The War On Drugs

[Kid in the Riot]

As well as being a stellar American rock band I'm seeing this Thursday, what are peoples views on the legalisation of drugs? The war on drugs, like the war on terror, is clearly a never-ending, unwinnable war - so what should we do about it, if anything?

[Barrs Court Red]

I'm all for people taking what they want, providing they sign a waver making them exempt from NHS treatment and claiming benefits.

[chipdawg]

I've seen The War On Drugs earlier on this year, they were magnificent. One of the best albums this year

As for drug legislation, I think some decriminalisation makes sense, but it's an immensely complex issue; too much tax and the black market will flourish. Too little and it'll become too accessible

[Kid in the Riot]

I'm all for people taking what they want, providing they sign a waver making them exempt from NHS treatment and claiming benefits.

 

Does the same go for alcohol and fags in your manifesto BCR?

[Barrs Court Red]

Does the same go for alcohol and fags in your manifesto BCR?

The genie is out of that particular bottle though. Tobacco doesn't have the same life destroying effect as crack for example, but NHS waivers would be introduced.

Alcohol is a tough one. In moderation it has no ill effect but it can destroy lives like other drugs.

I suspect cannabis will be legal wihin the decade. Where do you draw the line with other substances though?

[Red-Robbo]

Does the same go for alcohol and fags in your manifesto BCR?

Quite. And the various other addictions that occasionally need NHS treatment, like gambling.

As you say mate, it's an unwinnable war. Better to legalise it with state controls and take the gangsters out of the equation.

[Nibor]

Full decriminalisation.  Tax it, put that revenue and the money saved on enforcement into education and rehab.  We'll turn a profit, have a much lower addiction rate, and much lower crime rate.  There's no need to exempt anyone from the NHS either, that's a silly notion - it could be applied to every activity that carries personal risk e.g. sports.

 

Illegality of drugs has never reduced rates of use or abuse, all it does is empower traffickers and put addicts in situations that are far more hopeless than they need to be.

 

The experts on this (those who actually use evidence for their opinions) have a solid consensus.  The opposition to it is just PR.

[chipdawg]

Full decriminalisation. Tax it, put that revenue and the money saved on enforcement into education and rehab. We'll turn a profit, have a much lower addiction rate, and much lower crime rate. There's no need to exempt anyone from the NHS either, that's a silly notion - it could be applied to every activity that carries personal risk e.g. sports.

Illegality of drugs has never reduced rates of use or abuse, all it does is empower traffickers and put addicts in situations that are far more hopeless than they need to be.

The experts on this (those who actually use evidence for their opinions) have a solid consensus. The opposition to it is just PR.

The problem is, if you tax and regulate a drug, it will inevitably add cost. Even if you manage to be able to sell it 'officially' at a lower price than on the street, it'll just lower the street price. So the idea of there being no need for enforcement (and therefore no cost) is a fallacy. However, I still think it's an idea worth pursuing as the current legal framework doesn't work

[Red-Robbo]

The problem is, if you tax and regulate a drug, it will inevitably add cost. Even if you manage to be able to sell it 'officially' at a lower price than on the street, it'll just lower the street price. So the idea of there being no need for enforcement (and therefore no cost) is a fallacy. However, I still think it's an idea worth pursuing as the current legal framework doesn't work

It will be a considerably lower price than on the street currently. Medical diamorphine is produced under very tight controls and is sold by multinational pharma companies at a hefty profit, but it still costs 20-40 times less than addicts pay for their heroin/brick dust/God knows what else mixture.

[Eddie Hitler]

I don't like drugs but would have them legalised and controlled; addicts will do anything for them so no penalty will stop them.

 

Portugal has an ongoing experiment of not criminalising users; the results are good and the number of addicts is declining.

[Aizoon]

Legalise it; tax it; control it.

Won't happen though. The Mail and the Sun will see to that

[Red-Robbo]

Legalise it; tax it; control it.

Won't happen though. The Mail and the Sun will see to that

The Mail had this hilarious front page recentlythat read.PROOF - CANNABIS IS ADDICTIVE .

