Why not allow all drugs?

[Oneeyedvic]

Further to the question below - why not the reverse. Why not make all drugs available at 24hour clinics free.

 

It would take away any stigma, would make it less attractive to rebellious kids (hardly exciting if it is free).

Would cut down crime it terms of less gang behaviour as it would be a free product, and drug takers normally only  commit crimes to get money for drugs.

Yes there would be a lot of people out of their heads, but so there is on a Friday / Saturday night.

You could also put in a clinic in this 24 hour place giving free counceling if wanted.

 

Would be self funding as money from police could be used to fund it. Governement can buy in wholesale at cheap rates direct from other governments.

I know it would never get through in principle but any thoughts?

[jno]

the downside I suppose would be that it's bad enough having to pick your way through crowds of drunks in the evening, but if there were psycho crack fiends in among them it would be even worse. And as for having them drive their BMWs round and round the M25... well, I'd rather they didn't.

[undercovers]

the war on drugs has been lost but I�m not sure about a full scale surrender � instead I advocate a pure and free supply of the most addictive drugs (heroin for example) being made available on prescription from a doctor (must satisfy doc that there is a need to prescribe e.g. they are addicted), and to further separate these users from their old, dangerous and criminal lifestyles they would have to report to a drop in centre where a nurse would administer the drug. These people could then maintain their health (as the supply would be clean � and in this form is not damaging), hold down jobs without the worry of were their next hit is coming from, and not commit crime to play for it. All in all the results would be a reintegration of a marginalised group into society, a reduction in crime, the destruction of criminal gangs (or at least a reduction in the money they can make), a reduction in use of the drug over a long term and I think a healthier attitude towards drug use.

[WaldoMcFroog]

There are obviously difficulties with legalising all drugs, but broadly, I actually agree. And, of course, legalising does not mean the same as actively promoting or putting them on sale in Tescos!

jno mentions people driving their BMWs around the M25 on crack. Surely that's no different to driving when pished, or stoned or whatever? We already have laws about this sort of behaviour. In fact, we should follow the continental model re: drink-agravated crimes of any sort; far from being a mitigating factor as is often claimed in British courts, you should get penalised harder. I believe this should be the case already.

The chief arguments for legalising all drugs are as follows:

1) We have lost the war on drugs. This is admitted by senior police.

2) Many people take drugs but cause no other criminal activity. Why make otherwise productive members of society into criminals?

3) The government would get tax from the drugs. This could be used to offset the social problems that do arise. Currently we all pay for it. Why not make the users pay for it?

4) In turn, it deprives criminals of a flow of money that also suppports other criminal activities such as prostitution and people trafficking.

5) Drug quality would be standardised. No more smack cut with rat poison etc. Proper targetted health information to users.

6) Not nearly so cool if legal.

And, just in case anyone thinks I have a vested interest, I will declare a few spliffs and a bit of acid in my youth but no desire whatsoever to indulge now. Nor do I wish to see people taking drugs everywhere or an increase in use. I believe that legalisation would reduce rather than increase drug usage.

Problems that I don't have an answer for include:

1) People coming to the UK specifially to take advantage of our drugs policies.

2) Having to deal with foriegn suppliers who are criminals!

[jno]

Waldo - no, no different from the current drunk drivers I guess (I don't really know if heroin, for instance, makes you drive worse than vodka) - but more of them; is that a good basis for repealing the drug laws? Present law does outlaw intoxicated driving but doesn't actually stop it happening.

Basically I agree on libertarian grounds with what you, vic and others say - except from the point of view of public health (from road safety to puking in the gutter). I foresee scope for a lot more Asbos.

[hannahjo]

I agree with many of the views above for both sides of  the argument, but a point that hasn�t been raised is the fact that it is thought that use of class A�s can lead to mental illness in some people. I�m sure the government wouldn�t want to be seen as thinking this is acceptable by legalising drugs. However this does come back round to the point that smoking also harms and kills, so why is legally acceptable for one drug (smoking) to do this and not another?

[admarlow]

anyone who has ever had any real exposure would know that leagalising drugs would be the worst thing EVER!, being 'cool' doesnt come into in. getting the buzz is what it is all about and if its free more people more often would be buzzing.

[PlainJane]

The present law (which has only been the law since the mid 1960s) is not working, and has given the criminal fraternity the distribution rights to drugs. Its a nice little earner for them, and seems reminiscent of the prohibition era in the USA. For so long as criminals control the supply of drugs then they will seek to generate more addicts to increase their profits.
Much low level theft, burglary, robbery (mugging) etc is committed by drug users needing to pay for their addiction.
My proposal would be similar to Oneeyedvic.
It should reduce policing costs, reduce crime generally, and the clinics would be clean, properly staffed, and it would also therefore reduce infection. The cllinics could double up as treatment centres. If the drugs were available free the criminals wouuld go ouot of busines, and woulld not bother to try to win new addicts so there would be fewer addicts.
All we need is a rational policy. which the present policy is not

[Oneeyedvic]

Hannahjo - to address your health question - this governement does not ban smoking, drinking, fatty food, high salt food, cars that travel over 70 mph, motorbikes etc etc etc.

jno - in vaious tests, tiredness has proved to be more dangerous than drinking - take the Selby Rail crash as a prime example (and incidently - waht would have happened if he just had a bad night's sleep - ie wasn't chatting on the internet - would he still have been found guilty?)

admarlow - I have had a few drugs in the past and have had the buzz. I took them becasue I was curious and because it was cool. If you went into a clinic for the first time and saw other users - would you carry on. If so, maybe its time for a bit of Darwinism

[admarlow]

people will go to the pub to buy alcohol and to estates etc to buy drugs, why not the clinic to get drugs?, it would create a whole new social scene.oneeyedvic, are you saying you wouldn't have tried the drugs if you had to go to the clinic

[admarlow]

plus where would the government get them from?

answer criminals in other countries ie cocaine from columbia! plus if u think we have immigration problems now, imagine what would happen if we started giving out free drugs!

[Gef]

The question is obviously tongue in cheek. If not it is the probably the most stupid question that I have ever seen.

[Oneeyedvic]

Gef - any particular reason that I win the best stupid question category in your opinion?

And just to confirm - as I said in the question, I know it will never happen, but I would like to found out why and what the reasons are.

 

I appreciate a couple of people have mentioned where to buy the drugs from - and I appreciate that it would not be ideal to purchase from criminals. I believe (and I am willing to be corrected) that most drugs can be recreated in laboratories, or potentially even grown in this country.

Also mentioned is immigration problems - but again this can be tackled by proper border controls and / or id required for the free drugs (similar to what they are talking about for NHS treatment)

You obviously have a variety of reasons as to why this is a stupid question. I am genuinely interested in your reasons.

[Gef]

Sorry Oneeyedvic, I should not have used the word "stupid". I just think that if there was a "free drugs for all" policy then many more people would try them. I don't think kids would find it less attractive because it was free - quite the opposite. Imagine what would happen if alcohol was free in the pubs every Friday and Saturday and available to all.

I hope I have not misunderstood your question.