Buzzby

Cops' Efforts Up In Smoke?
With increasingly liberal attitudes on Marijuana use, some police officers question if enforcing drug laws is worth the time and effort
Martin Derbyshire | YorkRegion.com | 12/02/2004

There's a lot going through the mind of drug cop Det. Don Cardwell when he kicks down the door of an otherwise normal suburban home suspected of housing a Marijuana grow operation.

"Everyone talks about this intensity. If you're not like that, then there's a problem. If you're not on edge and expecting something on the other side of that door, then you're not prepared for it," he said.

The York Regional Police drug squad kicked down 173 of those doors in 2003 and are on pace for more this year.

Officers are quick to point out it's not usually an aging hippy with a joint on the other side; it's a gangster with a gun.

"You're dealing with organized crime and lot of the time they're not protecting themselves against police, they're protecting themselves against home invasion from rival gangs," Det. Cardwell said. "You're always cognizant of the possibility of booby traps or whether anybody is in the house. It's tense."

It's a tough job, but somebody has to do it. Don't they?

With Marijuana use among Canadians at an all-time high, a growing number of citizens would likely answer no to that question.

According to a survey by the Canadian Centre for Substance Abuse, 44.5 per cent of Canadians have used pot in their lifetime.

The percentage of Canadians who reported using Marijuana in the past year was 14 per cent, up from 7.4 per cent in 1994. Meanwhile, 70 per cent of young people age 18 to 24 reported having used Marijuana, the highest percentage ever recorded.

With use up, so is the percentage of Canadians who support legalizing Marijuana.

A poll by the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws shows 57 per cent agree possession of small amounts of pot should be ignored by police.

With increasingly liberal public attitudes toward Marijuana use and a government inching toward decriminalizing possession, it's not hard to find people who think the war on weed should end.

They say Det. Cardwell and other narcotics officers are wasting their time. And it's not just groups such as NORML -- other cops are on board too.

John Gayder is secretary of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP), a group of current and former cops from across North America who support Marijuana legalization and regulation.

"I see (drug squad officers) work very hard at their job and undergo great tribulation. But just as a person who sets out to bail the water from Lake Ontario works hard, it is all for no gain," said the Niagara Parks Police constable.

"Every big bust just creates a job opening for some up-and-comer."

Const. Gayder, who is quick to point out the opinions he expressed in no way reflect the position of his employer.

"The government can't even keep track of how much it spends on continuing drug prohibition, but it's a lot of money. Worldwide, it's in the billions. To continue diverting even 10 bucks of taxpayers' money toward something as philosophically and economically flawed as prohibition is folly. Pure and simple," he said.

Const. Gayder supports spending taxes on regulation and education rather than an expensive legal system.

Even some municipal politicians agree.

"With the limited dollars we have, you'd think we could do something better," said Richmond Hill Councillor Elio Di Iorio. "If we didn't have prohibition, there's a possibility we could actually lower the frequency of use because we could regulate and control it, just like we do with alcohol."

And if there's a better idea than scrapping the prohibition on Marijuana, Mr. Di Iorio said he's willing to listen.

"Right now all we have is a waste of taxpayers' dollars that's actually helping create a niche market for organized crime with no competition and no taxes. I have an acronym for you, MCBO. Tax it and control it," he said.

Decriminalizing the possession of small amounts of pot, as the federal government is considering, is not the same as legalizing, taxing and controlling the drug.

Legalizing Marijuana, including production, would put Det. Cardwell out of business.

Det. Cardwell doesn't make the laws, he enforces them. But enforcing laws more and more people don't believe in has its share of problems.

"Yes, my friends are questioning it. Yes, they say 'Everyday, you're risking your life, you're putting your guys in jeopardy and the government's not supporting it, why are you doing it?" he said. "Of course, you have to tell them through 19 years I've been on the job, the problems I've encountered with Marijuana use and the production of it, it is a problem. We're too quick to react and throw our hands up and give up."

That divide between popular opinion and a drug cop's duties has its effect on community and police relations, Mr. Gayder said.

"Consider the confusion with which people view citizens and family members being busted for possession of narcotics, but then observe alcohol being sold legally. Consider the hesitancy of otherwise law-abiding citizens, who happen to be drug users, to interact with the police in order to come forward with tips on crimes. Witness the reaction of family members to the news that their son or daughter, brother or sister has been arrested for possession under the guise of helping them. Help them? Their life has been ruined by a criminal record," he said.

With a murder at a Georgina grow house this year and home invasions and other crimes associated with the business of growing Marijuana, Det. Cardwell said he and others in the unit feel they're doing the right thing knowing they're going after the organized crime running many grow houses.