Its opening lines said a report from "the country's leading expert on addiction" based on a study of thousands of teenage users has shown that cannabis is a pathway drug to hard drugs, smokers do worse at school, and have a higher risk of develocity mental illness.

When you read into the story buried near the end was that this expert - the government's new drug advisor appointed after they sacked the last two for giving them advice they didn't want to here - said that cannabis WASN'T addictive, but vexceptionally heavy users became socially conditioned to smoking it. So the headline was a typical Mail lie.

The other claims were all qualified and applied to only a tiny proportion of users too.

[chipdawg]

It will be a considerably lower price than on the street currently. Medical diamorphine is produced under very tight controls and is sold by multinational pharma companies at a hefty profit, but it still costs 20-40 times less than addicts pay for their heroin/brick dust/God knows what else mixture.

There's actually quite limited commercial capacity for morphine/dicetylmorphine manufacturing. There was a shortage a few years ago I seem to remember. It's so cheap because it's not patentable or any patents will have expired, but manufacturing it as a drug would be very different to manufacturing it as a recreational substance. Plus you'd have to price it so as not to make it too accessible. This is all moot of course, because heroin will never be legalised in a month of Sundays

[WTFiGO!?!]

Very difficult issue but the Dutch policy of legalised pot encourages responsible usage. It is not a gate way drug but a normal and socially acceptable pass time. They do come down heavily on hard drugs, though.

Thing is, if alcohol were discovered tomorrow it would be banned instantly. Cultural considerations need to be made an us on this little Isle appear to be particularly fiendish.

[Red-Robbo]

There's actually quite limited commercial capacity for morphine/dicetylmorphine manufacturing. There was a shortage a few years ago I seem to remember. It's so cheap because it's not patentable or any patents will have expired, but manufacturing it as a drug would be very different to manufacturing it as a recreational substance. Plus you'd have to price it so as not to make it too accessible. This is all moot of course, because heroin will never be legalised in a month of Sundays

No but if it is we'd find there was a vast and adequate supply of the raw material.

[BristolCity1992]

To see it being discussed as it has is brilliant and the government can't just keep ignoring it.

We still have a long way to go but we will get there and even the mainstream press are getting behind it. The fact that drugs are illegal only serves to make them more dangerous and criminalizes some of the most vulnerable people in the country. It also means that people aren't able to have a open and honest debate about drugs because of fear and stigma. Not just politicians but families and friends too.

There is nothing positive about the current laws and it totally plays into the hands of criminals.

I see Baker resigned today though.

[Nibor]

The problem is, if you tax and regulate a drug, it will inevitably add cost. Even if you manage to be able to sell it 'officially' at a lower price than on the street, it'll just lower the street price. So the idea of there being no need for enforcement (and therefore no cost) is a fallacy. However, I still think it's an idea worth pursuing as the current legal framework doesn't work

 

There is a wealth of evidence that disproves this - start with Colorado if you like - but there are many more examples.  And think about the logic there.  

 

What makes you think that manufacturing something in a loft or in some dodgy lab overseas and smuggling it and paying a middle man a 12x markup is going to give a street price lower than a company mass producing the same substance and paying some tax?  

[Smokey]

Cannabis is not a "gateway" drug, Alcohol is. 

[chipdawg]

No but if it is we'd find there was a vast and adequate supply of the raw material.

But that's not the only issue with morphine/diamorphine, there's also a dearth of manufacturing capacity. I am actually for the decriminalisation/legalisation of some drugs (not heroin though) but it would not be a magic fix to all the issues surrounding domestic drug policy. Heroin won't be legalised in a million months of Sunday

[chipdawg]

There is a wealth of evidence that disproves this - start with Colorado if you like - but there are many more examples. And think about the logic there.

What makes you think that manufacturing something in a loft or in some dodgy lab overseas and smuggling it and paying a middle man a 12x markup is going to give a street price lower than a company mass producing the same substance and paying some tax?

