Sorry to use a DM link again – and thank you to whoever sorted the Linky thing last time. This depressing UN report, and for once I think a UN report is to be believed, demonstrates to me that drugs should be legalised asap. I realise this may result in deaths from overdoses, but it would improve the current situation.
Boadicea's Chariot 
I could not agree with you more. With drugs legalised, drug related crime would cease which would mean a massive reduction in crime overall. I would make it an offence to supply drugs to under 18s with the death penalty for those convicted. If you fell ill from using drugs you would be given pain relief but no other intervention, and that means no intervention, you will be using drugs by your own choice and be responsible for your own actions. And if the result is death so be it but you will be kept pain free.
There would also be a massive public education programme warning people of the dangers and telling them what could happen.
No it wouldn’t help.
All you would get is the same problem you have with tobacco and alcohol. The nefarious types woul dsimply shift to providing those drugs which are not legally available or counterfeit versions at a fraction of the cost.
Gubmint would of course slam a hefty tax on the product and then spend the rest of its time hand wringing and trying to tell everyone it is very bad for their health. Whole gubmint depts would be generated to cope with the ‘drug’ problem.
The only way to solve this is to identify the importers and dealers and administer a dollop of 7.62mm justice. The message will get through very quickly and the reoffending rate cut to zero overnight. Low life, subhuman scum should be eradicated just like any other vermin.
And that linky thang no worky for me Sheona. 😦
Personally, I think it worth a try. Certainly, as the law stands, things are getting worse rather than better. America, which is even more anti-drug than the UK has a massive problem and is losing the battle. The gang wars in Central and South American countries like Mexico, Honduras, Nicaragua, Columbia etc are a result of cartels fighting for the means to supply illegal drugs to the US and the rest of the world. If growth and supply were managed by well regulated, government-run, non-profit outlets, those criminal gangs would find it harder to operate. Because it would be legal and drugs readily available, possibly even free, there would be less incentive to push drugs by the scum bags who frequent night clubs, universities and school yards, inducing the young and vulnerable to take up the nasty habit. It is peer pressure that makes people do these things.
It might be necessary for the authorities to perform random and regular drug checks to see if people are clean. Those known to be using must register. It may require 5 years of being clean until you can have your name taken off. But while you are a registered drug user, certain privileges, such as a passport, are denied.
As admirable as Ferret’s solution is, it is not going to happen. Mexico which takes a harsh stand against drug barons, seems to be losing the fight. There will always be people willing to replace those who have been shot. Addicts will do anything to get their next fix, including putting their lives at risk to import drugs.
As an aside, production of opium has increased 10 fold since the invasion of Afghanistan. Growers find it far easier to operate in a country where law and order has collapsed. The American/British initiative, in that regard, has completely backfired.
Apparently parts of Manchester, Birmingham and Liverpool have no go areas like Mexico. There are arguments for and against legalising drugs. I personally have a dread of being hooked on anything, even legal stuff, for example prescription drugs. I think we have those in society who are going to over indulge whatever the situation. We are not capable, in this country, of producing tough punishments, look how we treat binge drinking and all the mayhem it causes, we let them fill A&E and those with genuine emergencies have to wait. I think we are beginning to be a bit tougher on the weekend drunks by providing units with pallets to leave the drunks to sleep it off but mark my words, let one drunk choke to death on his own vomit and all that will come to an end.
So there you have it Sheona, an undecided from me, I think it would entail too much legislation and there isn’t enough money in the country’s coffers to do the job properly.
This link may be of interest, if it works
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9110374/UN-drug-gangs-controlling-parts-of-British-cities.html
I think it is worth a try to legalise drugs as the law is incapable of stamping it out.
Try reading High society by Ben Elton, ( not my favourite author but this is good)
I can’t see how laissez-faire would help. So it would convert crimes into what? A free-for-all with drugs of all kinds being imported in vast quantities to satisfy the no-doubt even bigger demand. Instead of binge-drinking there’ll be binge doping. An even bigger nightmare.
Firstly… Rosie….. Yay!!!!!!
Welcome stranger.
Secondly,
I can only assume you pro mob are already on something.
The gubmint would tax the bejayzus out of this so it would not be cheap. Ergo the crims would continue to make coin on the black market so absolutely no change there.
When someone is somewhat the worse for the vimto, you can see and smell it a mile off. If someone is tripping on a substance legal or no, it isn’t that obvious. So what comes next at great cost to business and therefore us da consumer? Compulsory Drug Testing in every workplace, demanded by the Lloyds Register before anyone gets their H&S ticket. Imagine a forklift driver or crane operator with a few barbies or a qualude or two under his/her belt.
The whole bloody suggestion is simply preposterous. The authorities in Mexico, Columbia and the like are on the cartel payroll or dead so I fail to see how there is a harsh stand against drug barons Sipu.
It may be stating the bleedin’ obvious, but has nobody heard of Prohibition in Me-Ri-Ca in the 1920s? It singularly failed in its objective and spawned lawlesness and the rise of the mafia.
