Consensus on legality of drugs in Britain

[Gathursty]

From discussion on this thread https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/county-lines-drug-dealing-and-the-railway.244471/

I'll expand here without derailing the previous thread on my thoughts on drugs.

Firstly, there are legal (prescribed by doctors) versions of many drugs which I'm not concerned about.

Seccond, those already addicted shouldn't be criminalised for possession. Instead they should be offered rehab. Yes some people won't take that option but you should still offer it regardless. (If crime is committed whilst under the influence or as a means to acquire more drugs or money for drugs, then of course charge them but still offer rehab even if they maybe in prison for a long time.)

Third, drug dealers should be treated by society with more disgust than society shows. I think society thinks of addicts as people who bring it on themselves and let dealers off the hook accordingly. Then one begins a chicken-and-egg discussion of who is worse - those who seek it or those who sell it - I'd say given most drug dealers know well to not become an addict themselves, that's strong evidence that drug dealers is the most evil as they take advantage of those under the influence.

Fourth, gateway drugs like weed. I can see how people including some of my friends don't see it as an issue as it is a drug that 'relaxes' rather than 'stimulates' and for some of my friends is used as 'medicine' - not prescribed but is without THC. I would like to see these kind of drugs produced by vetted pharmaceutical providers so they can control such things as THC content.

Fifth, but what about alcohol? I agree that alcohol is one of the worst drugs in society because its not seen as one. Again, like weed, I don't see it as bad for most people unlike someone injecting heroin into themselves in some hovel somewhere. That's why I said initially there is no medicinal benefit in shooting up with heroin, crack cocaine, fentanyl, crystal meth etc... because they aren't what doctors prescribe to you (drug purity and composition etc...)

Sixth, everyone's addicted to something, not my problem. Live and let live etc... - this kind of argument doesn't entirely wash with me because that's the slippery slope of let's just not care and look the other way. If you're loved one only had one fatal ecstasy pill or was burning through hundreds of pounds on smack, you would care.

I'm happy to have a discussion on where we should be on drugs in this country.

 

[Cowley]

From discussion on this thread https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/county-lines-drug-dealing-and-the-railway.244471/

I'll expand here without derailing the previous thread on my thoughts on drugs.

Firstly, there are legal (prescribed by doctors) versions of many drugs which I'm not concerned about.

Seccond, those already addicted shouldn't be criminalised for possession. Instead they should be offered rehab. Yes some people won't take that option but you should still offer it regardless. (If crime is committed whilst under the influence or as a means to acquire more drugs or money for drugs, then of course charge them but still offer rehab even if they maybe in prison for a long time.)

Third, drug dealers should be treated by society with more disgust than society shows. I think society thinks of addicts as people who bring it on themselves and let dealers off the hook accordingly. Then one begins a chicken-and-egg discussion of who is worse - those who seek it or those who sell it - I'd say given most drug dealers know well to not become an addict themselves, that's strong evidence that drug dealers is the most evil as they take advantage of those under the influence.

Fourth, gateway drugs like weed. I can see how people including some of my friends don't see it as an issue as it is a drug that 'relaxes' rather than 'stimulates' and for some of my friends is used as 'medicine' - not prescribed but is without THC. I would like to see these kind of drugs produced by vetted pharmaceutical providers so they can control such things as THC content.

Fifth, but what about alcohol? I agree that alcohol is one of the worst drugs in society because its not seen as one. Again, like weed, I don't see it as bad for most people unlike someone injecting heroin into themselves in some hovel somewhere. That's why I said initially there is no medicinal benefit in shooting up with heroin, crack cocaine, fentanyl, crystal meth etc... because they aren't what doctors prescribe to you (drug purity and composition etc...)

Sixth, everyone's addicted to something, not my problem. Live and let live etc... - this kind of argument doesn't entirely wash with me because that's the slippery slope of let's just not care and look the other way. If you're loved one only had one fatal ecstasy pill or was burning through hundreds of pounds on smack, you would care.

I'm happy to have a discussion on where we should be on drugs in this country.

It’s such a complicated issue isn’t it?

One thing I would perhaps disagree with is this:

I'd say given most drug dealers know well to not become an addict themselves.