Yes, but the act of 'growing' the pot is not the main driver on cost, the fact that it's illegal is. So even though 'black market' sale of a drug would still be illegal, the resources would most likely be more available (because to have legalised canabis we would surely have to start producing the stuff here) and so more readily available to those who want to acquire it. Even now, sales of illegal tobacco and alcohol runs to billions every year in this country, why would it be any different with canabis? So it would need enforcement and lots of it

I should add though that I would support legalisation of some drugs- the current legislation and attitude doesn't work. It should start with treating drug addiction as an illness rather than a crime

[Kid in the Riot]

But that's not the only issue with morphine/diamorphine, there's also a dearth of manufacturing capacity. I am actually for the decriminalisation/legalisation of some drugs (not heroin though) but it would not be a magic fix to all the issues surrounding domestic drug policy. Heroin won't be legalised in a million months of Sunday

 

Isn't "heroin" already legal? I'm sure it's what they pumped into me after an operation I had a couple of years ago and it was lovely :-) Nearly everyone will be pumped full of an opiate at some point in their life - usually just before they die. Even codeine is an opiate I believe.

 

This woman actually won a debate at Oxford Uni recently to continue the war on drugs...no mean feat considering Oxford students' very pro-legalisation stance.

[Barrs Court Red]

You would have been given morphine. I believe we used to give it to African tribal leaders to get them hooked and then control them through their addiction.

[Kid in the Riot]

You would have been given morphine. I believe we used to give it to African tribal leaders to get them hooked and then control them through their addiction.

 

We got the Chinese hooked on opium too I believe?

 

Morphine/heroin same difference I thought (both opiates) - except heroin is stronger I think.

[Barrs Court Red]

It is, but given that it still does a job if a guy has just had his legs blown off, its why they use it.

We traded opium for tea.

[Red-Robbo]

But that's not the only issue with morphine/diamorphine, there's also a dearth of manufacturing capacity. I am actually for the decriminalisation/legalisation of some drugs (not heroin though) but it would not be a magic fix to all the issues surrounding domestic drug policy. Heroin won't be legalised in a million months of Sunday

If they can set manufacturing facilities up in the caves of Afghanistan they can do it anywhere. This isn't an oil refinery we're on about here: the process of manufacture is quite simple.

The fact that there may be a dearth of legal diamorphine labs in the UK, or the fact that pepole can grow weed in their greenhouses isn't an argument against legalisation.

You can make alcohol in your own house. We still have a licensed and retail trade in it.

[chipdawg]

If they can set manufacturing facilities up in the caves of Afghanistan they can do it anywhere. This isn't an oil refinery we're on about here: the process of manufacture is quite simple.

The fact that there may be a dearth of legal diamorphine labs in the UK, or the fact that pepole can grow weed in their greenhouses isn't an argument against legalisation.

You can make alcohol in your own house. We still have a licensed and retail trade in it.

I'm not arguing against it at all; I've said several times that I would support such a move (though not for heroin/diamorphine, it's too dangerous) but that it is not as simple as "legalise the stuff and all drug-related crime will disappear"

[WTFiGO!?!]

What about Jimmy White being an ex-crackhead then, eh?

Amazing revelation.

[BristolCity1992]

Also street heroin is full of other stuff (Benzos etc) which makes it more dangerous because of the fluctuation in strangth of it. If you suddenly have a higher batch come on to the scene after months of rubbish going about then the risk of overdose is quite high because people still use the same amount.

That's why they are advised to test dose before hand. Of course if we rolled out naloxone properly and introduced consumption rooms then this risk could be lowered even more.

Heroin is of course a dangerous and addictive drug but as with all drugs it's made more dangerous by the fact the dealers control it and can put whatever they want into it.

It's actually to dangerous to keep it illegal.

[Red-Robbo]

I'm not arguing against it at all; I've said several times that I would support such a move (though not for heroin/diamorphine, it's too dangerous) but that it is not as simple as "legalise the stuff and all drug-related crime will disappear"

If you do one, you do it all IMO. Otherwise you leave a drug business open for criminals who would then encroach on the legal trade.

I agree that heroin is dangerous, but its main danger comes from its adulteration and variable strength.

Mind you, in a way there is a de facto decriminalisation already in some places. The number of heroin addicts has halved in 25 years in the UK and one of the main drivers of this has been the policy by some health trusts of supplying addicts with diamorphine rather than methadone. The junkies would rather get their fixes from the state than dealers, so the trade in the drug dries up.

[Kid in the Riot]