Drugs? What way forward?

[Stramash]

What has become clear in recent years is that all out prohibition of drugs does not work. For every bust that police or customs make, a hundred get through.

And draconian laws that cover all drugs, including those viewed as recreational such as cannabis, means that thousands of young people are given criminal records merely for experimenting in 'softer' drugs.

You also have to take into consideration 2 other factors; 1) That by having all drugs illegal, those who are only using softer drugs WILL come into contact with harder drugs because of the criminal element.

2) That those who import and sell drugs are usually part of wider criminal networks and that the proceeds of their nefarious exploits also fund guns, people trafficking and other crimes.

So, if we do accept that prohibition isnt working, what do we do?

One problem in moving forward is that nearly all nations are signatories to the UN Single Convention on Drugs, and pursuing an isolationist policy on substance use contravenes that policy (though the UN are in reality a toothless giant)

What I would like to see is for other nations to follow the examples of Switzerland and Portugal.

IN Switzerland;

Art. 8, paragraph 6 to 8 of Federal Law on Narcotics states;

The Federal Office of Public Health may in addition issue as an exception authorisations to cultivate, import, manufacture and distribute substances referred to in the first paragraph, letter b. It may in the same way issue authorisations to utilise these same substances to treat drug dependent people, as an exception and only at the institutions specialised in this respect.

What this means is that the Swiss governent licence firms to import and manafacture drugs but only for supplying those registered and receiving treatment.

From the early 90?s on, Switzerland began to adopt harm reduction approaches towards drug use. This approach (currently known as ProMeDro) had a number of aims, including improvement of health and living conditions of drug users, decreasing the numbers of new drug users, reducing HIV and Hepatitis infection rates.

This involved a four ?pillar? approach;Prevention, Treatment, Harm reduction and Enforcement.

Rather than marginalising drug users, these new policies viewed them as dependent people who are victims of personal predisposition or outside circumstances.

Between 1990 and 1999, the Swiss government initiated or supported around 300 new projects as varied as needle exchanges, training for teachers/social workers/parents, prescribing of heroin and housing and employment projects.

Social exclusion was recognised as being a primary contributor to drug dependency, and the range of projects acknowledged this.

In 1992, the Federal Council initiated trials of the medical prescription of Heroin, with accompanying evaluations to monitor the progress of the scheme. In 1997 it was concluded that;

1) heroin prescribing for dependent heroin addicts improved their physical and/or mental health, as well as their quality of life (in terms of housing, work and other areas)

2) participants? illegal use of heroin and cocaine decreased

3) the users involved in the program committed fewer crimes (the incidence of theft and property and drug trafficking offences fell sharply).

After the success of the trials, The Federal Council authorised full implementation of the heroin maintenance programme setting out objectives, eligibility criteria, administrative measures and providing resources for the programme.

Between 1998 and 2000, reported cases of drug use for heroin fell from 15,870 to 11,721 and for cocaine from 10,333 to 8,644.

From a health perspective, the policy of harm reduction and maintenance has also been a success; In 1991 injecting drug users made up between 36 and 40% of all new HIV cases. By 1999 this had dropped to between 14 and 17%. Deaths from heroin overdoses fell from 405 in 1991 to 181 in 1999.

These ?liberal? measures have not come at the expense of law enforcement; dealers and smugglers are still targeted, and the number of charges under the Narcotics Act actually rose substantially, from 23,400 in 1991 to 44,336 in 1999.

In 1998, Switzerland became the first country in the world to hold a referendum on drugs legalisation. Although 75% voted against, it should be noted that many who voted against did so as they did not want the influx of ?drugs tourists? that legalisation might bring. It?s position as a non EU country and the success their policies have brought make Switzerland a likely candidate to be the first country to implement full regulation and control at some point.

In Portugal;

 

The revolution of 1974 and economic growth of the past 34 years has been an unmixed blessing.  With the transformation from a highly dispersed rural population to concentration in cities also came some of the ills of modern society, including drug abuse. There is widespread evidence that Portugal's drug problem seriously escalated in the 1990?s.

(Portuguese government data.) 

