A Bitter - and Poisonous - Pill To Swallow

A very wise man I know and trust – the "Giff", my senior editor Jim Gifford – both warned me and supported me several months back."Be prepared for the storm of controversy that will follow from these nine little pages," he said, referring to my chapter on drug reform. "But I support you, as this is a debate we must have."

If I truly understood in advance that 9 pages out of 276 would have created such a stir, I might have written 90 outlining my views on the weaknesses, and ramifications, of our current policy on illicit drugs! I would have deleted pages from the real meaty sections on prevention, parenting, targeted police suppression, urban and social renewal, and prison reform (which my critics often fail to mention that I write extensively about, as if my position is solely that drug reform is my solution to the problem of gangs). Too bad, because if I had written 90 pages on drug reform I would today be revelling in even more publicity!

Today’s Globe and Mail carried a review on my book entitled The gangs are all here, written by police officer, novelist and aspiring federal Conservative candidate (Scarborough Guildwood) Chuck Konkel. That a dual police service member and would-be Conservative M.P. would find little favour in my views about drug reform comes as no surprise to me. For him and others like him, it must indeed be a bitter pill to swallow. I appreciate Konkel’s criticism and his thoughtful counterpoints, and through this process, I am achieving exactly what I set out to do in this book: to propose ideas that stimulate debate and challenge conventional wisdom on gangs and gang-related issues (such as the huge drug trade) so that we can all become engaged in the fight against these scourges.

In his review, however, Mr. Konkel, who humorously suggests I must "live at Statistics Canada" because of my many fact-based arguments, falls victim to purposefully misrepresenting my ideas and the powerful pull of conventional wisdom. Konkel suggests I would legalize most drugs, when in fact the only thing I argue for is the immediate legalization of marijuana (page 232-233), with future policy decisions made based on the outcome of this drug’s legalization. Moreover, Konkel states that I "comment blithely that ecstasy is relatively harmless", when what I actually wrote was that if judged by its scientifically-proven pharmacological toxicity, ecstasy is not as toxic as another drug the majority of Canadians over 18 consume regularly, alcohol.

Regrettably for Mr. Konkel, he chooses to attack me specifically on the drug ecstasy, referring to a British expert who counted 394 deaths in the last decade due to ecstasy consumption. According to my "homeland" (Statistics Canada), we suffer 4,000 alcohol-related deaths every year in Canada, a country half the size of Britain, yet alcohol is a non-prohibited, socially accepted and taxed drug. It can’t just be me who sees this as a ridiculous paradox.

Borrowing a Konkel phrase directed to me in the review, his glaring "naive assumption" is related to another statistic he quotes in regard to the British study, of which in 42% of the 394 cases of death ecstasy was the "only drug mentioned". Mr. Konkel ought to consult with his police brothers and sisters who actually work the drug beat and ask them what’s in a typical ecstasy tablet sold to youth and young adults at raves and all-night dance parties across the country. Having studied this issue extensively, let me describe the stew of substances that Canadian police have discovered pressed into tiny colourful "ecstasy" pills by profit-hungry gangs, criminal syndicates and their ecstasy cooks:

• MDMA (the real ecstasy)
• GHB (date rape drug)
• Heroin
• Caustic soda (drain cleaner)
• Aspirin
• Codeine
• Dextromethorphan
• Ketamine (animal tranquilizer)
• Methamphetamine
• Ephedrine
• LSD
• Rohypnol
• PCP
• PMA (Paramethoxyamphetamine)

If you consume an ecstasy pill (a silly move, I might add, as I do not condone drug use) all bets are off in terms of what’s in it, so much so that my police contacts suggest that maybe as few as 2 to 3% of pills sold on the street are pure ecstasy and therefore are more likely to be combinations of the above substances. Indeed, many of the reported deaths associated with ecstasy in Europe and worldwide since 1995 were because gangsters made their pills with PMA, one of the most dangerous and toxic hallucinogens known to man.

Why, you wonder? Because of drug prohibition, the precursor chemicals for ecstasy production – MDMA – are tightly controlled by the government, therefore making ecstasy production expensive and risky. But since demand is unstoppable and profits so alluring, criminal organizations will make fake pills of virtually any composition, yet another disastrous consequence of drug prohibition. Because of our drug laws, we allow criminal organizations to determine, on their own discretion, what gets sold, to whom it gets sold, and where it gets sold. So while hospital ER reports may accord unfortunate deaths to" ecstasy", the reality is never so simple.

I am all for a debate on Canadian drug policy and its ramifications on the Canadian street gang situation. But the only way this debate will serve Canadians is by keeping it real. Let’s not misrepresent others’ words and perspectives. While we’re at it, let’s also not rely on conventional wisdom at the expense of the facts. Most important, let’s keep an open mind both to the sad reality that our "war on drugs" hasn’t been particularly effective, and that new approaches ought to be critically assessed rather than dismissed as naive.

Thanks, Giff, for indulging me in my cat amongst the pigeons, my nine little pages on drug reform.

Comments

[JAmes Dubro]

Hi Michael

First, Conratulations for a very good performance last evening at the forum. You were articulate and
persusasive.

One point I want to make that I think is very important re the legalization of drugs issue. I too beleive it is essential (and inevitable). And legalzing drugs will add billions to government coffers for a powerful education against drug campaign and take the fuel away from gang and organzied crime growth. BUT, and this is a big BUT, the legalization has to happen in Canada and the US at roughly the same time to be at all effective . In fact if the legalization is just in Canada there will be a prolifieration of gangs and organized crime activity and gang violence in Canada to fight for and keep the very large US markets. This is what happened during Prohibition in the 1920's in Canada (not just the US as popoularly thought) if you read my book "King of the Mob: Rocco Perri and the women who Ran his Rackets"). There were major gang and organized crime warfare and killings in southern Ontario then and would be again for control of the US market. Right now it is under some control as it is illegal in both countries and there is considerable risks though pot and street drugs are exported at a very high rate from Canada even now (as you stated last eve),BUT it would explode(as well as the warfare and violence) if it were legal in Canada but illgeal im the US. This is a major reaction to consider in the overall strategy. Legalization of pot and other drugs will happen in the US eventually as the war on drugs is a huge waste of money and a colloassal failure. LEAP knows that and many law enforcement officials in the US are realizing it.

sincerely..james R Dubro, author and writeer of many books and television documenaries on organzied crime in North America.

PS Despite what was said last evening, there are some street gangs producing the drugs too now in Canada as well as selling them. Think of some of the grow ops. And some soft drug labs. They grow or manufacture the drugs and sell them.