 posted by observer on September 08, 2002 at 09:57:18 PT

JAIL?
The Marijuana Party would have much more credibility in the eyes of the public if it conceded that legalization would have some negative effects on society.a) What's the evidence behind such a concession? We've had plenty of experience of the failure of prohibition. (Prohibition never "stops" the "drugs," but politicians and police love it for it gives them ever larger doses of the absolute power over us they so crave.) Where are the "negative effects" of "legalization"? All in a prohibitionists' mind?b) JAIL! This sophist forgot to mention the most salient fact: the jailing of adults, whose only "crime" was that of using marijuana. How did the author overlook that 'little' detail of prison? (Note that "legalize" was repeatedly punched.)When an author misses the most salient point of an issue (i.e. the jailing of adult cannabis users), then you have to wonder, what's the real agenda? Mulroney simply wants to prop up government authority in whatever form it appears?

[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #3 posted by Prop203 on September 08, 2002 at 09:17:43 PT

Sigh
>>>>>>>With respect, anyone who has spent time on a university campus in the past few years has gleaned enough empirical data to wholly refute that claim. As a freshman, I had a friend with a near-photographic memory and a desire to experiment with anything and everything.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Everthing" is alot more than POT! I would argue the below statment to not be from Pot but from "anything and everything">>>>>>>>Four years later, he was nearly two years away from graduation, he had a world-class collection of bongs and he frequently forgot why he had even walked into a room. Deadly? Definitely not. Benign? Ask my friend. He's probably still in school, trying to graduate.>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is canada not a free country? Do I not have the right to be lazy?>>>>>>>The government would have instituted a system delivering high-priced, low-grade pot, the perfect framework for the creation of a brand-new black market.>>>>>>>This is pure speculation.  And What if they did it? "low grade" is still better then the pot from mexico. Have u ever heard of making hash? Also I think eating a quater pound pot burger with cheese would eliminate all toxin worries and provide the needed punch even if it was low grade. >>>>>>>If you only listened to supporters of legalization, you'd think that all that ails our society is rooted in our drug laws: Loosen them up, and everyone would have jobs, schools would be safe and we'd all live forever.>>>>>>>>Well the way it is now shure dosent work. SO why not try a new plan? Also In all honesty I bet if everone got high on pot the world would become more passive in genral and we wouldnt be so mad at each other all the time!PeaceVote YES Prop 203 AZ 2002
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #2 posted by p4me on September 08, 2002 at 09:17:06 PT

The genius of this author
As a freshman, I had a friend with a near-photographic memory and a desire to experiment with anything and everything.Four years later, he was nearly two years away from graduation, he had a world-class collection of bongs and he frequently forgot why he had even walked into a room. Deadly? Definitely not. Benign? Ask my friend. He's probably still in school, trying to graduate.OK, so our genius offers us a reason a person should not use marijuana. But, why should people go to jail for using it? Our little genius does not seem to offer a reason for that.What some might call prohibitionist logic is rightly called stupidity.1,2
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #1 posted by JR Bob Dobbs on September 08, 2002 at 09:10:36 PT

My LTE of the day
Have you written a letter to the editor lately??-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-Sirs,  Ben Mulroney's editorial starts out by saying that the arguments for and against legal marijuana often slide into "automatic, dogmatic sound-bite machines", and then goes on to prove it himself.  For starters, he gives us some anecdotal evidence about a friend who lost focus during his college years while amassing a collection of bongs. Ben asks us if pot is "Deadly? Definitely not. Benign? Ask my friend. He's probably still in school, trying to graduate." Perhaps. But with the drug war in his way, Ben's friend has a lot worse things to worry about, like a criminal record.   Forgetting the anecdotal evidence - something the US Government does with medical marijuana - Mr. Mulroney does bring up a serious issue. He says Canadians "want to know if smoking a joint behind the wheel is tantamount to drinking and driving". Has he actually read the study, or even the shorter summary? It can be found online*, and indeed chapter 8 deals with this subject in depth. And he need not fear - "the Committee feels that it is important to opt for the greatest possible caution with respect to the issue of driving under the influence of cannabis."  The Committee found that the biggest danger was from people who drink and smoke cannabis and drive. "The Committee reccomends that the Criminal Code be amended to lower permitted alcohol levels to 40 milligrams per 100 millilitres of blood, in the presence of other drugs, especially, but not exclusively cannabis". While these are only reccomendations, they're clear ones. The law, when finally changed, would have to address these issues as well.  Mr. Mulroney should do a lot more reading on this issue, and then ask himself whether he believes the greater danger lies from people using cannabis, or from governments hooked on the drug war.* - http://www.parl.gc.ca/37/1/parlbus/commbus/senate/com-e/ille-e/rep-e/summary-e.pdf
[ Post Comment ]





  Post Comment