----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 11:53:18 -0700
Subject:Canada: Smoked Out Up TOC
Newshawk: CMAP
Source: Calgary Sun (CN AB)
Pubdate: Wed, 17 Jul 2002
Author: Roy Clancy

Smoked out

Federal Minister of Justice Martin Cauchon admitted smoking
marijuana in his youth yesterday.

The way he's been acting lately, you might be forgiven for
thinking he's still indulging in the occasional toke.

On Monday, Cauchon suggested he's considering decriminalizing
the illegal substance -- even though Senate and Commons
committees investigating the issue have yet to release their
reports.

Cauchon's comments represent a radical departure from his
earlier position on marijuana, which was that society isn't
ready for decriminalization.

If the neophyte minister hasn't been firing up the odd
doobie, it's hard to figure exactly what his motivation
might be. Perhaps he merely wanted to raise his political
profile.

If that was the goal, he succeeded. A whole bunch of people
are perturbed with him and the smoke hasn't even begun
to clear.

Solicitor-General Lawrence MacAulay has some reservations
about the notion.

The Canadian Police Association vowed to fight any moves
towards decriminalization -- claiming it would hamper their
efforts to stop drug-traffickers.

Even the leader of the federal Marijuana Party was left
gasping at Cauchon's suggestion.

The pot party folks are worried that fining people for
cannabis possession will become too attractive a source
of revenue for the state.

"It is very nice of Mr. Cauchon to think of us cannabis
consumers, but my major problem ... is that we could see
an increase in police stopping people for cannabis," said
Marijuana Party leader Marc-Boris Saint-Maurice.

The pot proponents make it patently clear they're not
interested in decriminalization -- where marijuana is
illegal, but not a criminal offence.

The stoners won't rest until it is out-and-out legal.

They've been fighting for it long enough. The U.S. based
North American Organization for the Repeal of Marijuana
Laws (NORML) has been active for decades.

A survey by the University of Lethbridge last year revealed
support for legalization has doubled in the last 25 years.

A change in Britain's laws last week to decriminalize pot
got the spliff and hookah set excited. Now with Cauchon's
pronouncements, they can barely contain themselves.

There's more organization than you would think behind the
legalization movement. Any mention of the subject by a
news outlet draws dozens of e-mails from all over the
continent.

Just yesterday, I was sent copies of editorials from two
major Canadian newspapers supporting decriminalization.
After this column appears, I'll get dozens of e-mails --
most of them indignant and angry at my callous and
intolerant attitude.

I'll admit decriminalizing marijuana makes some sense.

Roughly 30,000 Canadians are charged with simple possession
every year. The harm done by saddling people with criminal
records often exceeds the damage done by using the drug.

Most unfair of all, police in different parts of the country
enforce the law differently.

The pro-dope advocates make some compelling arguments, such
as the impact of organized crime and relatively benign nature
of the substance.

Their ultimate pipe dream is to see marijuana fully sanctioned
and available for sale at the corner store. The
decriminalization and medical marijuana issues are mere
bandwagons for them to ride on their way to achieving their
goal.

While I back the regulated use of medical marijuana -- like any
other medically prescribed drug -- I personally believe blanket
legalization would be a tragic mistake.

Anyone who has known a chronic, heavy user can attest to the
substance's side effects -- lethargy, inability to
concentrate, memory lapses.

A study published this spring in the Canadian Medical
Association Journal concluded that pot use drives down the IQ
by four points. Fortunately for the druggies, the same study
revealed the IQ bounced back after use was discontinued.

The researchers warned that multi-drug users and those who'd
been toking for decades couldn't count on the same recovery.

That's really the point here. Even though many Canadians have
tried marijuana during their lives, only a small percentage
now use it regularly.

Even those sympathetic to pot smokers would have to admit
this isn't such a bad situation.

Right now marijuana use remains on the periphery.

To keep it that way, we must retain penalties that send a
strong message that drug use is harmful and not accepted
by society.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 11:53:49 -0700
Subject:Canada: Editorial: To Decriminalize Cannabis Up TOC

Newshawk: CannabisLink.ca  http://cannabislink.ca/
Pubdate: Wed, 17 Jul 2002
Source: Globe and Mail (Canada)
Copyright: 2002, The Globe and Mail Company
Contact: letters@globeandmail.ca
Website: http://www.globeandmail.ca/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/168
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mjcn.htm (Cannabis - Canada)

TO DECRIMINALIZE CANNABIS

Quite what prompted federal Justice Minister Martin Cauchon's musings that
perhaps cannabis use should be decriminalized is unclear. In part he may
have been spurred by an imminent change in the laws of Britain, where
smokers of marijuana and hashish will no longer be arrested for simple
possession. Very likely he is also testing public reaction in advance of
two upcoming parliamentary committee reports, both widely expected to
recommend loosening Canada's pot laws.

Whatever its rationale, Mr. Cauchon's suggestion is welcome. Outdated and
ineffectual, our cannabis laws gobble up absurd amounts of police and court
resources and badly need an overhaul.

Not all agree. Two separate polls last year found Canadians evenly divided
about decriminalizing the use (as opposed to the sale) of cannabis. Police,
too, are ambivalent. While there is little overt pursuit of marijuana
smokers in this country -- the vast majority of the thousands of
simple-possession charges laid annually are incurred during the
investigation of other offences -- the Canadian Police Association firmly
opposes decriminalizing possession. Nor would there be any plaudits from
south of the border.

Reform, nonetheless, is long overdue. More than 30 years have passed since
Canada's LeDain commission urged that marijuana use be decriminalized,
allowing simple possession to be treated with the same severity as, say, a
traffic ticket. The arguments have altered little since then. Yes,
drug-taking in all its forms should be discouraged, particularly among
young people. And yes, for a minority of aficionados, cannabis may be a
"gateway" drug leading to wider experimentation and more serious drug problems.