Const. Gayder agreed organized crime is running the drug trade. However, he said drugs are worth far less on the black market when they're legal.

"That translates into less profits. It translates into filing tax returns and submitting to quality controls," he said. "Since Western society ended its experiment with the prohibition of alcohol in the 30s, there has not been a gang that could compete with corporate giants like Molson's, Labatt's or Smirnov."

The problem, according to Det. Cardwell, is local Marijuana growers are not just supplying the local market.

"We're supplying a worldwide market, we're not supplying the beer drinkers of Ontario. We're pushing it south of the border and if it's not legalized in the States, organized crime will stay involved," he said. "Even if they do legalize the production of it in Canada, that's not going to make any difference crossing the border."

In the meantime, the police force is committed to having Det. Cardwell and the drug squad kick down those doors at an ever increasing rate.

"If (local residents) have some pride in ownership in the community they should be proud of what were doing," he said. "The problem is (Marijuana) becomes accepted in these communities. They've been exposed to it for so long it has become accepted and that's where the problem exists. The government is slow to change the legislation, organized crime adapts too quickly, we lose control of the situation and that's where we are here in Canada."

__________________

Bluee

Take note of the usage of the word 'liberal' in the sub-title.

While the liberal used there is the same meaning as the one on topical solutions or shampoo, "apply liberally all over face", there's a fair amount of people that will associate liberal [politically] to Marijuana simply because they don't really know better.

Marijuana is not a liberal/conservative associations confuse me. Isn't trying to break away from the government, especially federal government, at the very heart of conservative philosophy? That every person is their own person and should be allowed to be their own person as they see fit, as long as they don't hurt anyone else? No need for affirmative action, medicare for the sick, funding for public schools, or restrictions on 'free' market...

People need to STOP labeling marijuana legalization as liberal.

__________________
Pessimism is being content when things go bad, while enjoying life when proven wrong.

psthbng

Bluee, Couldn't agree with you more. The concept of smaller government, yes. Cutting funding for medi-care and schools, no. You can't leave the seniors in the cold, nor the young uneducated.

Herb Ninja

Wake up, real conservatism is dead. Todays conservatives are big-government conservatives, which is an oxymoron.

"Once upon a time, conservatives stood for limited government, the rollback of the welfare state, strict construction of the Constitution, and traditional morality. Today they merely want their own people to run big government." Joseph Sobran-

Peace, HN-

__________________
"Truth is treason in an empire of lies." -Ron Paul

jlong

One concern I often hear from law enforcement agencys is there is no way of determining how long ago someone suspected of being under the influence actually got high when it comes to THC. In other words, if you got stoned 24 hours ago, you still test the same as if an hour ago.

SmokyMcPot

I really don't understand the negative association you Americans have with the word liberal. After all we have a Liberal government here in Canada and they do an alright job(as good a job as any major politacal party anyways ). Do you know the definition of liberal?

Liberal (adj):
1. Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.

2. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.

3. Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.

4. Liberal Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism, especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.

Buzzby

I believe the meaning of liberal in the headline is "Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded".

Marijuana law reform is both a conservative and a liberal issue.

It's a liberal issue because liberals think government should evolve in such a way as to maximize benefit and reduce harm as much as possible.

Conservatives (real conservatives like William F. Buckley) want to disinvolve government from our lives as much as possible. You can do as you please as long as you harm no one else.

Our current government is infested with people who call themselves conservatives but are actually the tools of the Religious Right. These people hold the same mindset as the Temperance folks who gained political power and forced through alcohol prohibition in 1918: pleasure is sinful, drugs make you feel good without "earning" it, and if we could just get everyone to give them up (and go to church) the world would be perfect and all our troubles would melt away.

That fact is, we don't know of any human culture that did not or does not use consciousness altering substances, except the Eskimos. They simply didn't have any available. Once introduced to them, Eskimos took to intoxicants like old hands. The desire to alter consciousness appears to be a basic human trait. Fighting it, as we found out with alcohol prohibition, is a losing battle. It's high time the War on Drugs folded up its tents, pulled down its banners, and went home, defeated by human nature.

freedom_fighter

This is completely retarded. What's so organized about growing a plant and smoking it in your house. GROWING AND SELLING SHOULD NOT BE ILLEGAL. Kicking down somebody's door and charging them with drugs in their possesion is retarded. Why not take care of murders, rapists, and sex-offenders?

vladimir

the problem is, with pot being illegal, they arent just growing it and smoking it themselves. they are growing a lot of it, and selling it at the high prices that the black market has set up for them. thats why it needs to be legalized, to take away that unnecessarily high profit from growing and distributing weed. then it would just be something done by the people who like it for the people who like it, no crime involved whatsoever.