Why not walk down and f**k them all?

[sittingrelaxing]

addictive drugs take choice away.

then you choose not to take them........

what you find addictive and what others find addictive will be different,

cheers

sittingrelaxing

Edited February 25, 2003 by sittingrelaxing

[Jessiedog]

Whereas there is a very strong case for the legalisation of cannabis purely based upon its relative safety and widespread use, there are equally strong arguments for legalising all illegal drugs, most (but not all,) of which also apply to cannabis (Drop the dealer!!).

Much of the discussion focuses upon the moral and health aspects to individual drug users, but the crime that is concomitant. Is perhaps the major issue

There is a bigger picture tho' and far reaching ramifications from the prohibition of illicit drugs. (N.B. All figures are rule of thumb.)

To tackle the first three above.

1) The moral issue. My body. etc. This is particularly pertinent for relatively harmless drugs such as cannabis and ecstasy.

2) Purity. Currently the drug market is a huge unregulated global market, where anyone can sell anything to anyone, including kids. Pills, the content of which are unknown. Heroin mixed with god knows what. Cannabis that is mixed with all kinds of shit (boot polish, cow shit, blood, plastic, old cooking oil, etc.) Regulation (and in the case of cannabis, home growing,) would resolve most of these problems.

3) Crime. In certain areas of the UK, up to 50% of all crime is committed in order to finance individual drug use. So, we are talking about relatively minor crimes, burglary, theft, minor muggings, etc. But it is these very crimes that are so intrusive in people’s lives and cause a great deal of distress to the victims. If certain drugs particularly those that are highly clinically addictive (heroin, crack) were easily available, regulated and inexpensive (or free), much of this crime would be eliminated.

Other issues:

4) Criminalisation: Up to a million people take ecstasy every weekend in the UK, many more are irregular users and many more still have tried it. With cannabis, there are some nine million regular users in the UK and some 40% - 50% of the population have tried it.

Many people (including many senior police officers) readily admit, that for the vast majority of these users, the most dangerous aspect of taking drugs (cannabis in particular) is the likelihood of getting busted and having a criminal record.

Some 80,000 people are still busted every year in the UK on cannabis charges. The bulk of these have never committed another crime, are unlikely to commit any other crime and would never have come into contact with "the system" were it not for their cannabis use.

What sense does it make, to "ruin someone’s life" with a criminal conviction for something that millions of people do in the privacy of their own homes every day and that affects no one else? It is the classic "victimless crime". INSANITY!!

5) The cost. The "war on drugs" is an unwinnable war (as was prohibition of alcohol in the US in the 1920's). More and more money is spent each year on policing, courts, prisons, etc. (80% of all prisoners in the US are in jail for drug related offences). Billions upon billions are spent and it makes no difference to the numbers using drugs. If a quarter of this money was spent on education, information dissemination, rehabilitation, etc. and production and regulated distribution of "clean" drugs, to targeted groups of users, the difference would be amazing.

In Holland, the relatively liberal approach to drug use (cannabis all but legal, sensible door policies on nightclubs - no more than 3 pills per person allowed in, addiction treated as a health and social issue rather than a criminal issue), have led to a LOWER usage of drugs than in the UK! The number of cannabis users in Holland has remained virtually static over the last 30 years (since decriminalisation), whereas in the UK, under prohibition, the number of users has risen expotentially over the same period. Over the last two decades, the average age of heroin users in Holland has risen from 21 to 40. Think about what that means.......It means that young people are not taking up the drug, so the average age of users rises as the addicts currently using get older. In the UK, the average age of heroin addicts is 21 and FALLING! The UK has one of the worst drug problems in the whole of Europe and yet is under one of the toughest regimes of prohibition. Prohibition actually INCREASES the problem on so many levels, including usage and addiction rates. "Just say no!" doesn't work!

According to the latest UN figures, the UK's drug laws leave it rated as number one in the EU, as far as illegal drug use is concerned. Meanwhile, the relaxed laws in Holland place them at no. 13! This, in and of itself, is surely testimony as to the total failure of the prohibition approach and the benefits of a more enlightened strategy.

