Want to cut crime by two thirds in 6 months?

[spindrift]

The statement provoked an immediate reaction from academics and from within the nursing profession, with many saying that this was a "slippery slope" which could see the state subsidising other addictive drugs such as cocaine.

 

However there is emerging research that this strategy can work. Pilot studies run by academics at King's College's national addiction centre suggest that allowing users to inject heroin under medical supervision could cut local crime rates by two-thirds in six months.

 

Of 127 users involved in the pilots, three-quarters "substantially reduced" their use of street drugs, while their spending on drugs fell from £300 to £50 a week. The number of crimes they committed fell from 1,731 in three months to 547 in six months.

 

Users were offered a range of support, including psychological therapy, and typically attended the clinic up to twice daily, seven days a week.

The cost was about £15,000 per patient per year, compared with prison costs of £44,000 a year, researchers behind the pilots said.

 

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/apr/26/prescribe-heroin-nhs-nurse-rcn

[libuse]

When you look at it like that, it's hard to imagine any rational person (trolls notwithstanding) being able to find any sensible objection.

 

When I worked in an aligned industry I found it mindblowing that the idea wasn't ever under government consideration, its not like we don't already sanction certain dangerous addictive substances. The crime reduction element alone is phenomenal; In 4 years of working in an environment providing services to offenders, I only ever met one service user - one - whose acquisitive offending wasn't to fund his habit. Thats out of maybe four or five hundred. I'm aware that this is anecdotal, but I've no reason to believe that my experience was a blip

[rubydazzler]

I'd support it definitely. The accepted way of dealing with the drug users obviously isn't working and the problem is worse year on year.

 

I've always supported the idea of bringing 'hard drugs' into the light where they can be controlled and produced under proper conditions. Soft drugs like speed and weed, should be treated the same as cigs and alcohol as I can't see any real difference between the latter, tbh.

[spindrift]

On a purely selfish level, I'd rather addicts got a safe, clean supply than nick my car stereo!

[Halibut]

I'd support it definitely. The accepted way of dealing with the drug users obviously isn't working and the problem is worse year on year.

 

I've always supported the idea of bringing 'hard drugs' into the light where they can be controlled and produced under proper conditions. Soft drugs like speed and weed, should be treated the same as cigs and alcohol as I can't see any real difference between the latter, tbh.

 

Wow. Respect to you Rubydazzler. What a pleasant surprpise.

[donkey]

Another benefit of this approach would be that because the profit was taken out of heroin dealing, there would be less heroin available to non addicts, and therefore a reduction in the number of new addicts.

[SHsheff]

Yep that'd be OK, they'd have to have chosen to get addicted, anyone who gets addicted to anything because of treatment in one form or another would be exempt.

 

And..how about an ex-SAS soldier, who had turned to alcohol to help him over the trauma of his service and became more reliant when he couldn't get a job in civvy street because actually, his skills in the real world were worthless and he had no experience that employers were interested in? Would his addiction be classified in your world as being 'chosen'? And, how about a girl (your daughter, my daughter, your niece) who had run away because of teenage stuff at home (I hate you, you won't ever let me do what I want!) and had inadvertently stayed that first night with some mates who said, have a go with this, it'll make you feel better (and after a couple of cans of cider, feeling miserable, alone and rebellious, she'd tried it)?

 

Do you REALLY think that any addict started off with the intention of becoming addicted?

[spindrift]

Another benefit of this approach would be that because the profit was taken out of heroin dealing, there would be less heroin available to non addicts, and therefore a reduction in the number of new addicts.

 

Exactly.

 

In The Netherlands, where heroin is prescribed, the average age of addicts is rising.

 

In the UK, the average age of heroin addicts is falling.

 

Prescribing heroin means fewer addicts, as well as a massive boost to the cops and the NHS.

[MAMALOCHA!]

Having first been against this idea on previous threads, I'm beginning to warm to the idea if it helps reduce crime and burden on our public services.

[rubydazzler]

Wow. Respect to you Rubydazzler. What a pleasant surprpise.

I am from the 60s, after all. My g-g-g-generation 'invented' drugs as a weekend pastime, so they say

 

I wouldn't be happy if one of my kids/relatives became an addict, obviously, but if all drugs were produced under proper conditions and sold either at chemists or in a tobacconists, I'd be a lot less worried about the effects on their health and wellbeing.

 

Decriminalising and regulation would not only reduce the incidence of petty theft, but also of street prostitution and the associated dangers to the girls. Most of the working girls are only on the game because someone's addicted them, it's not exactly a career of choice.

 

It sounds like a win-win to me.