In that it really depends, because most dealers are really just stuck in the same hideous cycle themselves and quite often deal just to keep on top of their own habit, at least on the lower level of things anyway. Which is of course the level that most everyday users ever actually come into contact with as they’ll generally never meet Mr or Mrs ‘Big’.

I really think that it’s just a massive mess in the UK unfortunately and we actually need to look around at neighbouring countries to see who’s having more success than we are with different policies. Countries like Switzerland for example.

It’s going to take some decent leadership (ha!) and a long term plan to make it happen though.

 

[najaB]

Fourth, gateway drugs like weed.

I was following along until you said "gateway drug". Really, this is a concept that should just go away.

There are heroin addicts who never took anything else, the same as there are life-long marijuana users who have never tried anything heavier.

Weed is only a gateway drug in as much as it's illegal in the same way that meth is. Which makes it easier to switch to other, more damaging drugs since users have already crossed the line into breaking the law.

 

[Cowley]

I was following along until you said "gateway drug". Really, this is a concept that should just go away.

There are heroin addicts who never took anything else, the same as there are life-long marijuana users who have never tried anything heavier.

Weed is only a gateway drug in as much as it's illegal in the same way that meth is. Which makes it easier to switch to other, more damaging drugs since users have already crossed the line into breaking the law.

Yep that’s very true. Smoking weed has become almost like Real Ale in the way that people compare different variants, flavours and types etc.
It really doesn’t compare with the types of drugs that people take in order to get utterly obliterated and escape from the reality of their lives and mental health issues that they can’t live with. That’s an important distinction to know if you’re going to talk about this.

 

[Meerkat]

The crackdown should be fairer. Treat the middle class cocaine users as harshly as the inner city kids. Make them face up to the industry they support.

I also think you could argue the alcohol comparison the other way. Alcohol is legal but controlled and taxed as some want drugs to be. Yet alcohol still causes lots and lots of problems, and it doesn't stop the underage and alcoholics drinking.

 

[cactustwirly]

I completely hate illegal drugs, they cause so much misery and our society would be in a much better place without them.

However it is a complex and difficult issue.
I don't agree with complete decriminalization, but at the same time law enforcement should be targeted against those at the top of the tree.

But that's very difficult as they are well protected and the money trail is well hidden so difficult prosecute them.

 

[66701GBRF]

From discussion on this thread https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/county-lines-drug-dealing-and-the-railway.244471/

I'll expand here without derailing the previous thread on my thoughts on drugs.

Firstly, there are legal (prescribed by doctors) versions of many drugs which I'm not concerned about.

Seccond, those already addicted shouldn't be criminalised for possession. Instead they should be offered rehab. Yes some people won't take that option but you should still offer it regardless. (If crime is committed whilst under the influence or as a means to acquire more drugs or money for drugs, then of course charge them but still offer rehab even if they maybe in prison for a long time.)

Third, drug dealers should be treated by society with more disgust than society shows. I think society thinks of addicts as people who bring it on themselves and let dealers off the hook accordingly. Then one begins a chicken-and-egg discussion of who is worse - those who seek it or those who sell it - I'd say given most drug dealers know well to not become an addict themselves, that's strong evidence that drug dealers is the most evil as they take advantage of those under the influence.

Fourth, gateway drugs like weed. I can see how people including some of my friends don't see it as an issue as it is a drug that 'relaxes' rather than 'stimulates' and for some of my friends is used as 'medicine' - not prescribed but is without THC. I would like to see these kind of drugs produced by vetted pharmaceutical providers so they can control such things as THC content.

Fifth, but what about alcohol? I agree that alcohol is one of the worst drugs in society because its not seen as one. Again, like weed, I don't see it as bad for most people unlike someone injecting heroin into themselves in some hovel somewhere. That's why I said initially there is no medicinal benefit in shooting up with heroin, crack cocaine, fentanyl, crystal meth etc... because they aren't what doctors prescribe to you (drug purity and composition etc...)

Sixth, everyone's addicted to something, not my problem. Live and let live etc... - this kind of argument doesn't entirely wash with me because that's the slippery slope of let's just not care and look the other way. If you're loved one only had one fatal ecstasy pill or was burning through hundreds of pounds on smack, you would care.

I'm happy to have a discussion on where we should be on drugs in this country.

I'm amazed you've posted all that but not one mention of tobacco.

 

[najaB]

I completely hate drugs, they cause so much misery and our society would be in a much better place without them.