In 1991, 4667 people were arrested for drug offenses by 1998; the figure had risen to 11395.

 

In 1998, 61% of drug related arrests were for use or possession for use (as opposed to sale or possession for sale)

 

45% of the arrests were heroin-related

In 2001 Portugal undertook a remarkable step by decriminalizing all drugs not just marijuana but also heroin and cocaine.  By decriminalization it is meant that use and possession for use are subject to administrative sanctions instead of criminal proceedings; in keeping with international treaties and the practice in other countries, Portugal is not prepared at the moment to legalize drugs.

Portuguese decriminalization is different from the decriminalized drugs policies of Italy and Spain in that it explicitly separates the drug user from the criminal justice system.  The Government explicitly concurred that imprisonment has not provided an adequate response to the problem of mere drug use, and that it has not been demonstrated that to subject a user to criminal proceedings constitutes the most appropriate and effective means of intervention.

Under the Portuguese drugs law, the use and possession for use of drugs is no longer a criminal offense, but instead is prohibited as an administrative offense.   Decriminalization only refers to possession of drugs for personal use and not for drug trafficking.  "Trafficking" for purposes of the law is possession of more than the average dose for ten days of use (although what these levels are for specific drugs is not spelled out in the law.

Administrative offences are deliberated by a Committee that deals only with drug use. The committees will generally consist of three people,  from the medical and legal sector.  Committee members are not supposed to be involved in drug treatment but should be sufficiently knowledgeable to judge what is best for the user.

 Drug users will largely be brought to the attention of the committees when the police observe them using drugs.  If the committee determines on the basis of the evidence brought before them that the person is a drug trafficker, then the committee will refer that person to the courts.

These criteria include;

     i)   the severity of the offence,

  ii)      the type of drug used,

       iii) whether use is in public or private;

    iv)    if the person is not an addict,

     v) whether use is occasional or habitual;

       vi) The personal and economic/financial circumstances of the user.

 

The committee will view the evidence placed before them before placing a sanction on the dug user

sanctions include;

    i)  Fines. 

       ii) ban on visiting certain places

       iii) ban on associating with specific other persons

       iv) withdrawal of right to travel abroad

       v) requirement to report periodically to the committee

       vi) withdrawal of the right to carry a gun

       vii) confiscation of personal possessions

       viii) Termination of subsidies or allowances that a person receives from a public agency.

The committee cannot mandate compulsory treatment to induce addicts to enter and remain in treatment.  The committee has the explicit power to suspend sanctions conditional upon voluntary entry into treatment, but because disobedience of committee rulings is not defined as a criminal offence, it is not clear what the further sanctions are if users do not follow either the treatment recommendations or the orders of the committee.

From 1997 to 2005 Heroin use has dropped from 4500 people to 1000 people

Arrests for Drug trafficking has fallen from 3000 in 1997 to 1000 in 2005

A recent assessment of the Portuguese drug policy approach has shown that care is more cost-efficient than prison; the drug epidemic and its terrible consequences are now under control. public health and social care have made justice and enforcement interventions work better.

The drugs policy in Portugal has been amended and new reforms were implemented in 2005. Several working groups have been set up composing of experts from various agencies to improve 6 areas of drug work.

1.    Prevention.

2.    Treatment.

3.    Harm Reduction.

4.    Rehabilitation.

5   Dissuasion.

6.    Supply Reduction

There is no such thing as a perfect drugs policy, but what is definite is that the prohibitionist approach used for the last 100 years has failed miserably. The criminalising of a large part of the population due to their choice of drug being illegal rather than legal has not reduced demand or supply.

What is being proposed is recognition that many people will try certain drugs with no ill effects on their health, on the community they live in or by resorting to crime other than that pertaining to their drug choice.

The results from both Portugal and Switzerland are encouraging. Crime is down, illegal use is down, HIV infection and death by overdose are down. Numbers succesfully going through treatment are up.

So, why cant we accept the realities and move forward?

Your thoughts please...

(sorry it's so long but wanted to present you with lots of info... )

[Karnie]

i promise i will read once i get up tomorrow. 8)

[joefarang]

hang on a bitty iain, i'll sit back, skin up, and "have a think" about it...

aaahh...

pollen!

