Drug Policy

[ChavWivaLawDegree]

Or what about seroxat and other prescriptions drugs that are handed out like smarties?

[LizzygotDizzy]

People don't kill/mug/sell themselves/steal from houses/people (well not many people) in order to get their next glass/fix of rum, Seroxat, or cigarette, bit of a difference there peeps.

[*Bob*]

LizzygotDizzy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> People don't kill/mug/sell themselves/steal from

> houses/people (well not many people) in order to

> get their next glass/fix of rum, Seroxat, or

> cigarette, bit of a difference there peeps.

That's because they're legal and are available at relatively little expense.

[LizzygotDizzy]

*Bob* Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> LizzygotDizzy Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > People don't kill/mug/sell themselves/steal

> from

> > houses/people (well not many people) in order

> to

> > get their next glass/fix of rum, Seroxat, or

> > cigarette, bit of a difference there peeps.

>

> That's because they're legal and are available at

> relatively little expense.

Drugs are offered basically everywhere you go so they are not that hard to get and surprisingly not that expensive anymore, my point was someone would'nt go and mug someone for money or steal from them if they couldn't get money to buy the above items, I wouldn't mug an old lady for ?20 to go buy cigarettes or booze, whereas someone on crack would think nothing of mugging someone or whatever to get their next fix.

[*Bob*]

Lizzie, you're kidding aren't you?

Alcohol and tobacco..? Two of the most addictive drugs around..??

Swap all the currently illegal drugs with the legal ones and I think you'd soon change your mind.

[LizzygotDizzy]

dita-on-tees wrote:-

"But jesus I am so surprised by some of the views here - this is a forum that gets itself in rebellion over chain coffee shops, overpriced babyclothes shops, estate agents and carbon foot print issues, but drug abuse and smuggling nahhhhh thats ok. Eh??? One of my big bug bears is middle class attitudes to "recreational" drug use. Well unless drugs are now being sold in John Lewis, organically farmed in sussex by a nice farmer called John, then where do we really think our money goes when we purchase drugs. The drug industry, and it is a huge industry, is happy to sell dirt cheap heroin to kids who have to sell themselves to pay for it. Middlesborough has the highest instances of under age prostitution in the country and guess what, the majority are on heroin or crack. More often than not prices are supplemented by the people willing to pay more for it - ooh all those nice people with a bit of charlie after the carbon neutral organic dinner party. Ok some dealer dont push class a but where do you think they buy their stuff from??? Not John Lewis. I dont know how anyone with a social concience can contribute to the demand for this industry - the money all flows to a small number of sources, and these people arent all that nice

well thats me not able to attend any forum drinks......."

Guess she was right about the attitudes on here eh!

[Brendan]

LizzygotDizzy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>I wouldn't mug an old lady for ?20 to

> go buy cigarettes or booze,

You have obviously never had to deal with a person in the throws of physical alcohol addiction then.

Although you do have a very valid point. Crack if viciously addictive and the cravings can drive people mad. I have read a bit about it and it is because of the way in which crack addiction affects your brain.

It hardwires the pathways in your brain associated with pleasure to only react to crack. This is similar to heroine and nicotine except for this point: With heroine and nicotine you reach a level where with each dose the same pleasure/drug association in the brain is used, so the amount and frequency of usage generally levels out. With crack a new pleasure/drug association is ?hijacked? each time you use it so the level of addiction increases exponentially with each hit.

This is why it is almost impossible to be a ?stable? crack addict. You just keep spiraling deeper and deeper into addiction until you crash.

[ChavWivaLawDegree]

I don't think anyone would advocate drug addiction as being a positive thing and I think more than looking at which drugs are worse than others, we need to look at whether the current policy is actually doing what it was implemented for over 30 years ago and if not what we can do to make things better for addicts and the wider community.

[char1ie]

I love the way you have changed your stance on this thread Amanda. Can I ask what actions you intend to take to further your understanding of the challenges of drug law and rehabilitation? Have you thought about volunteering at a drug addiction treatment centre? Visit a needle exchange? Spend time with the police to talk about their views on drug crime? Talk to victims of crime?

It strikes me that you have more experience than almost anyone on this forum of the harm that drugs can do.