But stacked against that is the reality that more than 1.5 million
Canadians regularly smoke cannabis, by estimate of the Canadian Medical
Association, and that the status quo does not work. All that the current
law achieves is to saddle convicted small-scale marijuana users with a
highly damaging criminal record, which can be a major liability when they
seek a job or attempt to visit the United States.

Britain is not alone in downgrading its pot laws. Several other European
countries have done the same, as has Australia. Canada should follow suit.
__________________________________________________________________________
Distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Ariel
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 11:54:27 -0700
Subject:Canada: Cauchon Admits He Smoked Pot- Questions Possession Law Up TOC

Newshawk: CannabisLink.ca  http://cannabislink.ca/
Pubdate: Wed, 17 Jul 2002
Source: Globe and Mail (Canada)
Copyright: 2002, The Globe and Mail Company
Contact: letters@globeandmail.ca
Website: http://www.globeandmail.ca/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/168
Section: Page A3
Author: Brian Laghi
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mjcn.htm (Cannabis - Canada)

CAUCHON ADMITS HE SMOKED POT; QUESTIONS POSSESSION LAW

OTTAWA -- Canada's top lawmaker admitted yesterday that he smoked pot in
his youth and questioned the suitability of a possession law that can play
havoc with an offender's employment.

"Yes, of course," Justice Minister Martin Cauchon said yesterday when asked
if he had ever smoked cannabis. "I'm 39 years old. I've been elected first
when I was 31 years old and yes, of course I tried it before, obviously."

Mr. Cauchon raised the possibility earlier this week of decriminalizing
possession of the drug, saying it is applied unevenly.

Legal experts have said that, although few individuals continue to be
punished with jail time, the stigma of a criminal record can close certain
avenues of employment and make it difficult to travel to the United States.

Asked if it is appropriate that being convicted of simple possession should
limit a person's career, Mr. Cauchon said that was one reason MPs and
senators have been asked to look at the issue.

"That's why actually there are two standing committees having a look at it
and they will come forward with their own recommendations and conclusions."

Mr. Cauchon, a lawyer, said he couldn't tell from his own experience
whether smoking cannabis is harmful.

Alan Young, a civil liberties lawyer, said that there are several ways in
which being found guilty of possession can damage a person's future
employment prospects.

For example, a private moving company might refuse a job applicant work
because a criminal record makes it difficult to bond a person. The federal
government often asks prospective employees about criminal offences, he added.

Travelling to the United States can also be difficult, Mr. Young said. In
the late 1990s, for example, some U.S. border personnel began asking
Canadian travellers whether they had ever smoked pot, in an effort to try
to slow down importation of Canadian-grown pot, he said.

"If people were stupid enough to say yes, they were often barred."

A spokesman for the Quebec Bar Association said the society punishes a
lawyer only when it becomes clear an offence impedes his or her ability to
do their job. That could cover a Crown lawyer prosecuting drug crimes, Leon
Bedard said.

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Jean Chretien told reporters that he has never
smoked dope.

"When I was young the word marijuana did not exist," he said after emerging
from a meeting of the federal cabinet. "I didn't know. I learned about the
word long after that. It was too late to try it."

Mr. Cauchon's decision to consider decriminalization was met with deep
skepticism yesterday by representatives of Canadian police forces.

"We have to be clear that marijuana is a mind-altering drug," said Mike
Niebudek, vice-president of the Canadian Police Association.
__________________________________________________________________________
Distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Ariel
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 11:54:55 -0700
Subject:Canada: Editorial: Joint Planning Up TOC

Newshawk: CannabisLink.ca  http://cannabislink.ca/
Pubdate: Wed, 17 Jul 2002
Source: Ottawa Citizen (CN ON)
Webpage: http://www.mapinc.org/cancom/AAA686E7-F1A2-4559-8825-2EEAA3131728
Copyright: 2002 The Ottawa Citizen
Contact: letters@thecitizen.southam.ca
Website: http://www.canada.com/ottawa/ottawacitizen/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/326

JOINT PLANNING

Positive smoke signals wafted over Ottawa this week as Justice Minister
Martin Cauchon suggested he might relax Canada's marijuana laws. Marijuana
is an inconsequential intoxicant, probably less dangerous than alcohol, and
it's a waste of resources to haul recreational users into court.

Even the British, models of rectitude and reason, have announced a plan to
decriminalize marijuana.

Go for it, Mr. Cauchon. It won't be just snowboarders who thank you.
__________________________________________________________________________
Distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 11:56:05 -0700
Subject:Ireland: Cannabis Campaigner Weeds His Way Out Of Prosecution Up TOC

Newshawk: JimmyG
Pubdate: Wed, 17 Jul 2002
Source: Irish Examiner (Ireland)
Copyright: Examiner Publications Ltd, 2002
Contact: exam_letters@examiner.ie
Website: http://www.examiner.ie/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/144
Author: Jim Morahan and Micheal Lehane
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/pot.htm (Cannabis)

CANNABIS CAMPAIGNER WEEDS HIS WAY OUT OF PROSECUTION

A PRO-CANNABIS campaigner who posted the drug to members of the Oireachtas
last November is not to be prosecuted. Yesterday Luke Flanagan received a
letter from the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) confirming that he
would not face any charges over the incident.

"I knew about this 10 days ago. I'd been waiting for a letter, I got it
today," said Mr Flanagan yesterday.

"I got a telephone call from the arresting officer, Garda Aidan Kelly,
based in Pearse Street. I wrote a letter to the DPP last month seeking
written confirmation."