Legalise everything, says I and let Darwin take the weakest as it does with booze and ciggies.
OZ
Well, I couldn’t agree with Ferret more, from his taxation and government point right up to the 7.62.
The day we give in to these lowlife, for that is what it will be, they will have won.
How many fixes does each user get? Who decides? What if they want more?
This will only ‘encourage’ more and more addicts (and yes OMG, lets run an ad campaign on the BBC so that everybody is aware of the pitfalls) this isn’t about birth control, or drunk driving, once people start they can’t stop!
It has to be eradicated at source and at the supply chain, any thought that right minded people would think different turns me cold.
A little realism, perhaps. The West is losing the war on drugs, and however many public health campaigns are mooted, it seems to make little difference.
I don’t, however, advocate legalising them, but it would seem to make sense for governments to control the source of supply, rather than leave it to criminals. Bought at source, they cost almost nothing, so even if they were taxed, it would eliminate a lot of the crime.
Frankly, if you decriminalise drugs and undercut the drug barons, control the supply, then you can start to control the problem.
Hi Ferret, while I do not doubt that many of the authorities are corrupt and in the pay of the drug barons, it is also true that many decent law enforcers, journalists, campaigners and legislators have been killed, tortured, kidnapped, terrorized etc, by the cartels. This link points to some of the events in Mexico.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Mexican_Drug_War
Legalise it, let them OD and then refuse to rescue them, Darwin principle at it’s most basic.
We need a clear out anyway.
Soutie, how would one eradicate the drugs at source? While it would be possible to buy in the entire poppy crop of Afghanistan and turn it into morphine for medical use, how could one deal with the South American crops and the Golden Triangle? As Araminta says, the West is losing the war on drugs through trying to fight the supply chain. If the governments controlled the distribution, it would be a lot more difficult for silly teenagers to try unknown pills at parties. The health warnings just don’t seem to work. Legalising drugs might take some of the “adventure” out of trying that first dose, which would be beneficial. I don’t think it would encourage more addicts.
Ferret, sorry about the Linky thing. I had an urgent phone-call from daughter-in-law and we had to rush off and be grandparents, so I may have got it wrong.
Christina, I have a lot of sympathy for your point of view.
trouble is nearly every TV programme has people snorting this drug or injecting that drug, then the so called celebrities, pop stars and failed sports people are nearly all taking some sort of drug. With these examples is it any wonder youngsters follow their example.
I do think this whole thing is a bit tricky but in the end it is a cash crop, for those who grow it. Think about the Opium Wars, and then the cash crop which then took over, that is tea!
It is simply about profit, forget the moralising, that’s not the way to solve the problem.
Alcohol is permitted and there are those who drink to excess, they do it at home now because it’s cheaper,cirrhosis of liver is claiming very young lives, if we can’t control that what hope have we of controlling narcotics.
Ferret…thanks for the welcome again.
Tina are you back home?
Sheona – your linky thing works fine. 🙂
tate
Hiya. Rosie. Why the need to control it? Darwin is a wonderful leveller of the gene pool.
OZ
p.s. You’d like it here should you so wish, particularly with the Dark Side in its present state. B & B run a tight ship – erudite and ribust debate is welcome as are threads of information, experience or pure whimsey. Trolls are shown the door post haste. I am proud to be the Chariot’s tame-ish wolf although I draw the line at ‘pet.’ 😀
OZ – The Chariot is now Boadicea’s site in every way; the word ‘Bearsy’ doesn’t appear in any link address (url), and ‘Bearsy’ is not the owner, not a moderator and not an author.
Boadicea and Soutie are the only two moderators for the Chariot.
I, the semi-tame Bear, am still allowed to post comments if I’m good. 😀
…ribust…??? ‘…robust…’
OZ
Bearsy – Well just behave yourself in future and thank you for the past. 😀
I’m thinking of opening a retirement home for the former Chariot semi-tamed – interested?
OZ
Sounds good, OZ. Will inmates have gnawing rights? 😕
Of course there will be gnawing rights. You are, after all, only semi-tamed. Fur stroking is an optional extra and ear tickling by Bilby will cost you loads.
OZ
Morning Sheona
Firstly, I have no experience whatsoever of a ‘legalised drug environment.’ How’s things in Amsterdam? Is the buying and selling controlled or is it only possession and use that are permitted?
Drugs, are we talking all forms? I’m happy with buying the coke and opium crops and then destroying them, as we’ve done with ivory, keep the farmers happy but protect our youth.
I’m no chemist (perhaps you know one ;)) Ecstasy and Tic (crystal methamphetamine) particularly Tic appear to be the main scurges down here, how do you propose to control them? Can they be manufactured just anywhere? I’ve no idea of the ingredients or ‘ease’ of manufacture, I’m just firmly against our children having their lives ruined and being exploited
Back on-thread – sorry Sheona –
A contentious problem, and one on which people can easily become polarised. I can only offer the following observations, which probably merely echo remarks already made –
This could be a three-pipe problem, Watson.