Charlie

[char1ie]

And on the subject of heroin prescriptions we were doing fine in the UK for most of the 20th century until 1965 when the law changed to only allow doctors with a Home Office licence to prescribe. Since then addiction and crime have gone up:

Heroin has been prescribed in England for the treatment of heroin addiction for almost 100 years. For many years, England was almost the only country where this occurred, and the British system was consequently the subject of international curiosity. In spite of this long history, very little research has been carried out locally, and until recently, there were no guidelines as to best practice. In 1965, it was decided that only doctors with a Home Office license could prescribe heroin. Since that time, the proportion of opiate addicts treated with heroin has greatly diminished, as has the number of doctors willing to prescribe. One doctor in particular remained an enthusiastic proponent of heroin prescription. His claims impressed some Swiss clinicians, who proceeded to establish a multicentre trial in Switzerland. This was followed by a similar trial in the Netherlands. These trials apparently indicated that a proportion of treatment-resistant opiate addicts could respond well to heroin, although the researchers' conclusions have been disputed. The National Treatment Agency in England is now developing guidelines for good practice based on this new information and is planning to set up some pilot sites. It is likely that practise in England will remain somewhat different from continental practice, particularly with respect to long-term supervised injecting. It is unclear how much funding will be released to support heroin prescription. Without adequate funding, it is likely to disappear.

[ChavWivaLawDegree]

"I love the way you have changed your stance on this thread Amanda" in what way?

I have had the same stance from the start i.e prohibition doesn't work, we need to look for alternatives eg legalisation/licensing and improve rehab and health access and outreach.

I think you need to cut down on whatever it is you are smoking!

I was on the Chaucer safer neighbourhood panel and the police hated arresting substance abusers and rough sleepers and had been implementing an unofficial policy of moving them on but putting them in touch with relevant charities and other agencies. they got flack for this off other panel members who wanted them to be 'tough' so I backed the local police's policy and it ended up being endorsed by the panel.

I also took this to the new Borough Commander when he had his community meeting on our Estate. I also used to bring up the inadequacy of rehab places at community council meetings every time the councillors brought up 'cleaning' up the streets.

I am still in regular (supportive) contact with people using drug addiction services and although they have stopped some of the appalling practices in the past, such as withholding methadone from addicts who test positive for drugs (er what are they there in the first place for??), there are still long waiting lists and even if you are arrested and go on a priority waiting list, it still takes over a month to get an assessment.

Have I explained that adequately for you and am I qualified enough for you, Charlie?

But what exactly is your stance as you seem to be all over the place?

[char1ie]

And the results of a three year trial in Germany of prescribing free heroin:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/5043766.stm

Charlie

[ChavWivaLawDegree]

Charlie - are you not playing anymore?

[Klaus]

LizzygotDizzy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> dita-on-tees wrote:-

>

> "But jesus I am so surprised by some of the views

> here - this is a forum that gets itself in

> rebellion over chain coffee shops, overpriced

> babyclothes shops, estate agents and carbon foot

> print issues, but drug abuse and smuggling nahhhhh

> thats ok. Eh??? One of my big bug bears is middle

> class attitudes to "recreational" drug use. Well

> unless drugs are now being sold in John Lewis,

> organically farmed in sussex by a nice farmer

> called John, then where do we really think our

> money goes when we purchase drugs. The drug

> industry, and it is a huge industry, is happy to

> sell dirt cheap heroin to kids who have to sell

> themselves to pay for it. Middlesborough has the

> highest instances of under age prostitution in the

> country and guess what, the majority are on heroin

> or crack. More often than not prices are

> supplemented by the people willing to pay more for

> it - ooh all those nice people with a bit of

> charlie after the carbon neutral organic dinner

> party. Ok some dealer dont push class a but where

> do you think they buy their stuff from??? Not John

> Lewis. I dont know how anyone with a social

> concience can contribute to the demand for this

> industry - the money all flows to a small number

> of sources, and these people arent all that nice

>

>

> well thats me not able to attend any forum

> drinks......."

>

> Guess she was right about the attitudes on here

> eh!