Mr Flanagan has been jailed for possession of cannabis before. In December
last year he refused to pay a UKP150 fine and was imprisoned in Castlerea
Prison.

"Cannabis has been legalised as far as I am concerned," he said. Mr
Flanagan had sent the cannabis to TDs and senators as part of a campaign to
legalise the drug.

Commenting on the DPP's decision, Mr Flanagan said: "I find it amazing. The
next time a person is in court for the possession of cannabis, can they not
come along and say: 'I know another person who was found in possession of
cannabis and they are not being prosecuted for it?'

"I cultivated cannabis; the State knows I cultivated cannabis. I am not to
be prosecuted for it."

The letter from the DPP's office said: "Dear Mr Flanagan, I can confirm
that a file was received in this office from the gardai and that a decision
was taken not to prosecute."

Mr Flanagan asked the DPP for a reason for the decision, but was told the
Director was precluded from giving a reason.

The Department of Justice yesterday insisted there are no plans to legalise
cannabis. "The law is the same and we're not aware of any moves to change
it," a spokesperson said. As long as the law remains the same the gardai
will continue to enforce it, he said
__________________________________________________________________________
Distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Terry Liittschwager
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 12:37:28 -0700
Subject:Canada: Editorial: Reform Marijuana Laws  Up TOC

Newshawk: CannabisLink.ca  http://cannabislink.ca/
Pubdate: Wednesday, July 17, 2002
Source: Toronto Star (CN ON)
Website: http://www.thestar.com/
Address: One Yonge St., Toronto ON, M5E 1E6
Contact: lettertoed@thestar.com

Reform Marijuana Laws

Canada's marijuana laws are not working. The country's police chiefs said so
years ago. So did the Senate's legal affairs committee. Even the Canadian
Medical Association Journal has joined the call for decriminalization of
simple possession of cannabis for personal use.

Now Justice Minister Martin Cauchon is adding his voice, however
tentatively, to the growing number of credible sources who think Canada's
laws must be reworked.

Cauchon is toying with decriminalizing marijuana use by making possession of
small amounts of cannabis a ticketing offence, much like a traffic
violation. The suggestion follows on the heels of Britain, which last week
became the latest European country to relax its possession laws.

There are strong, well-known arguments for making reforms here.

When the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs committee recommended in
1996 to change the law, it reported an estimated 3 million Canadians were
using marijuana and hashish. That, they said, was strong proof the punitive
approach had failed.

Worse, the laws are unfairly applied. Possession is ignored in some cities
but strictly prosecuted in others. About 5 per cent of the roughly 30,000
Canadians charged each year with possessing a small amount of marijuana go
to jail. How much respect can citizens have for a law that lets the vast
majority walk, while sending a very few unlucky souls to jail?

All of this is not to dismiss the legitimate concerns that changing the law
would increase pot-smoking and lead to the consumption of harder drugs like
heroin and cocaine.

Research in the United States suggests that relaxed laws haven't had much
effect. The 11 states that issue tickets for possession show no higher use
than in states with tough laws.

As for hard drugs, the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police believe they
could actually do a better job on cracking down on more dangerous drugs and
on traffickers if they could free up resources now used to enforce
discredited marijuana laws.

Marijuana remains a vice, like drinking alcohol or smoking cigarettes. It
would be better handled through public education, not by giving people
criminal records.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 14:08:31 -0700
Subject:Iran:  Police seize more than a ton of hashish  Up TOC

AP World Politics

Police seize more than a ton of hashish in
southeastern Iran
Sun Jul 7, 7:19 AM ET

TEHRAN, Iran - Police have seized 1,105 kilograms
(2,430 pounds) of hashish from drug traffickers in a
southeastern province, state-run television reported
Sunday.

The drugs were confiscated Saturday in
Sistan-Baluchestan province, Col. Pishqadam, the local
anti-narcotics police officer, told Iran television.
The station did not give his first name.

Pishqadam said that in the "extensive operation"
several guns were confiscated from the armed
traffickers.

In a major operation in March, police seized more than
17 tons of opium, heroin and hashish in the same
province, which has long borders with Afghanistan (
news - web sites) and Pakistan.

Iran accounts for 80 percent of the opium and 90
percent of the morphine intercepted in the world,
according to the International Narcotics Control
Board.

Iranian police seized 112 tons of illegal drugs and
arrested 306,000 people on drug-related charges during
the past Iranian year, which ended on March 20.

Iran is a major route for smuggling drugs from
neighboring Afghanistan and Pakistan to markets in the
Gulf, Europe and beyond. Single busts involving a ton
or more of drugs are not uncommon.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 14:09:30 -0700
Subject:Russia: A Group Collects Votes For Marijuana Up TOC

CRRH note: It is a happy day to see this story from Russia!
Newshawk: rosdmon
Pubdate: Wed, 17 Jul 2002
Source: Moscow Times, The (Russia)
Webpage: http://www.moscowtimes.ru/stories/2002/07/17/012.html
Copyright: 2002 The Moscow Times
Contact: oped@imedia.ru
Website: http://www.moscowtimes.ru/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/903
Section: Page 3
Note: From Combined Reports (AP, MT)

A GROUP COLLECTS VOTES FOR MARIJUANA

A small but vocal political group called for the legalization of marijuana
and hashish Tuesday, sparking an angry response from the country's top drug
expert, who said such a step would be terrible for Russia.

Members of the Transnational Radical Party held what they called a "street
referendum" on Pushkin Square, extolling the virtues of legalizing light
drugs and asking people whether they favor it.

"Hemp and its derivatives are less harmful than alcohol and tobacco," said
Anatoly Khramov, head of the party's Moscow office.

