"Two Drugs Are Quite
Enough" NZ Editorial;
Saying Marijuana Is "No Worse Than Alcohol and Tobacco" Won't Work
April 9, 1998(Ed. note: I think that the
otherwise generally excellent report by the Drug
Policy Forum of New Zealand made one very serious error. It based many of it arguments
on the premise that marijuana is "no worse than alcohol or tobacco." [In one
parentheses, it did say that "indeed they are
less severe."]
Prohibitionists around the world respond to this with the standard party line kneejerk,
"We don’t need any more drugs. We have enough problems with alcohol and tobacco.
Why would we want to add more?" There are a number of problems with this line of
course, but it should not be necessary to deal with it at all.
No drug is harmless to everyone at every dose and in every circumstance, but marijuana
is far "safer" or "less dangerous" to society and to the health of
its users than either of the legal drugs.
See "Tobacco
A More Dangerous Drug Than Marijuana, But It’s Still Legal" -- Colorado
Physician
There are two very important reasons for emphasizing this point. The first is simply
because it is true.
The second is that it is necessary for everyone to understand this in order to
understand that marijuana prohibition was not just another "noble experiment"
like alcohol prohibition or the current anti-tobacco mania. It is a counterproductive
fraud.
Marijuana prohibition is not merely hypocritical, as the "no worse than"
argument implies. It is wrong in its basis and evil in its application. It is not merely a
failure. The editorial below recognizes this, but failures can be reworked and corrected. Marijuana
prohibition cannot and should not be made to work.
It essential to say that marijuana prohibition is vastly counterproductive. Ironically,
this is really the inescapable conclusion of the study. The point is that there are
times when you have to call a spade a bloody shovel, and this is one of those times.)
Also see
"DO WE NEED ANY MORE DRUGS?" at
Cannabis Less Harmful
Than Legal Drugs; Prohibition Doesn’t Work; But London Daily Mail Is Just Hooked
Wellington New Zealand
Evening Post: Lead Editorial
editor@evpost.co.nz
http://www.evpost.co.nz/
April 4, 1998
TWO DRUGS ARE QUITE ENOUGH
The great dope debate smoulders on. This week’s report on marijuana law reforms by
a group of New Zealand doctors and professionals has stirred the embers again in
what’s become a long-running argument about whether it’s time this country
addressed the issue of marijuana law reform. A report by an organisation calling itself
the Drug Policy Forum Trust and recommending the Government regulate and tax cannabis was
immediately dismissed by Associate Health Minister Roger Sowry, who said the paper failed
to acknowledge the harmful effects of cannabis use.
In the report, forum director Dr David Hadorn says New Zealand is one of the few
countries not to review its drug laws in recent years, while attitudes toward cannabis
were shifting worldwide. In Australia, he said, police had conceded laws weren’t
working and the British House of Lords was launching an inquiry into the case for
decriminalising cannabis. Meanwhile, California last year went a step further by introducing the controversial and virtually unenforceable Proposition 215,
a law that enables doctors to prescribe marijuana use to ease the symptoms of a variety of
illnesses including Aids, glaucoma and multiple sclerosis.
While there is mixed evidence about the effects of marijuana on people’s health,
Mr Sowry is right to resist the decriminalisation lobby. Two
legal drugs already do much damage in New Zealand communities, and Dr Hadorn is missing
the point when he says the health effects of cannabis are no worse than those of alcohol
or tobacco. New Zealand doesn’t need another.
But the report is spot on when it makes the point that current laws haven’t
reduced harmful drug use, whereas experience with tobacco use and drink-driving rates show
social sanctions can work. The argument for a review of New Zealand
drug laws is timely.
Police don’t seem to be able to cope with the sheer volume of cannabis already
available. In 1995-96, they seized more than 268,000 plants. Last year, faced with a $1.7
million cut in their drugs and anti-social offences budget, they recovered just over
98,000. Whatever the reason for the sharp decline, it’s clear police aren’t
busting to make drug busts the way they used to. New Zealand’s courts system is
already clogged with people on minor possession charges, while limited resources mean
police are unable to make meaningful inroads into the hardened criminal element that
grows, supplies and deals in drugs.
Despite the Government’s understandable reluctance to decriminalise marijuana,
there have been signs of political movement in the way the Government treats small-scale
recreational drug users. Last year, Justice Minister Doug Graham raised the idea of
instant fines, and Police Minister Jack elder suggested that people with minor drug
convictions could have their record wiped after a suitable time. In its report, the trust
estimated half of those aged 15-50 had tried marijuana. That’s a lot of smokers. If
police arrested them all today, the courts would suddenly be faced with the unappetising
prospect of turning about one million otherwise law-abiding Kiwis into instant criminals.
Obviously, that’s neither practical nor realistic. If the
Government is serious about stamping out widespread cannabis use it makes more sense to
get tougher at the base of the dope mountain – by hitting the growers and suppliers
– rather than ineffectually chipping away at the tip.
|
Supported