The financial, health, crime and social costs of prohibition are staggering, it is an outrage, it is IMO, CRIMINAL! Legalisation, regulation and a shift from seeing drug use/abuse as criminal to seeing it as a social/health issue, is the ONLY sensible course of action and the ONLY way of addressing the issue. NOTHING could be worse that carrying on with the current approach. It is wholly destructive and it DOESN"T WORK!

Unfortunately, there are many vested interests that prefer the status quo. Mainly, of course, those who benefit financially from the war on drugs: Law enforcement agencies (particularly the DEA in the US, which would cease to exist), big business (particularly, arms and military supply companies, and oil [hemp is a substitute] and pharmaceutical companies), the far right and religious nutters (who have their own agenda's of interfering in peoples lives), et al. AND, of course, criminals. Not the kid who nicks a granny's purse (although see above, this would all but stop), but the REAL, NASTY, BAD peeps, (see below).

One of the main reasons I support (legalisation and) regulation of all drugs however, has hardly been touched on.

6) Organised crime. The global trade in illicit drugs is one of the biggest industries (if not THE biggest) in the world. Each year, some US$ 400 Billion. Where does this money go? It goes to "organised crime". These super rich gangs of hardened thugs, finance almost all their activities from the HUGE amounts of money available in the drugs trade. These are the people who, are into child trafficking and prostitution, people smuggling, the illegal arms business, corruption in government and business at the highest levels, murder, extortion, protection rackets, and on, and on. We are also talking about so-called "terrorist" organisations here, who largely finance themselves through the illicit drugs trade. The last thing all these people want is more liberal drug policies.

With legalisation and regulation of all drugs, organised crime operators would have the rug pulled out from under them virtually overnight. Their income from illicit drugs would drop from US$ 400,000,000,000 a year, to virtually zero, virtually overnight. It would knock the balls off organised crime and deal a severe blow to their finances, networks and operations.

Again, some of this money (less, since the prices charged under a regulated system could be much lower) would then flow into government coffers and, together with that saved from ending the war on drugs, could be directed towards far more effective measures (health, social, education, rehab, etc.) in dealing with the issue of drug use/abuse.

The policy of prohibition is a failure at every level and is wantonly destructive in every way.

Governments around the world have a DUTY to their citizens to end this debacle and to formulate sensible, effective strategies that approach the issue of drugs from a "harm reduction" perspective.

Legalisation of all drugs and regulation of quality and supply is the only sensible way forward.

Blessings.

Woof

Edited February 25, 2003 by Jessiedog

[Arnold Layne]

Law is the worst tool there is for trying to encourage moral behaviour.

Narcotics legislation started c.1900, and the result is what we see every day in our streets. Not only has prohibition failed to stamp out recreational narcotics use, it has in fact stimulated it and spawned a monster. How? By introducing criminality; and crime, my friends - contrary to what Mummy and Daddy said - pays big time! And so the market takes over, unregulated and thus enriched in violence and greed.

No one has any right at all to say what another person puts into their body. Educate and respect.

Mickle - Choice is choice, and every habitual user {and I've been there and done it} makes a choice with every hit. Remove that and you remove responsibility, and depersonalise the man/woman.

[wintermute]

dont understand the gun analogy,

guns are made to hurt others, where as legalised drugs would hurt the individual

It's taken me some time but i've finally realised your a bit of a wind up artist SR!

The analogy illustrates that while we have a totally legal aspect of life in other countries (gun ownership) the UK public's mandate has never included any moves to legalise gun ownership. The UK public in fact moved to make gun ownership less possible.

The same applies to "hard" drugs. The UK public have never shown any inclination that these substances should be legalised. The incrediblely liberal attitude you suggest is not logical in a framework when you know what you must know about British people.

