Short-Handed/Short-Sighted

Traffic in illegal drugs is so pervasive and destructive to society that governments around the world are committed to attempts to eradicate as much of the traffic as they can.  As much as government agents discover their presence in shipments and confiscate them, far more manage to slip through detection to reach the street and clients clamouring for the unlawful products.  So much time, energy and finances go into apprehending the passage of drugs for illegal purposes, despite which the effort seems futile.

And because recreational, illegal drug use is so endemic to society at all levels, and because prohibition never seems to work, it often enough seems like a losing proposition.  What prohibition does do, however, and no one denies this, is that it offers profitable business opportunities to the unscrupulous, to the criminals and specialized gangs within society.  The illegal transactions between dealer and user represents the seamy, squalid side of society.

Calls from police forces and social agencies to re-think the prohibition of drugs, to make them more accessible to users, cutting out the criminal element through legalizing their possession and sale, seems like a partial solution.  Short of persuading users that recreational drug use is the best possible way of ruining life-prospects for the future, destroying health and relationships, the de-criminalization of drugs would end violence related to drug cartels.

Governments would ideally like to serve their populations well.  Despite which, it is impossible to regulate human behaviour entirely.  Making it a criminal offense to use unhealthy, potentially destructive substances has never worked.  The dangers of tobacco are well enough known, yet millions of people continue to smoke.  Alcoholism and its attendant miseries are well enough known, yet people become addicted to both those substances, which remain under government control, not prohibited.

Governments invest substantial sums of financing in attempts at regulation, to try to ensure that criminality is not rewarded.  There are times when it becomes too onerous and the results are too paltry to continue the faltering drive.  Canadian border agents have now been informed they are expected to abbreviate their former focus on the apprehension of illicit drugs leaving and entering the country.

Simply put, there are not enough border guards to remain on the alert for illegal drugs and also to monitor other serious issues like the dangerously illegal export of nuclear material and stolen cars.  The Canada Border Service Agency directives focus on the matter of limited numbers of agents and the impossibility of achieving an overall goal with the growing numbers of issues requiring attention.

"It takes enormous resources to catch smuggled drugs.  You're looking for a needle in a haystack, or probably something smaller than that.  And maybe this is just a nod to reality that they're saying they can better spend their resources elsewhere", commented a founding member of the Canadian Foundation for Drug Policy.

Regional CBSA managers Canada-wide have received instructions that they are to focus on three priorities; stopping the export of illicit nuclear material and stolen vehicles, and enforcing other departments' export bans, as relating to the smuggling of endangered species, hazardous waste and electronic waste.

"The success of the Export Program in all modes and all regions will be based on the performance of the regions to meet those priorities.  When examination personnel detect narcotics in their daily activities, their obligation to take appropriate action remains the same: intercept, seize and arrest if applicable."

Over ten thousand shipments of illegal drugs with an estimated value of $1.6-billion were seized by Canada Border Services agents last year.  An expert on crime and policing advised that stopping smuggling of drugs generally lies with police forces, but he regrets the message that border agents have been exposed to.

"It's always disappointing to hear that they're not able to do this or that because of limited resources, because that's leaving things on the table.  What that memo is saying is they don't have the capacity to respond."  Darryl Plecas, University of the Fraser Valley