"Light drugs remain under the control of mafia structures and bring them
tremendous profits," he said, arguing that marijuana should be made legal
to take it out of the criminal realm.

Khramov called for three basic changes to drug-related legislation: to free
drug users from criminal liability; to make a clear distinction between
"hard" and "soft" drugs; and to provide free medical treatment and
rehabilitation to addicts.

Under existing law, people charged with obtaining and keeping even a small
amount of marijuana face up to three years in prison. Distribution can
bring sentences of seven to 15 years.

Tuesday's street action prompted an angry response from Nikolai Ivanets,
the Health Ministry's top drug abuse expert. Speaking on Ekho Moskvy radio,
Ivanets warned that legalizing "light" drugs like marijuana would be a
"danger to the nation."

"It would be terrible if this is allowed," Ivanets said, adding that "from
the medical point of view, marijuana opens the way to other harder drugs"
that are more addictive.

Drug use, especially of harder drugs like heroin, has exploded since 1991,
leading to a sharp rise in AIDS cases among addicts who share needles.

A recent poll of 1,600 people conducted by the All-Russia Public Opinion
Center found that 99 percent of those surveyed said the country's drug
problem is "very serious" or "serious enough." Only 1 percent called it
"not very serious."

The marijuana survey was the second headline-grabbing public action by the
Transnational Radical Party in as many days. On Monday, members of the
group boarded a Moscow riverboat and, just as it passed by the walls of the
Kremlin, unfurled a banner calling for immediate peace talks between
President Vladimir Putin and Chechen rebel leader Aslan Maskhadov.

The party complained that Moscow authorities had denied their request to
hold Tuesday's event for the whole day, instead limiting it to several
hours. In a statement carried on its web site, the party said it had filed
a complaint in city court.

Valeria Konovalenko, 20, a psychology student and cigarette smoker, said
she signed against legalization. "I think there are enough amusements for
young people and nothing good will come of legalizing marijuana. It's bad
for your health," she said.

Nikita Karpov, a 17-year-old law student, voted for legalization because he
considers marijuana a soft drug. "It should be like in the Netherlands," he
said. "If they legalize it, there will be fewer users."

State Duma Deputy Gennady Raikov disagreed: "It would be something awful if
drugs were legalized in Russia. You have to take into account the culture
and mentality of a people -- not compare them to, say, Holland."
__________________________________________________________________________
Distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Ariel
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 14:14:54 -0700
Subject:CA: Significance of Epis Trial Up TOC

by Mikki Norris

"I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth."

These are the words that witnesses must agree to when presenting their
testimony in a US court of law. But, then something happens. The judge and
the prosecutor get to keep out testimony they don't want the jury to hear
that may get in the way of a conviction of the defendant.

What's with that? Why can't a jury hear the reasons or intentions for a
defendant's actions? In judging someone's guilt -- especially when someone's
life or freedom is on the line --  isn't it vital that the jury is able to
hear all the facts of the case?

Something is seriously wrong with the justice system when the judge or
prosecutor can keep important facts out of a case, or the jury is not
allowed to consider all relevant motives and issues.

Such is the miscarriage of justice that was experienced in the Brian Epis
trial.  The facts related to his intention to cultivate "medicine" in a
state that allows caregivers to provide medical marijuana (California) for
legitimate patients were not allowed to be uttered in the court.  Why isn't
it relevant to the case to know the reason he was doing what he was doing?
Or that California has a law that allows for medical marijuana?  Why is a
jury not allowed to know that if they find him guilty, he could be facing 10
years or more in prison? Would they convict him of such a serious crime if
they knew that? Punishments should fit the crime. Is there justice when the
punishment is completely out of proportion to the offence?

This case wreaks of the need for judicial, legal and sentencing reforms.
When someone is facing a jury of their peers, they should be allowed to
present their case in its entirety with all the facts on the table related
to the charges. The jury should be allowed to vote their conscience in
relation to charges. They need to know their rights related to jury
nullification. They should know that their votes for conviction could
translate into severe punishments for trying to relieve suffering.  They
should know that a person could go to prison for providing medicine to help
a patient for longer sentences than corporate criminals could go to prison
for stealing thousands of people's pension plans, their futures.

Mandatory minimums need to be repealed. The feds need to respect states
rights. I wish Brian Epis luck with his appeal. Meanwhile, we should bring
as much attention to this case as possible as it exemplifies central issues
of what is wrong with federal drug policies.

The federal government and courts should be held to the same standard as
witnesses -- the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Anything less diminishes our system of justice.

- -- Mikki Norris, Director
Cannabis Consumers Campaign
www.cannabisconsumers.org
Coordinator, Human Rights and the Drug War
www.hr.95.org
Co-author, _Shattered Lives: Portraits from America's Drug War_
Co-author, _Human Rights and the Drug War_
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 18:48:31 -0700
Subject:HI: Kona police return  confiscated pakalolo  Up TOC

Newshawk: Rev. Dennis Shields
Pubdate: Wed 17, July 2002
Source: Honolulu Star-Bulletin
Copyright: 2002 Honolulu Star-Bulletin
Contact: rthompson@starbulletin.com
Website:http://starbulletin.com/
Author: Rod Thompson
see http://starbulletin.com/2002/07/17/news/index2.html
Wednesday, July 17, 2002
Kona police return confiscated pakalolo
It had been taken from 3 approved users of medical marijuana
By Rod Thompson rthompson@starbulletin.com

KAILUA-KONA >> Kona police have returned 1.5 ounces of marijuana to 
three state-approvedmedical marijuana users after confiscating the substance 
from them last week.

In a room at the main Kealakehe station yesterday, a police officer 
returned the marijuana belonging to John and Rhonda Robison and their house guest, 
Kea Wells.

But police say an investigation is continuing and charges are still 
possible.

