Ending the Drug War. Now.

cuffleyburgers

Hear hear.

Kevyn Bodman

Yes.

THX1138

I completely agree with you, legalize the lot now. Prohibition has failed how more years of this disastrous & innefectual policy will we have to suffer before politicians except that you can never ever beat human nature. Since we stood upright on the African savanna humans have wanted to get high this will never change, all drug laws do is make bad people rich a ruin more lives, we should use the tax proceeds to treat those who go to far exactly like we do with alcohol. Well done The Economist

Rhoda Klapp

If we can control it when it is taxed, and presumably to sell it untaxed will be a crime, why can't we control it now?

Who will enforce purity/quality standards? Won't it be subject to FDA-like regs? Will the supplying company be liable for any harm done to users?

And why the bloody hell should I look after abusers who are warned of possible consquences? Libertarianism comes with personal responsibility.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not against legalisation per se, I just think that is where the discussion begins..for so many it's the end of a sequence which goes 'I wish I could use dope free of risk, let's legalise it. Stop.'

Kittler

Illegal heroin is dangerous, it is impure,adulterated and of varing strength.
Pharmaceutical heroin is probably safer than pharcetamol.
Addicts are disfunctional when deprived of their drug, but with correctly administered dosage can be perfectly normal. In this they are much like Diabetics and insulin.
I have never used drugs and do not drink alcohol but if I were compelled to make a choice between alcohol and PHARMACEUTICAL heroin I would choose the latter as less of a threat to my health and wellbeing.

ally

Rhoda - I think part of the point is that at present you and I (and every other taxpayer) already pay heavily to look after users and the consequences of their actions. Legalising it would pay for part of the consequences and mitigate some of the current effects (e.g. crime).

I also commend the Economist heartily for admitting that it doesn't see a scenario in which legalisation would make drug use fall; it's nice to have an honest debate for a change.

Rhoda Klapp

I do not seek to defend the status quo. I don't want to pay to look after people who have chosen to harm themselves with drink or other drugs. I don't want users to be able to drive, operate machinery, come to work, under the influence. I don't want them to sue GSK or whoever for what the drug has done to them. I don't really want the drugs to be freely available over the counter. They can't stop kids getting fags and booze now (or drugs). Pharma Heroin is not now, not because it's class A, but because it's a drug. So will there be a prescription for heroin? MJ? E? Give me a framework for how it's going to work. What are all the criminals going to do? Go on the dole? Find something else? Work for a living?

Oh, and will we put the government in charge? Liberalising the pub laws has resulted in more pub closures than ever before!

Bibby

Although this kind of 'brave' utterance is always good for a quick round of cheers from the usual crowd of sofa surfers, you do have to wonder why something so apparently obvious and banal has never been tried... wait- could it be because it's transparently as crude and simplistic as its opposite- total prohibition- and just as unlikely to solve anything? Hmm....

THX1138

Bibby it was tried for virtually the whole of human history, prohibition is a very recent disaster.

Rhoda Klapp

THX, do you propose to legalise it completely, no restrictions? No age limits? Or will elements of prohibition remain?

It's just so easy to say remove prohibition. But As I said above, if you want to make a case, that's just the beginning. Don't just give the answer, show your workings.

THX1138

Rhoda- I'm glad you're up for the debate. In truth I'm not really sure how we should go about selling and taxing the stuff once we have come to are senses and decided that prohibition doesn't work. That after all is the big decision, the rest kinda' seems like mere detail, important detail of course but relatively straight forward to work out I'm sure.

For what it's worth I would favour (at least to start with) state run drugs shops, with an 18 age limit like alcohol perhaps with tax raised hypothecated to be spent on the NHS.

On a personal note I would look forward to trying out some of the products of the GSK recreational drug division.

What you have to ask yourself is how long can we afford to carry on with unwinable war against human nature?

You should read some of Iain M Banks si-fi Culture novels for an insight on what a society based on drug culture might look like, much more fun than ours.

Rhoda Klapp

I'm having fun envisaging a govt-run drug shop. Will it be like a jobcentre (maybe co-located) or a doctor's waiting room with all those creepy posters, anti-smoking leaflets and so on?
Will it be as successful keeping the stuff out of the hands of kids as it has been with alcohol, cigs, aerosol paint and knives? Oh.

And why don't we let the kids have the dope anyway?

THX1138

Rhoda well prohibition hasn't stopped kids getting hold of drugs. I bet half the youngsters popping an e or smoking a spliff we're attracted by the illegality of if the first place, I know I was.

Why not lots of brightly colored posters flogging their wares just like the legal drug dealers at Diageo & Inbev. I can imagine the Mad Men of Charlotte street working up their pitches - can't you?