Phanerothyme Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 It's the UKDPC this time - read it here: http://www.ukdpc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/a-fresh-approach-to-drugs-the-final-report-of-the-uk-drug-policy-commission.pdf I don't understand this fetish for decriminalisation - it's half baked. Only legalisation and regulation will have the desired twin effects of a body blow to organised crime and harm reduction accross the user spectrum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magilla Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 Not really a surprise, common sense prevails. Not that I expect the government to actually do anything of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kinetic Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 I've been reading David Nutt's new book "Drugs - Without the Hot Air" (well worth reading btw!). His position too is decriminalisation, and like you I couldn't get my head around it. Many of the major drug problems he identifies earlier in the book are linked (by him) towards the trade being controlled by organised crime and being unregulated (everything from violence, to purity/overdoses, how drug escalation and even addiction occurs). So I thought it was a strange position to take. Thinking about it a little bit more I'm wondering if he's taking that position because it's a stance that would sit easier with the middle majority (I think somewhere in the book he mentions over 50% of people surveyed agreed that some drugs should be decriminalised). Stating you think the government or private companies should start manufacturing, taxing and selling drugs in pharmacies or specialised drug stores is a far harder sell (for the majority of the public, most of whom are quite happy to pop out and buy a 12 pack from the supermarket!). I think he may be aware of this and sees decriminalisation as a first step towards eventually legalising and regulating drug sales. That's conjecture on my part, its just that a lot the points he makes in the book don't tally with his decriminalisation stance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glamrocker Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 Why should anyone pander to criminals,you do drugs you break the law you are criminals..... end of...funny the forums usually up in arms when someone on benefits fiddles a little..the word hypocrisy rears its ugly head..I would sooner have someone who fiddles a bit living next door to me than a smack head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 I would sooner have someone who fiddles a bit living next door to me Then you'd live next door to a criminal too. Edit; I'd also like to add that the rest is nonsense also, but I'll let others deal with that. Anyone with any common sense can understand that current drug laws aren't fit for purpose. Prohibition is an abject failure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magilla Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 Why should anyone pander to criminals The law as it currently stands panders to criminals, the fact that some drugs are illegal is a requirement for them to be able to make money. you do drugs you break the law you are criminals..... end of... Obviously, since the law states that the drugs in question are illegal, the point of this latest report is whether they should be illegal and whether the illegal status is justified. The authors of the report (and other reports in the past), would seem to suggest the current drug laws aren't justified. £3-4bn a year is a lot of money to waste for little or no gain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glamrocker Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 Then you'd live next door to a criminal too. Edit; I'd also like to add that the rest is nonsense also, but I'll let others deal with that. Anyone with any common sense can understand that current drug laws aren't fit for purpose. Prohibition is an abject failure. Of course I would but I would feel a hell of a lot safer,why do people feel the need to muck about with what is basically the greatest computer ever thought of ,sooner or later drugs and that includes legal ones will cause damage to said computer ..do you honestly think that decriminalizing drugs will do away with dealers,at the present the smuggling of tobacco and spirits ,legal over here ,is costing the country billions and prisons are full of smugglers,if y'all think the powers that be will legalise drugs without the lions share going on in taxes hence feeding the black market ..well...the drugs have already addled your brains Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 Of course I would but I would feel a hell of a lot safer Why would you feel safer than living next door to a heroin user? why do people feel the need to muck about with what is basically the greatest computer ever thought of I presume this metaphor is referring to the human body? Why "muck about" with it? For many reasons, from the personal to the pointless. Pleasure, ultimately, is why I use drugs. I had some with my sunday lunch - in liquid form. Breton cider. do you honestly think that decriminalizing drugs will do away with dealers No. Legalising them will. at the present the smuggling of tobacco and spirits ,legal over here ,is costing the country billions I don't accept that. I buy my alcohol from reputable dealers - pubs, mainly. Even if it is "billions" - that could be around 1% of the alcohol/tobacco economy. The figure needs context. the drugs have already addled your brains End on an insult. I like it. Keep it consistent. Don't use them all up too soon though. By page 10 you might need to repeat them all again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewheeldave Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 Why should anyone pander to criminals,you do drugs you break the law you are criminals..... end of...funny the forums usually up in arms when someone on benefits fiddles a little..the word hypocrisy rears its ugly head..I would sooner have someone who fiddles a bit living next door to me than a smack head. No-one's advocating 'pandering to criminals'- except of course, people like you who support the current position of drugs being illegal, which ensures the production and selling of drugs is entirely in the hands of criminals who, as a result, get all the profits. So, why do you support this "pandering to criminals"?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magilla Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 So, why do you support this "pandering to criminals"?? Quite, virtually every drug related issue to society is as a direct result of their prohibition, not in spite of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.