Does that include caffeine, nicotine and alcohol?

 

[cactustwirly]

Does that include caffeine, nicotine and alcohol?

The affects of caffeine, nicotine and alcohol are not in the same league as harder drugs

They don't tend to be distributed by dangerous criminal organisations

 

[Cross City]

The affects of caffeine, nicotine and alcohol are not in the same league as harder drugs

They don't tend to be distributed by dangerous criminal organisations

The affect alcohol has on society is much more damaging than any of the illegal drugs you’ve mentioned. And this is coming from somebody who loves a pint or 12.

Go up Broad Street in Birmingham on a Saturday night and tell me all the pissed up, fighty, loud morons that clog up the streets at 3am is better than it would be if they were all out smoking a bit of weed instead of drinking.

 

[najaB]

The affects of caffeine, nicotine and alcohol are not in the same league as harder drugs

If you are speaking to the immediate impact on the person using them, then maybe so.

If you are speaking to the impact on wider society then, as @PsychoMouse points out above, the cost of policing drunken weekend evenings is massive, as is the medical cost of injuries incurred in fights, falls and accidents - not to mention the cost of long term alcohol overuse (lost productivity, domestic abuse, alcoholic cirrhosis, etc.)

The long-term health impacts of smoking are beyond any question. No doubt that its use has cost tens, if not hundreds of thousands of lives in the over the years.

They don't tend to be distributed by dangerous criminal organisations

There is a global organisation that is funded by extracting a stimulant drug from a tropical plant commonly found in Colombia, and distributing it around the world. Its finances are extremely opaque and difficult to understand, but there is zero doubt that they move vast sums of money around between countries to avoid scrutiny by the authorities, and that any neighborhood they move into suffers with long-standing local business often closing as a result.

They're called Starbucks.

 

[Gathursty]

I'm amazed you've posted all that but not one mention of tobacco.

You are right. I can't believe I forgot about tobacco and vaping etc.. I guess it must be because I rarely see anyone smoke but yes I do see many people vape. I did mention use of non-THC cannabis oil which can be vaped. I do think of vapes as like alco-pops for the young who don't realise that it is still has nicotine in. For adults trying to come off cigarettes, I've heard some studies say vaping is a bit better but truthfully I have limited thoughts about vaping.

 

[GusB]

I find that it's often difficult to have a sensible conversation about drugs because the moment the subject is mentioned, certain people go into an automatic "Drugs! Bad! Illegal!" mode and refuse to discuss it.

I'm very much of the opinion that possession for person use should be decriminalised so that those caught up in a cycle of addiction aren't then tied up in a criminal justice spiral that ultimately prevents them from getting on with their lives if they do manage to recover. People don't even need to be addicts - for some people it's just a phase they'll go through. By acknowledging that some people are going to dabble and providing as much information on the main effects, side effects (and, more importantly, what to do if something goes wrong), we can at least try to reduce some of the harm.

It's also not very helpful that we continue to use terms like "junkies" to describe people with addiction issues; they're human beings with unique sets of circumstances. Life can often take a turn for the worse and people deal with crises in different ways. I've encountered a few people over the years that have struggled with drugs, most of whom had problems in early life such as unstable home lives, being in care, homelessness etc. For some it's not just going through a bad patch, but a constant barrage of life events. If they're not getting help from anywhere else, is it any wonder some turn to drugs?

 

[cactustwirly]

If you are speaking to the immediate impact on the person using them, then maybe so.

If you are speaking to the impact on wider society then, as @PsychoMouse points out above, the cost of policing drunken weekend evenings is massive, as is the medical cost of injuries incurred in fights, falls and accidents - not to mention the cost of long term alcohol overuse (lost productivity, domestic abuse, alcoholic cirrhosis, etc.)

The long-term health impacts of smoking are beyond any question. No doubt that its use has cost tens, if not hundreds of thousands of lives in the over the years.



There is a global organisation that is funded by extracting a stimulant drug from a tropical plant commonly found in Colombia, and distributing it around the world. Its finances are extremely opaque and difficult to understand, but there is zero doubt that they move vast sums of money around between countries to avoid scrutiny by the authorities, and that any neighborhood they move into suffers with long-standing local business often closing as a result.

They're called Starbucks.

What about the costs of investigating a stabbing or shooting between rival gangs?