But i'm obviously failing to make my basic point clearly. My post title "Why not walk down and fuck them all" really means why try to go from complete prohibition to a completely relaxed attitude in one go? I agree, basically, with the points about prohibition being unworkable and counter productive. But i see no value in adding to the agenda that interests me. I dont want to be the great alltruist helping to legalise all substances i just want a smoke so i see no point in pitching too high. It's about expectation management. I dont agree that smack and charlie should be freely available and the argument that they should be free is just mental. There no such thing as "free", somebody pays , in this case all uk tax payers.

Cigarettes and alcohol are available in the UK but are legislatively controlled, yet more children are smoking every year and underage drinking is huge problem in the UK. Do you think this is thru lack of education? Is anyone unclear on the dangers of smoking?

[buffon]

But i'm obviously failing to make my basic point clearly. My post title "Why not walk down and fuck them all" really means why try to go from complete prohibition to a completely relaxed attitude in one go? I agree, basically, with the points about prohibition being unworkable and counter productive. But i see no value in adding to the agenda that interests me.

Speaking for myself I think full legalisation is the only way forward.

If we have a relaxed attitude I think it would be far too easy for any Government to use the relaxed attitude as a vote winner. "Vote us in we will stop drug use in this country" With a little help from those lovely people at the Daily Mail and a few well placed scare stories it would be enough to put us back to square one.

If we have Legalisation it would be far harder for any incoming Government to change the law back. Especially when they realise how much dosh they are getting in Tax.

I do accept that these things take time and it's one step at a time but I can't help but think that all this reclassification thing is load of New Labour spin (bollocks). I am not holding breath!

[Guest earthgodess]

I thing Buffon that going for short term goals does not undermine the wish for or the case for, full legalisaton.

The reality is that full legalisation -for reasons I wont rehearse here- is a long way off.

In the meantime we can strive hard to achieve gains closer to hand such as medi-weed freedom, decrim for personal possession and personal growing and further along the line licences for growing.

If we all get behind the Coffee shops in the UK we will bring all these goals much closer and I once again take this opportunity to salute the brave women and men who are opening these establishments at great personal risk to themselves. We must support them.

(And if that sounds like a reply to a Parliamentary question it's because I'm listening to the House of Commons as we speak).

[buffon]

(And if that sounds like a reply to a Parliamentary question it's because I'm listening to the House of Commons as we speak).

You are of course right it is one step at a time inch by inch we can push for what we want.

[sittingrelaxing]

It's taken me some time but i've finally realised your a bit of a wind up artist SR!

what? me? never.......

The UK public in fact moved to make gun ownership less possible.

yes, but not because people were shooting themselves,

but because "nutters who shoot others"

and has it worked, has it fcuk, look on the news and police records

and you will see gun crime rising.

if you want to use guns as an analogy to drugs,

then surely it should be, that by making things illegal, it pushes it into criminal hands were you have no conrtrol,

forcing normal bods(except for an addiction) to mix with the scum of the earth....

I dont agree that smack and charlie should be freely available and the argument that they should be free is just mental.  There no such thing as "free", somebody pays , in this case all uk tax payers.

where paying anyway, these fcukers need there fix, that aint gonna change,

so we can either let the criminals keep feeding them drugs,making £££££££ for themselves and putting nothing into the community, and ruining peoples health by

cutting drugs with shit.(addicts have to rob you and me to get there fix)

or

we can give them a chance not to steal and rob for there drugs,

let them go to a "hit house" where they can have regular dosage,health checks.

lower crime,lower problem users and more importantly the addict has a chance

to live a crime free life........

Cigarettes and alcohol are available in the UK but are legislatively controlled, yet more children are smoking every year and underage drinking is huge problem in the UK.  Do you think this is thru lack of education?  Is anyone unclear on the dangers of smoking?

i think that's because we preach to kids, dont do this, dont do that,

it gives it a "adult mystery to it"

holland, swizterland,belgium dont have the same problem,

why?

could it be kids feel respected and dont feel preached too

and are told "if you smoke this can happen" it seems to work better than "dont smoke because it will cause cancer"

cheers

hope that makes sense

sittingrelaxing

i'm not saying i'm right, but i know your way aint working now,.....

and it's just opinion.......