Honolulu attorney Jack Schweigert, who represents the three, said this 
is the first instance in Hawaii of police returning marijuana to people.

"I'm happy for them," Schweigert said. "They were really sick."

The Rev. Dennis Shields, who is pastor for the three and whose 
ministry includes the use of marijuana, said he believes this is 
the first instance in the nation of police returning marijuana to people.

Wells is under treatment for leukemia and recently received radiation 
and chemotherapy. Schweigert said she was vomiting repeatedly over the weekend 
because she lacked marijuana, which helps people tolerate chemotherapy.

John Robison was diagnosed with leukemia 10 years ago and attributes 
his long-term survival to anti-cancer properties of substances in marijuana.
Rhonda Robison uses marijuana to treat pain from a form of muscular dystrophy.
 
All three have state medical marijuana certificates that allow them to 
have up to three mature and four immature marijuana plants each, plus one 
ounce of dried marijuana each.

Police searched their home July 8, seized their marijuana, arrested 
and held them for eight hours before releasing them without charges.

Vice Lt. Robert Hickcox said the dried marijuana was returned 
yesterday because the total seized by police, 1.5 ounces, was less 
than the total of 3 ounces that the three were allowed to have.

Hickcox said the decision to return the marijuana was made after 
police consulted with the Narcotics Enforcement Division of the state Department of Public 
Safety and the Hawaii County Prosecutor's Office.


Police also seized 20 plants, one fewer than the total of 21 the three 
were allowed to have, he said.

The plants were not returned because 11 were mature, but the three 
medical marijuana users are allowed to have no more than a total of nine mature plants, 
according to Hickcox.

Shields said he was at the Robison home the night before the police 
search and only one of the 20 plants was mature, as evidenced by the 
presence of flowers or buds on the plants.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 21:43:48 -0700
Subject: NV: Editorial: Reefer Madness

Newshawk: Krissy www.mpp.org
Pubdate: Mon, 15 Jul 2002
Source: Las Vegas Review-Journal (NV)
Copyright: 2002 Las Vegas Review-Journal
Contact: letters@lvrj.com
Website: http://www.lvrj.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/233
Webpage: www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/2002/Jul-15-Mon-2002/opinion/19177100.html

REEFER MADNESS

DEA chief Asa Hutchinson was in Reno last week, delivering a speech in
which he embraced a crackdown on methamphetamine labs.

Afterward, though, he couldn't resist taking a poke at the proposal on
Nevada's fall ballot to legalize possession of up to 3 ounces of marijuana.

If the measure is approved, he said, "What kind of tourism will Nevada
attract?"

Stoners among all the gamblers, womanizers and boozers? Perish the thought!

Yes, Mr. Hutchinson, if the pot initiative passes, hordes of
Birkenstock-wearing, pony-tailed hippies will descend upon the Silver State
in their VW buses, clogging traffic as they steal bong hits while cruising
the Strip.

Then, of course, the lucrative California tourist market will dry up when
Fred and Ethel from Orange County decide against making the trek up
Interstate 15 for fear they'll be accosted in Las Vegas by crazed young
people high on that wacky tobacky.

Next thing you know, the only in-room movies available at the high-end
resorts will be "Up in Smoke" and "Dude, Where's my Car?" Why, instead of
passing out thinly veiled porn, hawkers on the Strip will be thrusting
copies of High Times into the clutches of beleaguered tourists.

Reefer madness, anyone?
__________________________________________________________________________
Distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 09:02:08 -0700
Subject: Canada: Smoke Of Marijuana Battle Lingers

Newshawk: Join CMAP (http://www.mapinc.org/cmap/lists.htm)
Pubdate: Wed, 17 Jul 2002
Source: Guelph Mercury (CN ON)
Copyright: 2002 Guelph Mercury Newspapers Limited
Contact: editor@guelphmercury.com
Website: http://www.guelphmercury.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1418
Author: Eric Volmers
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mjcn.htm (Cannabis - Canada)

SMOKE OF MARIJUANA BATTLE LINGERS

GUELPH -- Derek Wildfong is an activist by default. The owner of Hemp
Asylum on Macdonell Street considers himself a businessman first, but
admits his store's focus on selling marijuana-related paraphernalia often
puts him at the centre of the prickly debate over whether using the drug
should be decriminalized.

For seven years, Wildfong has sold a variety of colourful pipes and
literature about cannabis use, and become an advocate in Guelph for the
decriminalization of pot.

The debate resurfaced this week when Justice Minister Martin Cauchon
announced Canada may follow Britain's lead in decriminalizing marijuana
use, by making simple possession of small amounts a ticketing offence.

Chauchon's suggestion was met with criticism by local police officials and
MP Brenda Chamberlain.

Wildfong, meanwhile, sees it as cause for cautious optimism.

"Sure, I'm hopeful it will happen," Wildfong said. "Personally, it's been a
long time since I partook in that sort of thing. But for the people I know,
it's important."

Wildfong blames what he sees as lingering myths about marijuana use for its
vilification by law enforcement agencies and politicians.

He said his hope that Cauchon's suggestion becomes reality is based on
principle, not self-preservation in any business sense.

He said the idea that marijuana use would skyrocket after decriminalization
is not based on fact.

"I don't think my business would change," he said. "They didn't find any
change in Holland (after decriminalization). There has been a lot of
disinformation about marijuana and that's what keeps people scared. It's so
ingrained.

"There's this idea that you will smoke a joint and then try heroin. That's
not going to happen. But if you have six generations of people being told
the sky is green, it's tough to change that perception."

It's a common argument by promoters of cannabis use. Activist Robin Ellins
said politicians and police insist on lumping marijuana in with harder
drugs, such as heroin and cocaine.