Middle class hypocracy regarding cocaine is, of course, daft. Coke's a horrible drug, both in it's effects on users and the way it's grown and distributed. As i said before, i think the law is correct on this one.

But please, for the purposes of this discussion can we can we stop lumping all drugs together: legal = good, illegal = bad.

[Klaus]

LizzygotDizzy Wrote:

> Drugs are offered basically everywhere you go so

> they are not that hard to get and surprisingly not

> that expensive anymore, my point was someone

> would'nt go and mug someone for money or steal

> from them if they couldn't get money to buy the

> above items, I wouldn't mug an old lady for ?20 to

> go buy cigarettes or booze, whereas someone on

> crack would think nothing of mugging someone or

> whatever to get their next fix.

Of course you wouldn't mug an old lady for a drink/fag. Lucklily, most of the country's drinkers/smokers have the same viewpoint. Similarly, most drugs (legal or not) have the ability to be taken sensibly and without harm to others by the majority of their users. The harm you do to yourself is a personal issue and i'd argue that 'recreational' drugs like cannabis and ecstacy are no worse in this regard than alcohol or tobacco.

By accepting alchohol, you are implicitly saying that it's morally ok for the public to get into a state of altered conciousness. Yet alcohol causes immense damage to society, ranging from personal relationships to city-centre violence to the burden on the NHS. Simply put, the law is hypocritical and directly causes a lot of the problems associated with drug usage.

Understandably, you're concerned about addicts commiting crime to pay for their habit. The vast, vast majority of drug-related crime is caused by heroin and crack users. By distributing these for free through special clinics you will wipe out most of this crime instantly. It will also greatly reduce the numbers of 'pushers' who deliberatly get vunerable people addicted in the first place (because they'll have no financial insentive). Legalising drugs will also greatly harm organised crime, from the the international cartels to local gangs. Surely a good thing?

[LizzygotDizzy]

Klaus wrote:-

"By accepting alchohol, you are implicitly saying that it's morally ok for the public to get into a state of altered conciousness. Yet alcohol causes immense damage to society, ranging from personal relationships to city-centre violence to the burden on the NHS. Simply put, the law is hypocritical and directly causes a lot of the problems associated with drug usage."

Erm, sorry Klaus, I don't recall saying anything of the sort! didn't say it was ok to go out in the world and get blottoed with alcohol, did say they would'nt go mug an old lady for the money to buy booze though.

[Klaus]

Most alcohol users drink sensibly and without harm to others, yet it's a dangerous drug. That's why it's legal, yet controlled. In practice it's the same with most 'recreational' drugs. Most cannabis users smoke to relax in the evening. Why should they be criminalised whereas someone having a glass of Shiraz in the same situation is perfectly fine?

The problems associated with these drugs are caused *exactly because* they're illegal.

[char1ie]

Playing?

Amanda, your first post said "I think all drugs should be legalised".

Charlie

[Brendan]

To be fair I don?t think she was trying to impose her views but was rather opening up the floor to discussion.

Who was it who said something to the effect of ?Only a fool believes he is right.??

Yoda I think it was.

[Asset]

I reckon some alchys would most definitely mug an old lady to buy some more booze and I bet it happens too.

Klaus - you assert that cannabis and ecstacy are ok and that coke is horrible, that is a personal opinion yes? Excessive use of anything is unattractive in its users usually. You cannot use the argument of the way cocaine is grown and distributed for it being an ugly drug as the same goes for hashish, there is a lot of crime around this drug too.

Moderation in all things is my motto!

[*Bob*]

When you say 'moderation in all things', eh Asset?

ie 'A bit of everything' mmm?

[Asset]

I suppose my moderation could be another's excess!!

[Brendan]

Actually stuff Yoda. I said that.

I would like it to be known that I am henceforth making myself available for the position of ?Philosopher in Residence?. I will require a 6 figure salary and a barrel (somewhere near the coffee machine) from which to work.

[Brendan]

Oh. I see we?ve moved on.

There is a difference between ecstasy, cannabis and cocaine Asset but it is not in their moral tax. The difference is that they are all addictive in different ways.

Oh and one of them makes you dance like a pillock.

[Asset]

it makes some people dance like a pillock yes, who remembers the teapot?