Edited February 26, 2003 by sittingrelaxing

[Unit]

To clarify for the King of Pedantia when i say NEVER i mean in a realistic and short time frame. We may live on mars one day but it wont happen while i'm able to go.

King of Pedantia!!! Classic

So your definition of "never" is different from everybody elses, that's cool B)

[the dood]

I won't add to the legalisation of all drugs debate too much here, other than to note that medically pure smack is in many respects much safer than paracetamol and only costs one pound per gram. These are figures often quoted by Richard Brunstrom, North Wales Chief of Police and ACPO member, who speaks openly of the need for full legalisation of all drugs. The full legalisation debate is a lot more widespread and well considered than it may initially appear, and the british electorate are a fickle bunch. Support for the full legalisation approach has grown significantly over the last few years.

The main point though is the fact that people seem to confuse legalisation with promotion. Legalisation just means taking MOST of the job of drug control away from the hugely ineffective police approach and putting it in the hands of the healthcare profession. I sincerely doubt there would ever be smack shops on your local high street, but what else is the new government plan to prescribe heroin through doctors other than the legalisation of heroin for those people? Legalisation of a class A drug has already happened, but they didn't call it legalisation, and it's not being openly sold, so no-one really noticed. It's proiving to be a bloody effective solution too....

There is no reason to think that a legalised world would be a drugs free for all. Teenagers in Holland have been shown to find it much harder to get hold of weed than those in the UK. There are many other more effective ways of preventing things than through the criminal courts.

nd as for a licence to grow weed, the one main argument in it's favour is the fact that it would be easily allowed under current legislation. What does it say on all those souvenir seed packets "germination is illegal in the UK WITHOUT A HOME OFFICE LICENCE"

A fee could also be charged for the purchase of a licence which could then be fed back into the NHS, for all those who worry about the extra costs it may incur following such a move.

the dood

[ken]

I think they should make all addictive drugs illegal.

I am very much for a persons right to choose, addictive drugs take choice away.

all drugs are addictive, where would you draw the line?

are you suggesting alcohol & tobacco prohibition??

ffs we'd have to shut all the chemists down (most over the counter drugs are addictive too)

even weed & caffiene are addictive if ur gonna be strict.

it is possible to use addictive drugs responsibly (do you drink / are you an alcoholic?) & if they were supplied legally it would cause less problems (purer, cheaper, no criminals involved, etc)

lets face it, making a drug illegal doesnt stop people from taking it, it just makes it more dangerous for those that do.

[sittingrelaxing]

well put ken........................

cheers

sr

[AlunfromLCA]

B) Why push for legalisation? To PROTECT the user by allowing people to grow their own and produce their own. To enable those who are unable to grow their own to buy it from people upon whom laws such as trades descriptions, weights and measures, quality assurance, and taxation on profits, can be applied. To legalise production, use and trade - to take all of that away from crimes that do produce victims.

Why legalise - because it would be the Right thing to do.

Because prohibition does more harm than good.

Because sick people need suppliers who can be trusted. So that people can find a legitimate source whilst away from their own areas. So that people who choose to can gather together to share their preference in a clean and safe environment - away from children and people who do not wish to passively inhale.

... to allow adequate research into all the beneficial uses of the plant.

To enable us to takle drugs problems openly and sensibly; to prevent the alienation of users. To stop the sometimes essential crimes associated with cultivation and supply. To bring it all into the open.

But for those lucky souls who have ensured themselves of a plentiful supply and a place to use without hassle or threat of arrest, those who maybe don't care too much about the benefits cannabis could bring to the world, maybe little of the above means much.

Others may be so disillusioned that they think campaigning is pointless. Some may feel we should ask for what we think we can get easily. I believe we should ask for what is Right and what we want. If we get less, like being allowed to possess a certain quantity of number of plants at home, we'll be better off than we are now.

But if we don't push for what we want and for what is right. We may never get it.