"It's not in the same category," said Ellins, who sells cannabis
literature, smoking accessories and hemp fashions at his downtown Toronto
shop, Friendly Stranger. "Police are worried about keeping jobs and having
something to do. A lot of their time is spent cracking down on people
smoking pot in places they shouldn't be."

As for Cauchon's suggestion, Ellins said it doesn't go far enough.

Canada needs to adopt a policy similar to ones in Switzerland and Holland,
where marijuana use has been decriminalized, regulated and taxed, he said.

"Right now it's a forbidden fruit," said Ellins.

"More want to try it when they are younger. But if they set up some sort of
distribution the demand goes down."

Guelph Police Deputy Chief Don Porterfield disagrees.

He said the force is opposed to decriminalizing possession.

"The concern the police have is legalization is going to increase use," he
said.

While marijuana is typically considered a "harmless" drug, Porterfield said
there are crimes associated with its use, including impaired driving.

"It creates a number of collateral problems for the police," he said. "Any
step in that direction would have to be undertaken with a great deal of
caution."

Porterfield said Guelph Police drug officers are primarily focused on
curtailing marijuana growing operations, and targeting those involved in
the distribution and use of more serious drugs. That includes battling the
increased presence in Guelph of crack cocaine.

"Practically speaking that's where we focus our enforcement," Porterfield said.

He conceded issuing tickets for pot possession may put fewer restrictions
on officers than treating such matters as criminal cases, which involves
preparing materials for the federal prosecutor and also going to court if
the accused pleads not guilty.

However, Porterfield added even under a ticketing system the accused still
would likely have the right to plead not guilty, as motorists currently can
do with traffic tickets.

When contacted at her office Tuesday, Guelph-Wellington MP Brenda
Chamberlain said she also opposes decriminalization of marijuana.

She rejects the idea that marijuana is "harmless" and said she believes its
use can lead people to harder drugs.
__________________________________________________________________________
Distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Ariel
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 09:03:22 -0700
Subject: NV: Addressing The Pot Smokescreen

Newshawk: Krissy www.mpp.org
Pubdate: Fri, 12 Jul 2002
Source: Las Vegas Sun (NV)
Copyright: 2002 Las Vegas Sun, Inc
Contact: letters@lasvegassun.com
Website: http://www.lasvegassun.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/234
Author: Susan Snyder

At what point does enforcing a law become more burdensome than the
people who break it?

When the law involves arresting people for possessing small amounts of
marijuana, say Nevadans for Responsible Law Enforcement.

The group has completed a petition drive successfully placing on
Nevada ballots a proposal making it legal for adults to legally
possess up to three ounces of marijuana.

Billy Rogers, the group's Las Vegas spokesman, said it has gathered
74,767 valid signatures in 40 days -- 44,637 of them in Clark County.
To become law, it must be approved by voters in this year's election
and in 2004.

Nevada voters approved marijuana use for medical purposes in 2000. But
it remains unclear whether that or this new measure, which calls for
taxing marijuana as a tobacco product and selling it through
state-licensed shops, actually could take effect. The U.S. Supreme
Court ruled last year that no state could make exceptions to marijuana
laws for medical uses.

Rogers says it wouldn't be the first time state and federal policies
didn't match. And he says the time it takes to arrest, prosecute and
convict "otherwise law-abiding citizens" for possessing small amounts
of marijuana wastes law enforcement's time.

"Ultimately, the biggest problem with marijuana laws is the time
police officers waste on the arrest. With the paperwork and the time
in trial, it takes up to eight or nine hours to deal with one person
who has a very small amount of marijuana," he said.

About 750,000 such arrests were made nationally in 2000, Rogers
added.

The proposal prohibits possession by and sale to minors, public use,
use while driving or driving under the influence, advertising and
transportation into or out of Nevada.

"Anyone stupid enough to (violate) it would get sent to jail," Rogers
said.

Seems like we're trading one set of laws people don't follow for
another set.

According to Encyclopedia.com -- the most objective information I
could find -- marijuana use is traced back to China in 2737 B.C.

  >From 1850 to 1942 it was prescribed in the United States to treat
labor pains, nausea and rheumatism. Federal drug officials of the
1930s portrayed it as an addictive substance that led to other drug
abuse. The Controlled Substances Act of 1970 lumped it into Schedule I
with LSD and heroin.

In moderate doses, marijuana creates euphoria and affects motor
skills. High doses can cause paranoia, delusions and abnormally rapid
heart rates. It lowers testosterone in men, and raises it in women.
Heavy smokers can suffer lung damage. Regular use results in
psychological dependence.

Cigarettes and alcohol are addictive. Tobacco products cause lung
damage. All medicines come with other "side" effects. It is up to us
to decide whether the benefits outweigh the risks.

This seems to be an issue of making good choices rather than strict
laws. For example, California officials want to penalize drivers of
gas-guzzling SUVs to curb ozone-damaging emissions.

As with zero-tolerance policies regarding marijuana, I applaud the
intent. But they don't solve anything. Liberty operates on personal
choice. If we choose to pollute our air or bodies, laws hinder us.
They don't change our minds.

We can regulate dope. Not acting like one still will be up to
us.
__________________________________________________________________________
Distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Derek
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 09:04:39 -0700
Subject: Canada: U.S. to Canada: 'Lax' marijuana laws hinder war on drugs

Newshawk: CannabisLink.ca  http://cannabislink.ca/
Pubdate: Thursday, July 18, 2002
Source: Ottawa Citizen (CN ON)
Website: http://www.canada.com/ottawa/ottawacitizen/
Address: P.O. Box 5020, 1101 Baxter Rd., Ottawa, ON K2C 3M4
Contact: letters@thecitizen.southam.ca
Author: Janice Tibbetts
Webpage: http://www.mapinc.org/cancom/D31444A1-2F78-4836-8D6B-9F577C7D3D9A

U.S. to Canada: 'Lax' marijuana laws hinder war on drugs

More Canadian-grown cannabis will go south of border: drug czar

Janice Tibbetts
The Ottawa Citizen

OTTAWA -- Canada would hamper the aggressive U.S. war on drugs by adopting a
"lax policy"of decriminalizing possession of marijuana, says the head of
drug enforcement in the United States.

