Decriminalise drug use

Blakemore also has an opinion piece in the Times, entitled: Rule 1: Stop politicians spouting about drugs.

I have not read the article referred to by Bags. These are the thoughts I have in my head at the moment.
I do have mixed views on the decriminalisation of drugs. One of my jobs was Drugs adviser to schools in the West Midlands. This involved teacher training, awareness raising, and research. I worked closely with the Health Authority and the Police as well as the Education Authorities.
Although I still do have reservations I lean towards the decriminalisation of drugs.
I believe that when we talk about drugs we should include prescribed drugs, alcohol and tobacco.
I once gave a talk to the Chamber Of Commerce about drugs and the workplace.
They were very quick to condemn a young lad in the warehouse using cannabis but they would not discuss the brandies taken in the board room.
One of the biggest dangers in using "illegal" drugs is the way they are manufactured or adulterated with other substances including rat poison.
I believe there would be more control on the purity of drugs if they are distributed via a legal source.
It would be good to take away the power of the major drug dealers who amass great fortunes from the lives of young people.
A criminal conviction can limit a person's opportunities and too many young people have a caution or a conviction for cannabis use.

I have quickly skimmed the article and will read it in detail later, however 1 point that leaps to mind is that Teresa May told MPs she considered cannabis a gateway drug. Many studies show that cigarettes are a gateway drug as the patterns and groupings are established.

It's like prohibition in the USA. It didn't stop people drinking, just pushed it underground, made it unsafe and opened opportunities for criminals.

Better to legalise drugs, have them produced safely and TAX THE PROFITS lol.

I think cannabis probably is a gateway drug not because it automatically leads to people wanting to try other, more dangerous drugs but because obtaining it makes the connection with those who sell more dangerous drugs. If it were decriminalised or available legally, this access would not be so easy and obvious. However, we already have harmful drugs – tobacco and alcohol – widely available. I'm not sure it's wise to add anything more.

Another form of drug misuse is glue or aerosol polish/deodorant sniffing. This can lead to immediate death often on the first use. Controlling this is difficult as the products are easily accessible and there are no restrictions at point of sale.
Cannabis may lead to long term mental health issues, but it does not kill on first use.

Agree with glitabo that control is difficult when things are easily accessible. There is already a huge street market in legalised drugs anyway (socalled 'legal highs)' tranquillisers, painkillers, etc etc. So ... how will legalisation of all drugs help? It's not e.g. Sir Richard having a spliff on Necker, it's the poverty stricken communities where the largest drug problems are entrenched that will continue to suffer and suffer more. And the entrenched heroin addicts who will demand morphine prescriptions, which are very expensive (currently a fairly small percentage of the total drug using population). No simple answer.

I hope that if the use of drugs is decriminalised they would be safer in as much as they would not have the threat of contaminants and again, hopefully, this would reduce the power of the local drug dealers and the international drug lords.
In most cases it is not the drug that is illegal it is the misuse of drugs that is illegal. Heroin is used in hospitals and is an effective medicine when used appropriately. I admit there is another side to that as many people become addicted to prescription drugs.
Many people take drugs or misuse them and do not become addicts, just as many people drink alcohol and do not become alcoholics. If we accept that drug addiction and alcoholism are illnesses then surely we should treat them not punish them???

I firmly believe that it is the pushers and profit makers that should be punished.

Yes, decriminalise and use the money saved on police, courts and imprisonment to fund treatment centres.
(A crumb of comfort from the economic crisis - I heard on the news that drug use is down because so many young people are unemployed.)

The committee has not suggested making possession if drugs legal, merely that it would be a civil and not a criminal offence.
Instead of jail terms there would be fines and required attendance at drugs awareness programmes.
It sounds sensible to me. I don't think a young person who has made a mistake should be criminalised.

Sorry wasn't very clear and didn't read your first post properly glitabo, it's also because my thinking on it is still a bit muddled! My point is that e.g. benzodiazepines are currently legal and a controlled drug, yet there is a massive street market in them and the ones that are imported e.g. from India are full of contaminants. A lot of people are addicted to benzodiazepines, so would they all be supplied legally to treat their illness and therefore continue to support their addiction? It's only in the UK and other parts of Europe where the word 'misuse' is in common use, elsewhere in the world it is still 'abuse' of drugs legal and illegal. How would you balance the message that the best harm reduction is 'don't do it', with 'it's okay to try them as long as they're pure and let's hope you don't become addicted'? Agree the double standards around alcohol is deplorable. Will an addict use his or her 'medicine' appropriately if supplied pharmaceutical heroin? What about the injectors - will they have to provided with safe, cleaninjecting facilities? (very expensive).

Am I right in thinking the cannabis around now is much, much stronger than that used in the 60s? Skunk?

If perhaps the old fashioned sort could be legalised, those of more mature years could access it for the relief of arthritis etc. I've heard it's very good!

Yes, I do think drug abuse should be treated as a health issue, not a criminal matter. The suppliers and pushers are criminals, but those with just a bit for personal use are hardly in the same category.

I also believe addicts should have access to safe drugs, perhaps at a pharmacy or medical centre injecting room. These addicts would then be able to get their lives together, instead of having to commit crimes and prostitution to pay the dealers. They would have a chance to achieve a better frame of mind, conducive to getting off the things. And it would ruin the business of pushers by taking their clients away.

And yes, I agree about modern cannabis being appalllngly strong compared with the stuff from the 1960s. We need to old stuff back into circulation. And we need it for medicinal use, especially for people on chemo.

Think how much time it would give back to the police.

I think almost all young 'uns try out cannabis and ecstasy these days. I was very very lucky in that when our lads were at that daft stage in life, mid teens, they both joined the Army Reserves and were subject to regular drug tests. This kept them off the stuff, thank goodness!

