How it Works1 min ago
Decriminalise All Drugs?
112 Answers
the Scottish government wants personal possession and use of all drugs (including class A) to be treated as a healthcare issue rather than a criminal one
https:/
notwithstanding recent number decreases, Scotland still has the highest number of recorded drug deaths in all Europe
Drug laws are reserved to Westminster, but Scotland can legislate on healthcare issues.
Is this the right approach? or will it cause more problems than it solves?
https:/
notwithstanding recent number decreases, Scotland still has the highest number of recorded drug deaths in all Europe
Drug laws are reserved to Westminster, but Scotland can legislate on healthcare issues.
Is this the right approach? or will it cause more problems than it solves?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by mushroom25. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Untitled, they are not talking about legalising the drugs, they'll still be illegal to sell so there'll still be drug gangs.
As much as I hate it I think logically we should just legalise the whole lot then tax them accordingly, then the drug gangs would have no reason to exist. (well they'd have to diversify into other areas) This will just increase usage to no benefit in crime reduction etc.
As much as I hate it I think logically we should just legalise the whole lot then tax them accordingly, then the drug gangs would have no reason to exist. (well they'd have to diversify into other areas) This will just increase usage to no benefit in crime reduction etc.
cannabis is legal in 23 states in america, im sure they did all the stats
and background studies ad infinitum, cant stop it so why not tax it.
as for chemicals thats a step to far ie heroin cocaine and the new weirdo drugs, talk of gateway erm same with booze, but are considered
good drugs, taxable drugs..my thoughts erm id legalise cannabis.
not my cup of tea, more an ale type.
and background studies ad infinitum, cant stop it so why not tax it.
as for chemicals thats a step to far ie heroin cocaine and the new weirdo drugs, talk of gateway erm same with booze, but are considered
good drugs, taxable drugs..my thoughts erm id legalise cannabis.
not my cup of tea, more an ale type.
It's interesting that the children of the sixties revolution, who believed in the legalisation of drugs, have carried on with their granparents' belief that drugs are evil, and must be banned.
Not all drugs of course - nicotine and alcohol, firmly rooted in our culture, are acceptable, and regulated and taxed.
It's the 'evil' drugs like heroin and cocaine that are vilified, and feed a billion-pound criminal empire.
My view is that it is simply about perception.
If we can view heroin and cocaine in the same way as tobacco and alcohol, we can treat them the same way.
Drug health issues are down to the pollution of drugs to increase profits - diluting them with everything from baby powder to rat poison.
If the government licensed the production of these drugs, they could be made and sold safely to the people who wish to use them.
Overdoses will still occur, but currently, the overdoses on heroin and cocaine are a fraction of the drain on the health and police services caused by the abuse of alcohol.
The incalculable rise in tax revenue will allow the government to oversee the production and distribution of 'street' drugs, instantly cutting out the criminal gangs who take the billions in revenue that drugs produce, and the criminal activity caused by addicts stealing to feed their habit, which can be controlled medically by qualified doctors.
The absurd notion of a 'war on drugs' has long been a vote catcher because it makes politicians look responsible and caring, and determined to stamp out those nasty 'druggy types'.
But history demonstrates that the 'war on drugs' as been a billion-pound PR vote catcher, and a complete and utter waste of time.
We don't have a choice about whether we have drugs in our culture or not, that particular genie left the bottle decades ago.
The choice we have is whether or not we continue to let our governors kid us that a 'war on drugs' can ever be won, or they grow up and accept that drugs are here, and here to stay, and our choice is not to get rid of them, which we never will, but to control them, and use the money made to fund a proper health service for everyone.
It won't happen, because attitudes are entrenched, and no government ever wants to risk something today that will only bring benefit tomorrow, so we lurch on as we are.
Legalise drugs tomorrow, take control, get some revenue, get rid of criminals, be adult about what is going on around us.
Not in my lifetime, but maybe one day ...
Not all drugs of course - nicotine and alcohol, firmly rooted in our culture, are acceptable, and regulated and taxed.
It's the 'evil' drugs like heroin and cocaine that are vilified, and feed a billion-pound criminal empire.
My view is that it is simply about perception.