Asa Hutchinson, director of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration,
predicted that more Canadian-grown pot would end up south of the border if
Justice Minister Martin Cauchon decides to relax Canadian law.

"It would probably complicate things somewhat for the U.S.," Hutchinson said
in an interview.

"If you have lax marijuana policies right across the border, where
possession of marijuana is not considered criminal conduct, that invites
U.S. citizens into Canada for marijuana use and that will increase the
likelihood that both U.S. citizens and Canadian citizens will bring back the
Canadian marijuana across the border for distribution and sale."

Hutchinson also fears that any shift in policy in Canada or Britain, which
announced last week it will relax marijuana laws, will rejuvenate a debate
on marijuana decriminalization in the United States at a time when the
administration is determined to keep the drug strictly illegal.

"We have great respect for Canada and Britain as well, and if they start
shifting policies with regards to marijuana it simply increases the
rumblings in this country that we ought to re-examine our policy," said
Hutchinson. "It is a distraction from a firm policy on drug use."

The U.S. policy was reinforced last month by the U.S. Court of Appeals,
which upheld that marijuana is a dangerous drug with a high potential for
abuse.

The court said marijuana should remain classified as a Schedule 1 drug, the
most restrictive classification under the Controlled Substances Act.

Cauchon said earlier this week that he is considering decriminalizing
marijuana possession by removing it from the Criminal Code and making it an
offence punishable with a fine instead of a criminal record.

He is awaiting recommendations from a Senate committee and a House of
Commons committee, and he intends to consult with Canadians before making a
decision.

Hutchinson cautioned that he was not suggesting that a change in Canadian
law would go so far as to threaten Canada-U.S. relations, nor does he plan
to privately voice his opposition to Cauchon.

"If I'm asked whether I support decriminalizing marijuana, the answer is I
do not support that,"he said.

"My views on that issue are a reflection of where we should go with U.S.
policy. It's not our job to tell Canada what to do."

There already is a "significant influx"of marijuana into the United States,
Hutchinson said. A spokesman for the drug enforcement administration singled
out the potent B.C. bud as particularly prevalent in the United States.

Figures were unavailable from both Canadian and American authorities
Wednesday on how much pot is seized at the Canada-U.S. border, but there
have been estimates in the U.S. that as much as half of Canada's supply goes
south.

Canada is already viewed in the U.S. as being soft on drugs and the federal
government's move to allow marijuana smoking for medicinal purposes received
a rough ride in the U.S. media.

Hutchinson also rejects legalizing marijuana for medicinal use.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 09:05:07 -0700
Subject: Canada: Canada warned not to relax drug laws

Newshawk: CannabisLink.ca  http://cannabislink.ca/
Pubdate: Thursday, July 18, 2002
Source: National Post (Canada)
Website: http://www.nationalpost.com/
Address: 300 - 1450 Don Mills Road, Don Mills, Ontario M3B 3R5
Contact: letters@nationalpost.com
Author: Janice Tibbetts
Webpage:
http://www.nationalpost.com/utilities/story.html?id=31E9741A-5153-45B9-B106-
5963CBE07C6E

Canada warned not to relax drug laws

'Lax policy': Fear Canadian marijuana would cross the border

Janice Tibbetts
National Post

OTTAWA -- Canada would hamper the aggressive U.S. war on drugs by adopting a
"lax policy"of decriminalizing possession of marijuana, says the head of
drug enforcement in the United States.

Asa Hutchinson, director of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration,
predicted that more Canadian-grown pot would end up south of the border if
Justice Minister Martin Cauchon decides to relax Canadian law.

"It would probably complicate things somewhat for the U.S.," Hutchinson said
in an interview.

"If you have lax marijuana policies right across the border, where
possession of marijuana is not considered criminal conduct, that invites
U.S. citizens into Canada for marijuana use and that will increase the
likelihood that both U.S. citizens and Canadian citizens will bring back the
Canadian marijuana across the border for distribution and sale."

Hutchinson also fears that any shift in policy in Canada or Britain, which
announced last week it will relax marijuana laws, will rejuvenate a debate
on marijuana decriminalization in the United States at a time when the
administration is determined to keep the drug strictly illegal.

"We have great respect for Canada and Britain as well, and if they start
shifting policies with regards to marijuana it simply increases the
rumblings in this country that we ought to re-examine our policy," said
Hutchinson. "It is a distraction from a firm policy on drug use."

The U.S. policy was reinforced last month by the U.S. Court of Appeals,
which upheld that marijuana is a dangerous drug with a high potential for
abuse.

The court said marijuana should remain classified as a Schedule 1 drug, the
most restrictive classification under the Controlled Substances Act.

Cauchon said earlier this week that he is considering decriminalizing
marijuana possession by removing it from the Criminal Code and making it an
offence punishable with a fine instead of a criminal record.

He is awaiting recommendations from a Senate committee and a House of
Commons committee, and he intends to consult with Canadians before making a
decision.

Hutchinson cautioned that he was not suggesting that a change in Canadian
law would go so far as to threaten Canada-U.S. relations, nor does he plan
to privately voice his opposition to Cauchon.

"If I'm asked whether I support decriminalizing marijuana, the answer is I
do not support that,"he said.

