IT'S NOT THE 1920S

Another day, another targeted shooting.

Such is life (and death) in the Lower Mainland these days.

In the past month there have been 13 shootings like the one Sunday in
Vancouver that left a man, "known to police," critically injured.

Earlier that day, hundreds of people gathered in Surrey to demand
action against the increasing violence.

They joined similar calls from politicians on every level who say
more needs to be done before someone is killed in the crossfire.

Finding people to blame is about the easiest part in this crisis. The
courts, the police, the politicians, even parents, share
responsibility for the carnage, according to some.

To one group, however, the solution is simple: legalize marijuana.
With knee-jerk regularity they claim every gangland slaying, every
drive-by attack could be avoided if marijuana were legally obtainable.

Their argument rests on a comparison with the prohibition of alcohol
in the 1920s. Gangs and guns went hand-in-hand with the distribution
of the contraband. Once the prohibition was lifted, they say, the
tommy guns were silenced.

But did organized crime truly die with prohibition?

Hardly.

Although one lucrative tap was shut off (with the diverted proceeds
running freely into government coffers), organized criminals simply
found other sources of wealth.

Because that's what they do. That's their business.

To assume the gangster wannabes will hang up their Kevlar vests just
because marijuana becomes easier to acquire is simplistic at best.

Certainly we can have the discussion about the effectiveness of our
courts or police chasing anyone at the whiff of a smoldering joint.

But let's not be so naive as to believe the people who are capable of
spraying a mother with machine gun fire while her four-year-old son
is in the backseat will transition smoothly into civilian life once
their illicit income runs dry.

The public deserves a more thought-out response.