If we can view heroin and cocaine in the same way as tobacco and alcohol, we can treat them the same way.
Drug health issues are down to the pollution of drugs to increase profits - diluting them with everything from baby powder to rat poison.
If the government licensed the production of these drugs, they could be made and sold safely to the people who wish to use them.
Overdoses will still occur, but currently, the overdoses on heroin and cocaine are a fraction of the drain on the health and police services caused by the abuse of alcohol.
The incalculable rise in tax revenue will allow the government to oversee the production and distribution of 'street' drugs, instantly cutting out the criminal gangs who take the billions in revenue that drugs produce, and the criminal activity caused by addicts stealing to feed their habit, which can be controlled medically by qualified doctors.
The absurd notion of a 'war on drugs' has long been a vote catcher because it makes politicians look responsible and caring, and determined to stamp out those nasty 'druggy types'.
But history demonstrates that the 'war on drugs' as been a billion-pound PR vote catcher, and a complete and utter waste of time.
We don't have a choice about whether we have drugs in our culture or not, that particular genie left the bottle decades ago.
The choice we have is whether or not we continue to let our governors kid us that a 'war on drugs' can ever be won, or they grow up and accept that drugs are here, and here to stay, and our choice is not to get rid of them, which we never will, but to control them, and use the money made to fund a proper health service for everyone.
It won't happen, because attitudes are entrenched, and no government ever wants to risk something today that will only bring benefit tomorrow, so we lurch on as we are.
Legalise drugs tomorrow, take control, get some revenue, get rid of criminals, be adult about what is going on around us.
Not in my lifetime, but maybe one day ...
jno, does not matter one iota who you trust, once it's legal and who ever is in charge erm will tax it and exploit it for more finds, not unlike tobacco, it would be new and people will have a go, then get bored
and go back to there ususal, booze ..iv seen what its like in amsterdam on a business trip, the locals are not really interested in it, same will happen here.
and go back to there ususal, booze ..iv seen what its like in amsterdam on a business trip, the locals are not really interested in it, same will happen here.
jno - // It's going to take a while to adjust a more drugged-up Britain //
That's my point - it would be a less 'drugged up Britain' because the street addicts and criminals would be gone.
It will take time, but hey, we've spent the last sixty or seventy years pretending that we can stop people taking drugs, and that hasn't worked, so it's time for a more rational adult response.
That's my point - it would be a less 'drugged up Britain' because the street addicts and criminals would be gone.
It will take time, but hey, we've spent the last sixty or seventy years pretending that we can stop people taking drugs, and that hasn't worked, so it's time for a more rational adult response.
Stableford - // Isn't a better to way increase revenue, rather than legalisation to increase fines for druggies? //
Since a very large number of serious addicts already mug and burgle to finance their habits, I don't think making them find more money with more mugging and burglary is the way to go, do you?
Added to the fact that failure to pay simply produces a prison sentence, draining the public finances even further with absolutely no positive end result, since drugs are even more rampant in prison than outside.
Since a very large number of serious addicts already mug and burgle to finance their habits, I don't think making them find more money with more mugging and burglary is the way to go, do you?
Added to the fact that failure to pay simply produces a prison sentence, draining the public finances even further with absolutely no positive end result, since drugs are even more rampant in prison than outside.
douglas - // Not sure if you've heard of the burgeoning underground supply of illegally imported cheap and counterfeit fags n booze Mr Hughes, but it's alive and kicking. //
I have, thanks for asking.
And there will always be counterfeits of anything that costs money for the real thing - but its impact will be a drop in the ocean compared to the revenue derived from properly taxed and controlled access to, as in your example - tobacco and alcohol.
You won't stop counterfeiting, but I could live with that if the government was billions of pound richer by making a few far-sighted decisions.
I have, thanks for asking.
And there will always be counterfeits of anything that costs money for the real thing - but its impact will be a drop in the ocean compared to the revenue derived from properly taxed and controlled access to, as in your example - tobacco and alcohol.
You won't stop counterfeiting, but I could live with that if the government was billions of pound richer by making a few far-sighted decisions.
^Vote Labour then, Andy, you know it makes sense...
https:/
https:/
