I'm going to do something I don't do often - side with Stephen Harper, and also with those pseudo-prohibitionist lunatics in MADD. I completely support PM Harper's plan to clamp down on driving while impaired on drugs, for a few reasons.
First of all, people should not be driving while high; it's dangerous to themselves, but more importantly, to those around them. Any responsible drinker knows not to drive drunk, and a responsible drug user should not drive high. It's just common sense.
Second, as I have made it clear in the past, I wholeheartedly support the full legalization of marijuana. This law would eliminate one of the most common arguments against its legalization: that people would drive while high and endanger others. Now, it is clear that such an argument falls flat, as under this legislation such behaviour would be clearly illegal, and hopefully result in stiff penalties (given who we're dealing with here, I don't think that's in question).
Also, I support this legislation because it takes away from the stigmatization of marijuana, and logically concludes at its legalization. How? Well, let's examine this statement by Stephen Harper:
"Just as a drunk driver does, a drug-impaired driver presents a danger to himself and others."
The key phrase there is, "Just as a drunk driver does." That is to say, a drunk driver and a high driver are in the exact same boat - they're both in a state of mind that does not permit them to drive at the capacity necessary for a reasonable level of safety. That's why drunk driving is illegal, and that's why high driving should be illegal as well.
Thus, if drunk-driving and high driving are the same, this takes away some of the "mystique" surrounding pot, because it at least implies that alcohol and marijuana are similar, making the argument that one ought to be legal while the other is illegal all the more absurd.
In addition, this law acknowledges something that the chorus of anti-drug mantra-chanters usually refuse to admit - that you cannot stop people from smoking marijuana, that if someone wants it enough it is easy enough to get, and that the best course of action to take is not to try to prevent its use, but to encourage its users to be responsible, for both their decision to get high and for what they do while high - just like alcohol.
After all, having a law on the books making it illegal to be high while driving is a bit redundant if it's already illegal to be high at all. Logically, one of these laws is quite unnecessary. If we're going to have one, it only makes sense to get rid of the other.