Friday, August 27, 2010

A periodic reminder...

This post is intended as a reminder that my opinions on this blog do not represent the official views of my employer. Although I believe the drug laws in most parts of the world should be changed, I also believe in the rule of law. Police officers need to uphold the law even if they disagree with certain aspects of it.

My efforts toward drug policy reform are focused on changing laws that are ineffective and harmful, not picking and choosing which laws to enforce. There is room for discretion, of course, but discretion is something that occurs at the time of the offence. It's not something one can announce in advance. A variety of factors influence police discretion, including the age of the offender, department policy, nature of the offence, and so on.

The ability of Canadian police officers to engage in public debate about complex social issues is protected by Section Two of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It states:
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d) freedom of association.
These freedoms are afforded to "everyone," not "everyone except police officers."

Don't worry... nothing precipitated this entry. All of my public statements include similar warnings, so I thought it would be good to post the same kind of language on the blog.


  1. Thanks for continuing to exercise your rights while protecting the public David. Your insistence on properly performing your job as a public servant lends tremendous credibility to your work with LEAP.

    (By the way, how exactly does prohibiting drug consumption not violate one's "freedom of conscience"? Just sayin'...)

  2. They can lock a thread on a website they control, but they shouldn't be able to lock or control your mouth or mind!

  3. This is a conflict that occurs in other areas as well. It's my understanding that the rank and file are generally opposed to the long gun registry and feel it has had no positive effect on crime, while the chiefs are in favour of maintaining it.


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...