[eagle]

Illegal drugs cause more harm from them being illegal then they would cause being legal from what I've been seeing.

I think legal pharmeceutical drugs are causing more harm. Statistically legal drugs cause more deaths and thats not including alcohol and tobacco. http://drugwarfacts.org/cms/?q=node/30 Its become a huge industry that is inventing drugs for every aspect of the human condition with multiple side effects and thousands of wrongful death lawsuits pending. Big money in illegal drugs yes but legal drugs are making huge profits also. Twisted world :twisted:

[beej]

I'm baked so this might be a bit pointless!

Legalization.

[eagle]

I'm baked so this might be a bit pointless!

Legalization.

give some to McCainiac ,he looks tense

[joefarang]

ok, i've had a think about it and umm..

....

eh? ...

i'm hungry.

[beej]

ok, i've had a think about it and umm..

....

eh? ...

i'm hungry.

I'm off to 7-11 too!!!

[English_Bob]

Legalise...

Then you can regulate quality - no more coke mixed with worming tablets and bicarb(!)

You can educate people realistically. Tell kids the truth, E makes you feel great... but drink lots of water or you can collapse.

You can ensure age of legality. No sale without ID.

You can tax them to pay for the health problems.

I think a night on the town with an E causes a lot fewer problems than a night on the liquor.

Legalise... and float the companies on the stock market.

[beej]

While walking in and around Chidlom yesterday this caught my eye...........

[Karnie]

noted with thanks! 8)

[beej]

I've been tempted to call this number so many times just for shits and giggles!

[Karnie]

I've been tempted to call this number so many times just for shits and giggles!

keep us posted the result once your tempted is success. 8)

[beej]

Pam just bought me these......

......... mmmmmmmmm

[babyoiy]

Why non-fat milk when she wants you to have more meat?? or she makes you on diet now? Or probably becoz it's a high calcium one...

[Stramash]

Well thanks so far to Khun Dave and to Eagle for making thought out posts and not just discussing the munchies or Bangkok policemen masquerading as Filipino hash salesmen.

Dave, I would say on the E comments though, you have to be careful about the lots of water advice. This is actually what killed Leah Betts, not the E she had taken - you should drink no more than around a pint of water per hour.

What has to be taken into consideration is the other costs of illegal drug use; particularly crime committed to buy drugs (99% of it for heroin/crack), anti social behaviour as a result of drug use, and police time and resources in pursuit of low level users (estimated at around £516 million per year in UK)

Control and regulation have been proven to lower crime rates, to allow police to free resources to pursue more serious crime, to reduce anti social behaviour etc etc

Health harms are also greatly reduced (even through harm reduction methods such as needle exchanges) with HIV, Hepatitis rates greatly down and lower DRD's (drug related deaths). Also there are higher instances of STDs amongst problematic drug users due to higher risk taking while UTI.

How far would you go?

Would especially welcome comments on Swiss and Portuguese systems and whether you think they would work elsewhere...

(Oh and Joe, send me some pollen if still in UK?? :wink: )

[beej]

We fatten turkeys before we kill them

Hence the non fat milk :wink:

[condotown]

The War on Drugs is a prohibition campaign undertaken by the United States government with the assistance of participating countries, intended to reduce the illegal drug trade?to curb supply and diminish demand for certain psychoactive substances deemed "harmful or undesirable" by the government. This initiative includes a set of laws and policies that are intended to discourage the production, distribution, and consumption of targeted substances. The term was first used by President Richard Nixon in 1971, and his choice of words was probably based on the War on Poverty, announced by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964.

For more on this exciting subject, see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Drugs

LEGALIZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZE

[Stramash]

The War on Drugs is a prohibition campaign undertaken by the United States government with the assistance of participating countries, intended to reduce the illegal drug trade?to curb supply and diminish demand for certain psychoactive substances deemed "harmful or undesirable" by the government. This initiative includes a set of laws and policies that are intended to discourage the production, distribution, and consumption of targeted substances. The term was first used by President Richard Nixon in 1971, and his choice of words was probably based on the War on Poverty, announced by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964.