Hi Soutie, I was told recently by a lady who lives in the townships that her 18 year old sister is an addict. I asked if she used Tik. She said no, she used heroin as it was cheaper. I heard just last week from a security adviser in Afghanistan that opium production has increased 10 fold since the US/UK attempts to halt it.
“I’m just firmly against our children having their lives ruined and being exploited”. I think we are all with you on that score, I am just not sure that I share the same methods of achieving it. Just like I am not sure that the best way of halting the rhino and ivory trade is to ban all sales. Licensed production may be a far more effective. It should certainly be considered rather than dismissed out of hand. I would refer you to the history of the gin trade in London in the late 17th early 18th century. Unlimited and unlicensed production of gin caused chaos. This was followed by excessive regulation that resulted in illegal gin shops sprouting up all over producing poisonous gin. (Somewhat like the shebeens producing skokiaan). Only when a reasonably liberal form of licensing emerged did London begin to wean itself of the excesses depicted in Hogarth’s Gin Lane.
OZ, could Backside visit you for a cure?
Btw, Bearsy, is it true that semi-tame bears no longer use the woods?
I still argue for the legalisation of all drugs, controlled by a government agency with very severe penalties for anyone who steps outside of the rules. As I stated earlier there would NOT be a drain on the NHS as no care apart from pain relief in the final stage of death would be given. If you are over 21 and aware of the dangers then make a free choice, it’s your life to do as you wish. There would be no need for a ‘back door’ supply as in the days of prohibition in the USA because drugs would not be banned, just given to those who seek them.
As far as the demon drink is concerned we are not to far away from a sober up pill which will nullify the affect of alcohol very quickly, the brewers will welcome this as it will mean when people get drunk and take the pill they will sober up and may continue to drink, etc etc.
Janus – Provided he is hairy and semi-tame, Backside would be very welcome.
OZ
My instinct is for legalisation, but Bearsy’s #27 and others show it isn’t as easy as all that. People are people and they will always thrill seek.
As for the article itself – out of respect to Sheona I won’t make any negative reference to the DM, but the article is based on a theoretical paper by a UN boffin that is based on utter bollocks. No go areas in Manchester and scouseland? Rubbish, bunkum, total fantasy. The problem is poor legislation, no deterrents from the court and a lack of respect and trust in the community because they all want something for nothing. Any copper I know will happily go into any of the areas mentioned.
Soutie, I presume that all the Ecstasy and Tic and such are produced from a base of cocaine or heroin. So if the basic crops were legally purchased, the farmers would still make a living. Then the crops could be turned into the Class A drugs, for use as omg suggests. If the “legal” price were kept low, the crimes committed to find enough cash to buy drugs would be fewer. The glamour associated with drug taking would also disappear, as would the hazard of taking something where the hard drug had been cut with God knows what. I think that the Dutch have tightened up their regulations a bit, Soutie, but it was always a case of smoking the stuff in the café you bought it in, I believe.
I think we have to try something to stop the illegal trade, involving “yardie” gangsters, drugs mules and the whole unsavoury criminal scene. Some addicts would probably die, but that happens anyway. Sacrifice a few to save the many?
Hi Cuprum, as far as I can work out from this article, which I only skimmed through, ‘Tik’ is not cocaine or heroine based, but is manufactured from readily available chemicals, hence the numerous crystal meth labs that exist all over the place. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methamphetamine
Cuprum, your #33 is very reassuring. I don’t like to think there are “no go” areas in Britain. If some drugs can be manufactured in labs, Sipu, that will make control more difficult. I’m very ignorant of the ins and outs of the drug scene really.
I have just seen on CCTV (China Central Television) that the president of Guatemala has advocated the legalising of drugs. The US remains steadfast in its resolve that drugs should not be legalised. But then the US has a history of disregarding the advice of others; just think the invasion of Afghanistan which British wonks swore would lead to disaster.
A bit of perspective is called for, however. Apparently, there have been 50,000 deaths in the Mexican drug war since 2006, while in the past 12 months there have been 8,000 deaths in Syria as a result of the anti-government uprising.
Meanwhile in the past 12 months there have been 16,500 murders in South Africa and over 100,000 murders since 2006. Maybe we should not get too upset about democracy in Syria or drugs in Mexico.
Oh, damn, I forgot, this is an African country run by Africans.
Sipu, don’t tell the DM.
Good morning, Soutie. As soon as I saw this article in today’s “Le Figaro”, I remembered your question about Amsterdam.
http://www.lefigaro.fr/actualite-france/2012/03/01/01016-20120301ARTFIG00728-les-coffee-shops-se-ferment-aux-francais.php
Holland is restricting the activities of its cafés where cannabis may be consumed on the premises, in various forms including cake. Starting with Dutch provinces on the Belgian border, foreigners will no longer be permitted to buy cannabis. Apparently every weekend saw a vast influx of French and Belgians eager to indulge. In future these cafés will become clubs, where only members, who must be resident in Holland, will be allowed to buy cannabis. Each club will be limited to 2000 members, will not be allowed to sell any drugs other than cannabis and will be subject to regular police checks. By 2013, all of Holland will be covered by this new regulation.