Saturday 14 September 2013

“Do I seem like I smoke marijuana?"



 
This was how the Prime Minister of Canada, Mr Stephen Harper, responded when asked by a journalist whether or not he had ever smoked pot. The question came up because a number of other high-profile Canadian politicos have been confessing all over the place to having tried the weed.

Politicians who admit involvement with pot come in all shapes, sizes and genders, so the Prime Minister’s looks are not a reliable guide as to whether he indulges or not. In any case, the admission of pot-smoking by anyone seeking or occupying high office is, commonly, a well-crafted PR event, with the respondent being careful to say only that they merely “try” the substance. I suppose the use of the verb “to try” takes the edge off the perceived misdemeanour somewhat: Pot light, so to speak. Very few actually say they smoke it, implying that their engagement is that of a dilettante who wishes merely to investigate the substance’s possibilities. The hearer is left to flounder in a sea of ambiguity as to what is meant by “trying”; whether it means merely taking a puff (without inhaling), or inhaling (perhaps only shallowly), or going all the way and taking a reckless, deep, no-holds-barred drag that allows full exchange of the weed’s vaporous  ingredients with the blood circulating within the lungs.

Using or trying or smoking, according to the degree of ambiguity in the confession, can be casual, occasional, regular or even “all the time,” as the city of Toronto’s mayor, Rob Ford admitted on camera recently.

            Of course, in today’s Canada, the debate really is not whether a Prime Minister or wannabe Prime Minister or a colourful city mayor smokes a joint. The more serious issue is whether laws prohibiting smoking and/or possession for personal use should be repealed. Repeal would undoubtedly relieve the law-enforcement authorities of policing these relatively minor infractions and could perhaps, ultimately, render traffickers obsolete.

            For many, however, legalizing pot could be a step too far, the beginning of the slide toward legalization of “harder” drugs. On the other hand, fall-out from legalizing the hard drugs might be much more benign than doomsters suppose, considering that a major consequence of the legal prohibition of hard drugs, as well as of marijuana, is fostering the creation and maintenance of criminal cartels that cause more harm to individual lives and to society than the drugs themselves.

            Troublesome and complex, no doubt, but these are issues that need thorough debate if we are to achieve best solutions.

Tell Fren Tru



PS: As I finish writing this post, I hear that police in Toronto have been busy raiding a grow-op planted within innocent-looking corn-rows in a farmer’s field in the northern suburbs. The street value of the 600 plants confiscated was an estimated $2m. Meanwhile, the state of Washington in America is writing rules regulating the location of outlets out of which pot can be legally sold in the state.

4 comments:

  1. LOL!

    Funny post, but I fear the reality-- at least in North America has moved well beyond the issue of slide into harder substance etc. There are now dozens of THC ( the active ingredient in cannabis) analogs that mimic the effects of the drug. These can be made by high school kids with chemicals typically imported from China, sprayed on some (real) grass and sold in smokeshops, gas station shops, adult video stores etc.. all with in easy reach of 10 year olds. At this point it seems likely that legalising Marijuana could actually save us from this almost completely unregulated chaos. By us I mean the known world...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Makes my point. Very difficult to control, without jailing the vulnerable, while the real criminals go scot-free. Meanwhile, youth continues to be highly inventive.

      Delete
  2. Question: How does marijuana compare with cigarettes, alcohol or even refined sugar in terms of its harmful effects?

    ReplyDelete
  3. The scale of evil is open-ended. All we can do is minimize harm by intelligent public policy choices.

    ReplyDelete