"My views on that issue are a reflection of where we should go with U.S.
policy. It's not our job to tell Canada what to do."

There already is a "significant influx"of marijuana into the United States,
Hutchinson said. A spokesman for the drug enforcement administration singled
out the potent B.C. bud as particularly prevalent in the United States.

Figures were unavailable from both Canadian and American authorities
Wednesday on how much pot is seized at the Canada-U.S. border, but there
have been estimates in the U.S. that as much as half of Canada's supply goes
south.

Canada is already viewed in the U.S. as being soft on drugs and the federal
government's move to allow marijuana smoking for medicinal purposes received
a rough ride in the U.S. media.

Hutchinson also rejects legalizing marijuana for medicinal use.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 09:05:56 -0700
Subject: Canada: Pot possession up, but 'incidental'

Newshawk: CannabisLink.ca  http://cannabislink.ca/
Pubdate: Thursday, July 18, 2002
Source: Montreal Gazette (CN QU)
Website: http://www.canada.com/montreal/montrealgazette/
Address: 250 St. Antoine St. W., Montreal, Quebec H2Y 3R7 Canada
Contact: letters@thegazette.southam.ca
Author: Lynn Moore
Webpage: http://www.mapinc.org/cancom/0938904B-3AD8-4A4B-80DB-9AB78D9293F1

Pot possession up, but 'incidental'

LYNN MOORE
Montreal Gazette

Salvatore Mascia can't remember when he last saw a judge jail someone for
simple possession of marijuana, but the veteran legal-aid lawyer can recall
when the charge was a meaty criminal offence and not "the charade" it is
today.

About 15 years ago, lawyers had to mount a "major song and dance"
production, complete with supporting documentation such as school or work
records, to obtain an absolute discharge for a first offender charged with
simple possession, Mascia said.

Now, an absolute discharge for a small quantity of marijuana is "almost
guaranteed," while charges for larger amounts might require a $300
contribution to the province's crime victims' fund, Mascia said yesterday
from his office at the Montreal courthouse.

Others in the justice system described the charge of simple possession of
marijuana yesterday as "an incidental" criminal charge or a tool used
arbitrarily by police to subject the unlucky - often young, disadvantaged
urban males - to a full police interrogation.

A perennially controversial charge, it is again in the spotlight because
federal Justice Minister Martin Cauchon - who, like millions of Canadian
youth smoked pot but was never nabbed, charged or convicted - has mused that
perhaps cannabis use should be decriminalized.

As the dust swirls around the issue, simple possession of marijuana charges
are on the rise, as are - critics say - costs to individuals and the public
purse.

In 1990, 27,344 charges were laid in Canada; last year, there were 49,639
charges, according to Statistics Canada. In Quebec, the number of simple
possession of marijuana charges expanded like a smoker's appetite, going
from 2,221 in 1990 to 9,522 in 2001.

Unlike earlier eras, the charge now "tends to be an incidental charge, not
something that police tend to go out and look for," said Croft Michaelson,
director of strategic prosecution policy for the federal prosecution
service.

He cited a small Ottawa-area study that found about 95 per cent of the
charges were related to other offences. For example, marijuana joints found
on a break-and-enter suspect translate into two criminal charges, he said.

Benedict Fischer, one of Canada's leading authorities on issues relating to
cannabis and public policy, has a different take on the "incidental use" of
the charge by police.

"Often officers want to make an arrest for drug possession not because they
want to enforce it but because they want access to that person ... and all
the other things they can only do if an arrest is made," said Fischer, a
lead author of studies for the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health and
the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse.

A person under arrest can be searched or have their vehicle searched,
Fischer noted.

Factors such as the race and socio-economic background of the suspect often
come into play, and the discretion - or mood - of an individual police
officer is always an element, said Fischer, noting that enforcement varies
widely across Canada.

A veteran Montreal police officer, who asked that his name not be used, said
the charge isn't used as a form of harassment. But young people smoking dope
in a public park are much more likely to be charged than "rich kids partying
in a club," he said.

Most charges arise when suspects are taken to the station for other wrongs
and a search turns up dope.

"We can't flush it down the toilet," he said.

Fischer, who has followed the debate for 30 years, said police might be more
willing to support decriminalization if they maintained discretionary power
and their handy "tool."

They have favoured solutions where "under normal circumstances, they could
just write a ticket (for pot possession) but if they wanted to arrest
someone, they could," he said.

Currently, the simple possession charge may be withdrawn by the crown
prosecutor before it gets to court. A judge may dismiss it or grant an
absolute discharge. A spokesman for Quebec's justice minister said
statistics to show the conviction rate for simple possession charges in
Quebec weren't available.

If the charge is contested in court, many accused still receive an absolute
discharge, meaning they don't have a criminal record, said Michaelson,
echoing Mascia.

Outside of Quebec, a significant number of accused are routed through
"diversion programs" where "low-level offenders in appropriate
circumstances" are asked if they want to perform community service and the
like, Michaelson said.

Once the service is done, the charge is withdrawn, said Michaelson, adding
about 700 offenders used Toronto's cannabis diversion program last year.

Even with the program in place, about $4.8 million of his department's
prosecution budget of about $56 million is spent on simple possession of
marijuana charges, he said.

Fischer's research indicates the bulk of Canada's drug enforcement money is
spent on cannabis possession. The most recent auditor-general's report found
it costs more than $500 million for federal agencies to fight illegal drugs.

Diversion procedures don't make sense to Fischer. Even if the charge is
ultimately withdrawn, the person's record still indicates an arrest, he
said, and the complex procedure might cost taxpayers more than running it
through the courts.
------------------------------
End of Restore-Digest V2002 #139
********************************