Surely that's a greater cost than a few drunks on a weekend

 

[najaB]

What about the costs of investigating a stabbing or shooting between rival gangs?

The links between gangs and drugs (specifically) as opposed to general criminality is tenuous at best.

Very few gangs exist because of trade in illicit drugs, their involvement with drugs is just incidental. If it wasn't drugs it would be other ways of making money such as dealing in stolen goods, smuggling untaxed tobacco and alcohol or controlling sex work.

 

[cactustwirly]

The links between gangs and drugs (specifically) as opposed to general criminality is tenuous at best.

Very few gangs exist because of trade in illicit drugs, their involvement with drugs is just incidental. If it was drugs it would be other ways of making money such as dealing in stolen goods, smuggling untaxed tobacco and alcohol or controlling sex work.

I seriously doubt smuggled tobacco is as profitable as cocaine or heroin for example

 

[najaB]

I seriously doubt smuggled tobacco is as profitable as cocaine or heroin for example

You'd be surprised. Cigarettes cost as little as £1.50 a pack in Türkiye as compared to £14 in the UK (20 pack of Marlborough).

The mark-up on street dealing in drugs is considerably less than that.

 

[AlterEgo]

I seriously doubt smuggled tobacco is as profitable as cocaine or heroin for example

You should go to Egypt where 200 cigarettes will cost you about £14-15, about a tenth of the price they cost here.

My personal view is nobody who smokes tobacco has a leg to stand on when it comes to opposing the principle of illegal drugs remaining criminalised. We have much more harmful things than cannabis which are legal.

 

[ainsworth74]

The affects of caffeine, nicotine and alcohol are not in the same league as harder drugs

They don't tend to be distributed by dangerous criminal organisations

Though, of course, they're legal. The United States tried making alcohol illegal for a time. That certainly helped contribute to the rise of dangerous criminal organisations to distribute it as there was plenty of money to be made doing so. It strikes me the same is true with our treatment of presently illegal drugs, of course there are dangerous criminal gangs distributing it! There's money to be made and the only way to do so is illegally!

Personally I'd say that weed should simply be legalised, regulated and taxed in the same way that we do alcohol or tobacco. Other drugs I would take perhaps the Portuguese approach of decriminalisation with personal possession being treated as a civil matter subject to a fixed penalty notice with the main aim being getting such individuals into treatment for addiction (and in general treating usage as a public health matter, not a criminal) with criminal resources focused on those that profit from the drugs trade. Potentially other drugs could be fully legalised, regulated and taxed in time but that's the place I'd be looking to start. We desperately need to stop pretending that the "War on Drugs" is ever going to work. We've been trying this approach for decades and we seem to have absolutely nothing to show for it.

The other strand I'd be exploring is if we're missing out on using at least some of these in actual medical settings. For instance there's evidence that using psychedelics like magic mushrooms or MDMA could have significant impacts on the treatment of PTSD:

How It’s Thought to Work​

The common category of antidepressants often used to treat PTSD now are Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs). These drugs work by increasing the amount of serotonin available to bind to serotonin receptors in the brain. Serotonin is a neurotransmitter that helps regulate your mood. When more serotonin binds to specialized receptors, it may help patients feel more stable and content.


Psilocybin [an active ingredient in magic mushrooms] also acts on serotonin receptors, but scientists say the drug’s impact reaches far beyond serotonin. They believe that the drug actually alters the way neurons connect to one another. “We're talking about a different mechanism of action that these drugs have compared to the old serotonergic compounds,” says Vermetten “The mechanism action doesn't rely on one molecule.”


Many patients prescribed antidepressants experience a range of side effects from upset stomach to insomnia. One of the reasons that psychedelic therapies are so appealing is that they’re thought to work with only a few doses—limiting the risk of side effects.


Woolley explains that the psychedelic drugs seem to induce a state of plasticity that can make it easier for people to rewire neuronal circuits and learn new things, like they did when they were kids, for example. That provides the opportunity for therapy to be especially effective. Patients are more likely to embrace new connections and ways of thinking during their treatment.


