I really don't understand the frequently made argument that we should stop fighting against drugs because we haven't yet been able to stop people using drugs. I mean, despite decades (centuries for some crimes) in which things like dangerous driving, burglary, mugging people in the streets, or shoplifting have been illegal we still haven't been able to eliminate those those scourges on our society. Some things like shoplifting seem to be becoming completely rampant despite being illegal. Yet I bet no-one would argue that we should therefore give up and decriminalise those things/stop 'wasting' police time on them, in the way people seem to do for drugs (I realise you haven't actually said that in this post, but that's usually where disparaging comments about 'war on drugs' tend to lead)
No we haven't been able to eliminate them and I'm not sure that our current approach to issues like dangerous driving, shoplifting or mugging is particularly working either. But on the latter two that opens up very difficult and wider policy conversations around the link between them and rising levels of poverty as well as cuts to services like the police, social services as well as youth programmes and activities. As well as the increasing evidence that short sentences that crimes like shoplifting and mugging attract do far more harm overall than a community order or similar might achieve. Quite apart from the woeful state of our prisons meaning that nothing productive can be done with them to help them be rehabilitated certainly not in the short sentences they might currently get let alone a long sentence.
But, again, far easier to simply cry "lock them up! Tougher sentences!" than to try and tackle root causes of these issues.
...Who would presumably then simply then seek to supply and get more people addicted to more dangerous drugs instead. Or do you imagine that drugs gangs who find they can no longer make a fortune pushing softer drugs, would simply say, "
OK guys, let's give up on our lucrative life of crime, become honest upright citizens and go get minimum wage jobs as shop assistants or something instead"?
Obviously they won't, legalisation of weed in the US hasn't exactly stopped drug gangs over there now has it? But it seems bonkers to allow the drug gangs to make easy profits from something which should obviously be legal, regulated and taxed. Rather than prohibited and hidden away where only criminals can profit. But it is just part of the general issue that current drugs policy does not work and I do not see how getting "tougher on drugs" is actually going to achieve anything other than continuing to cause significant societal damage through, what often seems to be, purely moralistic outrage.
Singapore can pass a death sentence for anyone trafficking drugs above the below amounts (and if you're found with that much the presumption is that it was for trafficking purposes, unless you can prove otherwise):
Under Schedule 2 of the
Misuse of Drugs Act, any person importing or exporting more than the following quantities of drugs receives a mandatory death sentence:
- 1200 grams of opium and containing more than 30 grams of morphine (§5 and §7, (2)(b));
- 30 grams of morphine (§5 and §7, (3)(b));
- 15 grams of diamorphine (heroin) (diamo (§5 and §7, (4)(b));
- 30 grams of cocaine (§5 and §7, (5)(b));
- 500 grams of cannabis (§5 and §7, (6)(b));
- 1000 grams of cannabis mixture (§5 and §7, (7)(b));
- 200 grams of cannabis resin (§5 and §7, (8)(b));
- 250 grams of methamphetamine (§5 and §7, (9)(b)).
Death sentences are also mandatory for any person caught manufacturing:
- Morphine, or any salt of morphine, ester of morphine or salt of ester of morphine (§6, (2));
- Diamorphine (heroin) or any salt of diamorphine (§6, (3));
- Cocaine or any salt of cocaine (§6, (4));
- Methamphetamine (§6, (5)).
en.wikipedia.org
And yet Singapore is not without drug users and abusers despite it being potentially legally terminal.
Far more sensible to take a holistic review of our approach to drugs from both treatment, legalisation, decriminalisation and enforcement. The Governments own advisers have told them that the current approach does not work and is potentially causing more harm than it cures but the Government tried to avoid revealing that information:
The UK government’s official drug advisers privately advocated for a formal repeal of the criminalisation of personal-use drug possession in 2016, a leaked document has revealed.
The Guardian has seen a copy of the 27-page pro-decriminalisation report, which the Home Office ignored at the time but then fought a three-year battle to keep confidential after a freedom of information request.
The report sent to the then home secretary by the former chair of the Advisory Council for the Misuse of Drugs highlighted a number of serious concerns around criminalising drug use. It is the only ACMD report not to have been published.
It said there was “little consistent international evidence that the criminalisation for possession of drugs for personal use is effective in reducing drug use”, that the UK was not required to criminalise drug use under its treaty obligations, and that criminalisation harmed people’s educational and employment prospects.
The ACMD recommended that “the Home Office reviews the personal possession offence (MDA). The review could result in the offence of possession for personal use being repealed.”
Exclusive: Guardian has seen copy of 27-page report that Home Office attempted to keep confidential
www.theguardian.com
Our current drug policy does not work, causes harm to our own citizens and siphons vast sums of money into the pockets of criminals and then eventually fuels instability in places like Mexico and Colombia.
Hell it means we cannot even easily explore potentially life altering treatments that certain currently forbidden drugs could unlock. There is increasing evidence that psychedelics like Magic Mushrooms or MDMA might have a critical role to play in the treatment of PTSD, depression or other mental health problems but our drug laws are so restrictive that it is extremely difficult carry out research which could improve the lives of many people. Further we lost decades of time due to the absurd drug laws in most of the Western world that applied from the mid-20th century onwards. We're only just starting to uncover the potential of these substances for healthcare.
It is absurd to pretend that our current drugs policy is anything other than a failure which has, and is continuing to, cause huge damage to society and that the only solution is "JUST SAY NO" and ever tightening restrictions.
I'd say it rests on the premise that individual use of drugs causes relatively little harm to others (obviously depending on the drug and the quantity), and if it causes an individual to commit other offences then they can be dealt with for those. But the very fact it is illegal allows criminal gangs to establish themselves as the only supply chain, which leads to many crimes directly due to supply and generates funding for them to move into other illegal activities. Legalising use opens the door to setting up a legal supply chain and regulating it in a similar way to tobacco and alcohol.
Exactly!