For more on this exciting subject, see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Drugs

LEGALIZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZE

brief history of prohibition; (from European/UK perspective)

1800 ? Napoleon bans use of hashish amongst his troops in Egypt

1860 ? Convention of Peking; ending of 2nd opium war leads to opium laws in US states

1869/1906 ? UK pharmacy act regulates sale of opium

1916 ? D.O.R.A ; for the first time, drugs are treated as a criminal justice matter

1920/23 Dangerous drugs act and amendments

1926 - Rolleston Committee Report on drug dependency

1928 ? Cannabis added to dangerous Drugs Act

1961 ? United Nations Single Convention on Drugs

1964 ? Dangerous Drugs Act 1964

1965 ? 2nd Brain Committee recommends restrictions on prescribing of heroin (beginning of end of ?British system?

1967 ? Dangerous Drugs Act 67 (stop and search laws)

1971 ? Misuse of Drugs Act

1977 ? Ecstasy added to 1971 act

1998 ? First UK drugs ?tsar?

2000 ? Police Foundation report (Runciman report)

2001 ? Portugal introduces de facto decriminalisation on all drugs

2002 ? Home Affairs Select Committee rejects decriminalisation but admits it may be a future option along with regulation and control

2002 ? Lib Dems launch new drugs policy ? among other points, it calls for removal of imprisonment for Class B and C offences

[funky_house]

200+ million dollars of drug money found in Mexico.

Now that really could help me beat the credit crunch. :shock:

[Desmodronic]

It keeps amazing me how much the US government has learned from the prohibition on alcohol in the 20's and how far they have come with innovating policies ;-)

Being Dutch, I'm used to a quite liberal drug policy. While soft drugs are still illegal by law here, it is policy that personal use is accepted, as is the sale for personal use via government regulated so called "coffee shops",

Of course import and manufacturing are still illegal and prosecuted, showing our hypocrisy towards the issue. That alone is reason enough to legalize. Either you take the path of prohibition, proven not to work .. or you legalize. Anything in between is a legal monstrosity.

[Stramash]

It keeps amazing me how much the US government has learned from the prohibition on alcohol in the 20's and how far they have come with innovating policies ;-)

Being Dutch, I'm used to a quite liberal drug policy. While soft drugs are still illegal by law here, it is policy that personal use is accepted, as is the sale for personal use via government regulated so called "coffee shops",

Of course import and manufacturing are still illegal and prosecuted, showing our hypocrisy towards the issue. That alone is reason enough to legalize. Either you take the path of prohibition, proven not to work .. or you legalize. Anything in between is a legal monstrosity.

legalisation still ambiguous - better the regulation and control the way Swiss have done...

[Desmodronic]

legalisation still ambiguous - better the regulation and control the way Swiss have done...

Well .. as it relates to hard drugs, I agree with you. Although what the Swiss have done is actually a form of legalisation albeit that they don't allow hard drugs onto the free market and their law only serves as a basis for a "medical treatment by heroine" of addicts

The Swiss approach doesn't solve the soft drug/recreational drug issue though. In that, they have followed the Dutch approach. Officially the use is still illegal, but they just won't prosecute as policy.

From a legal point of view, that's a rather undesirable situation. What's the point of keeping it in your criminal code?

[BrianAZ]

Illegal drugs like pot do less harm than alcohol, no one has ever beat their wife because thay get mad when they smoke pot.

Most are begging their wife to make them somthing to eat.

I don't do any drugs and I don't drink much but to make smoking pot illegal sure doesn't make sence to me.

just my 2 cents.

[AYJeezy]

I always thought the 'War on Drugs' was started as a Race War (especially in the U.S.A.). The Harrison Act (I think?) lists prohibited drugs. Plantations owners in the south knew their 'workers' liked to use certain drugs and in order to pass the bill in the Senate/House, they added those drugs. I'm always the kind of person that thinks if you are responsible enough to handle something, so be it. Different people have different thresholds. Nothing wrong with a little recreational use...