Additionally, Rakesh Jetly, chief medical officer of Mydecine, a company developing psychedelic medicines, and a veteran of the Canadian army, says, brain imaging studies have shown that the drugs can induce changes in a network of cells that normally helps us understand who we are and where we are in time and space, called the default mode network. The disruption of this circuit may be behind the symptoms of many PTSD patients who experienced trauma in war. When an individual feels scared, this is the part of the brain that tells them, “Hey, man, you’re okay. You’re not [at war] in Rwanda anymore. You’re not [fighting] in Afghanistan,” explains Jetly. However, if the default mode network isn’t working properly, the person may have difficulty recognizing that they’re no longer in danger.

Why Psychedelic Drugs May Become a Key Treatment for PTSD and Depression

Ecstasy and the active ingredient in magic mushrooms have shown promise in clinical trials, but more testing is needed

www.smithsonianmag.com

There's a lot of work to do before it could be considered a treatment that anyone could potentially access as part of mental health treatment but surely it's worth exploring further rather than having sat on our hands for decades because "These drugs are bad because we say they're bad!".

 

[stuu]

The affects of caffeine, nicotine and alcohol are not in the same league as harder drugs

Do you seriously think that alcohol is not a hard drug? You can buy enough to kill you for £20. It sends you more off the rails and away from your normal self than any of the other main recreational substances. It is highly addictive, very damaging to physical and mental health, and if it was invented tomorrow it would be banned immediately

 

[AlterEgo]

Do you seriously think that alcohol is not a hard drug? You can buy enough to kill you for £20. It sends you more off the rails and away from your normal self than any of the other main recreational substances. It is highly addictive, very damaging to physical and mental health, and if it was invented tomorrow it would be banned immediately

Yes agreed. It’s a very harmful substance. Probably more so than cannabis.

 

[Russel]

I've seen the effects weed has on people, including the long lasting effects, it's an illegal substance and the fact that society has forgotten that, quite frankly, disgusts me.

 

[GusB]

I've seen the effects weed has on people, including the long lasting effects, it's an illegal substance and the fact that society has forgotten that, quite frankly, disgusts me.

I've seen the effects that alcohol has on people, including the long lasting effects. It's a legal substance and the fact that society has forgotten that, quite frankly, puzzles me.

 

[najaB]

I've seen the effects weed has on people, including the long lasting effects

You've seen the effects that were has had on some people...

 

[THC]

Legalise, regulate and tax. Treat drug dependence as a public health issue and not a criminal one. Instead of public spending on enforcement, generate revenue through taxation. All of which require political vision, none of which we have.

THC
(my initials before anyone starts!)

 

[Snow1964]

Legalise, regulate and tax. Treat drug dependence as a public health issue and not a criminal one. Instead of public spending on enforcement, generate revenue through taxation. All of which require political vision, none of which we have.

THC
(my initials before anyone starts!)

Or simply invent a rule that any drug dealer that is caught is taxed on assumed profits and gains like anyone else. Then seize any upmarket physical assets (cars, posh phones, jewellery, designer goods etc) to cover the tax, unless they can show other legal income that would have funded it.

 

[Meerkat]

Or simply invent a rule that any drug dealer that is caught is taxed on assumed profits and gains like anyone else. Then seize any upmarket physical assets (cars, posh phones, jewellery, designer goods etc) to cover the tax, unless they can show other legal income that would have funded it.

AIUI income doesn't have to be legal to be taxable anyway.

 

[THC]

Or simply invent a rule that any drug dealer that is caught is taxed on assumed profits and gains like anyone else. Then seize any upmarket physical assets (cars, posh phones, jewellery, designer goods etc) to cover the tax, unless they can show other legal income that would have funded it.

You miss my point entirely. By legalising and regulating, the dealers no longer exist in criminality and much of the black market is removed. Police involvement in combatting the drugs trade is drastically reduced and tax can instead be remitted through the usual (legal) channels. Huge savings to the public purse and an income generator for the Treasury.

THC

 

[stuu]

Yes agreed. It’s a very harmful substance. Probably more so than cannabis.

Alcohol is routinely considered the most dangerous drug of all. Worse than crack.

What is the most dangerous drug?

Some drugs classified as highly dangerous are less harmful than alcohol or tobacco

www.economist.com

 

[Meerkat]

Alcohol is routinely considered the most dangerous drug of all. Worse than crack.

Is that really per person? Because it doesn’t really correspond with the state of drug users I have seen.
Its also an irrelevant comparison as alcohol is legal already.