Injectors are being supplied with fresh needles already to try to prevent cross-infection.
I think you are right NfkDumpling about the cannabis being stronger and more contaminated.
Cannabis was, until recently, a legal prescribed medicine. I believe that Queen Victoria used it, for medicinal purposes only of course.

There is always an educational opportunity.
I was working with a group of 15/16 boys and trying to teach them about fractions. I was using a diagram showing how a 1 becomes 2 halves or 4 quarters and so on. There was a glaze of boredom on all their faces until I got to eighths and sixteenths. Then the penny dropped. That is how they buy the cannabis resin in 1/8s or 1/16s. Sometimes you just have to use what you've got.

glitabo I used to work in an injecting drug service some years ago (but I am not a clinician). I don't just mean clean needles, which I realise are already available. I mean medical facilities where people can inject in hygienic surroundings, like they have in Australia and in Canada. BTW although needles are available, sometimes needle sharing is part of the ritual, so supplying clean needles become a moot point. joan my DS sailed through the daft teen phase with no drug use, then tried drugs (cannabis) in his early twenties, at university, because he fell in with a 'drugs broaden the artiste's mind, and we will write better poetry' bunch, and promptly had a psychotic episode, which has had ramifications for many years in one way or another and truth be told, I'd rather not remind myself of it! I have a nurse acquiantance, who decided that she would encourage safe drug use for her teenage son "because he will experiment any way" and purchased all the equipment etc online for him to indulge in laughing gas if he fancied it, and then said to me the other day "I'm a bit worried because he uses it every night now". .

Really mixed feelings here. I don't smoke, I was teetotal until in my forties and still drink very little alcohol (except when under the influence of a Gransnet meet-up!!!) and have never used illegal substances; so I don't know what it feels like to have those compulsions. I hate that criminals seduce youngsters into using drugs and would be very happy to see supply taken out of their hands. BUT I also hate the mixed messages that are sent out about any addictive substances. I hate that the psych units are filled with young people whose lives are permanently blighted by the use of skunk. I hate that too many young people will never reach their potential because they've had their lives stolen by booze or drugs.
I do think that when reports such as this one are published, they should be critically examined by government and their recommendations either acted upon, or reasons should be given as to why will not be implemented.

Many people won't use methadone because they don't want to be stigmatised at the pharmacy. I have personal experience of the critical attitude of some health professionals towards drug users, even those who have become addicted because they have been prescribed strong pain killers.
Not all addicts are feckless youngsters.

Greatnan I agree with you.
grannyknot I am sorry that I misunderstood you.

I am not an expert in this field. I believe that I may have been well informed a few years ago but TBH it is more than 12 years since I worked in this area.

I do remember going to an ACPO (Association of Chief Police Officers) conference where a motion was agreed to set up courts specific for drug issues, separate from other courts, offering treatment rather than punishment as an option. This was on the lines of what was happening in parts of America. They also agreed that wheels turn very slowly in the British legal system and that it would be years before this happened, if ever. This was in the mid 1990s.

I agree that stigma needs to be addressed. But cigarette smokers are stigmatised now! So is that good or bad?

I can only offer a personal view nothing of an educated comment I'm afraid.

All I know is what I see. I have a dear friend in the depths of despair because her DD is a 'junkie'. She started this road to tragedy in her teens by smoking cannabis. She now is on methadone, a schizophrenic and living a life of abject misery.

I am of the mind it is all too easy to obtain drugs, of what ever their nature. Making drugs legal will not change that. Indeed it is cheaper to buy drugs from a dealer than pay for it at the going rate of an NHS prescription.

I would like to see a campaign targetting school children perhaps clearly showing them where the drugs come from, how children and adaults are basically slave labour to the drug barons, the killling that takes place between gangs and the health effects caused by drugs. Profits to AlQaida etc.

I don't stigmatise smokers, but I didn't like having to breathe in their smoke.
I like Pogs idea of showing children the misery caused to so many - apparently telling them about the effects on the user alone can cause a rise in use.

greatnan you don't, but many people do now stigmatise smoking (if not smokers). So, to me, that is a good example of a legal drug (nicotine) which is clearly harmful, and which now has had controls put in place around its use and therefore smoking is down and the current drop in numbers of young people presenting for help with problem drug use is thought (by some) to perhaps have something to do with the decrease in smoking, the first 'gateway drug' for many young people. Heroin and crack use is 'going out of fashion' it is thought from people having seen and experienced at first hand the devastation it has wrought on generations that went before them. So that's a good deterrent too then, and fits in with the comment pogs made. Each drug user of course is unique, so not all are young, not all become addicted etc. Another point to consider - many drug users stop using in prison - it provides them with the respite/change of scene/drug treatment comes to them instead of them having to go and find it etc. As an aside, I found it really interesting to hear the other day that many prisoners, especially drug users, benefit immensely from the routine and the three square meals a day - they put on weight, their health and wellbeing improve etc. I think it was on Sunday Morning Live. The biggest rising problem in addiction as was said on another thread is addiction to prescribed medication and over the counter stuff, and 'legal highs' which are proliferating and mutating at a rate that no one will ever be able to stop.

Another interesting article in the Times, this time by Hugo Rifkind, who is arguing that decriminalising possession of small amounts of drugs is only the tip of the problem. Trying to paraphrase what he says, where/who drugs go to is a problem, but by far the bigger problem is where they come from. It's a huge industry out there!

The article also compares systems that have been put in place in California and in The Netherlands. Apparently possessing drugs is not illegal in sixteen US states, but Federal law is different from State law and this causes problems.

Gee whiz! What a mixed up bunch we humans are!