Think Tank 'thoughts' on UK drug policy

[????]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8175550.stm

Discuss

[SteveT]

How will it work are they going to 'vet' the dealers to get local government or police approval will they have to carry drug passes?

[mockney piers]

Study after study has shown that the only way to reduce levels of use os to plough to

e and effort (hance obviously money) onto the social side of social care, treat addiction and education.

Sadly it's a nn starter politically hence we carry on pouring resources into customs and policing which has consistently done little more than paper over the cracks.

But as with all solutions that are difficult, long term, hard to quantify and downright unsexy (leaving alone the soft on crime inference among daily mail readers) it's unpopular politically.

Leave alone that the police have been saying this for years, leave alone that nabbing some teenage dealer achieves little but to put another kid in the incredibly damaging juvenile secure estate system. ...

God what a bleeding heart liberal I am ;)

[????]

...then that leads us back to legalisation

God what a bleedin' heart libeterian I am ;-)

[????]

The fact that many of the 'elders' are in jail or dead also leaves us with 14, 15 and 16 year olds with guns running the streets - Lord of the Flies stuff. Anyone read the 'Freakeconomics' chapter on drug dealers, 'Why most drug dealers live with their moms(sic)"? Fascinating stuff on the economics of drug dealing.

[mockney piers]

If we're talking decriminilisation then we' re on the same page (god I hate that expression).

Is that libertarian or just plain liberal.

That was rhetorical btw ;)

[louisiana]

Yes Quids, that was a fascinating account of young drug dealers.

We heard again the claim this morning on the radio (BBC R4) that it's 'under control', but perhaps my idea of control and theirs differ substantially. I feel if they had to provide a complete account, including all the adverse social and economic consequences their policies, it would be clearly be seen how seriously their policies have failed to date.

[ratty]

I feel quite qualified to talk on this subject, having worked in substance use for the last 12 years.

Sadly I have not got a bleeding clue what to do about it! :( One thing though, it is far from under control. The Anti Social Behaviour and violence / misery surrounding the heroin / crack underclass is shocking and is pretty much totally ignored by the police imo! :(

[Asset]

legalisation and education.

[mockney piers]

Very fair point ratty, I noticed I kept using the word solution when in reality there is none, perhaps improvement was the word I was looking for.

[Huguenot]

I don't see a reason why drugs shouldn't be treated like any other commodity, and in that sense I think that you guys are taking too local a perspective.

If we can legislate against Blood Diamonds, we can legislate against Blood Snort.

You'll struggle to encounter a nipper on the street who would fight for Blood Diamonds, but they'll be oh so keen to glam it up with their mates to show off a talc moustache.

In that sense I concur with Mockney on education, but consider social care and treatment to be regressive policies that are self-perpetuating. You're treating the symptoms, not the disease.

[mockney piers]

Indeed, but it's those symptoms thy affect the quality of life for everyone, whether in the spirAlmof poverty an violence on the streets or whether you have your tires nicked or get scammed for cash in Barry rd.

No ne has cone up with a cure in the half a century we've been fighting this 'war on drugs' if you have any suggestions I'd like to hear them.

Diamonds are a much much smaller Market and more easily legislated for, not least because the product itself isn't illegal.

[Huguenot]

Well, you know me.

I'd be happy with 48-sheets on roads and tube stations showing dismembered corpses in the Colombian jungle, with a tag line saying 'That was fun wasn't it? Fancy a shag?'

I don't think it's fair to characterise recreational drug taking as a clinical issue that needs resolution through the NHS.

Your average housing estate dealer isn't watching an ECG, he's buying stolen BMWs and putting neon lights underneath.

[mockney piers]

Well I'm with you there. Iguess we need to differentiate the difference with drug use ground on social ills and purely recreational use (assuming just for a moment that there's no grey area).

The former requires social help and attention from outreach trams to urban regeneration, the latter needs decriminalisation.

We know we can't halt supply or demand and education will only achieve so much. I knw plenty of folks who will buy organic bacause of the thought of suffering chickens but will do a guilty shrug at the thought of the suffering the cocaine trade causes before tucking into a line.

[SeanMacGabhann]

Is this not also true of legal commodities such as cheap clothing/sneakers etc?

[Moos]

Sean, I think you could argue that many people will do the guilty shrug for the things they aren't prepared to give up.

If you have enough spare cash, it's no great sacrifice to give up battery eggs and intensively farmed meat. Likewise, if locally produced organic cocaine were available (sold in little hemp bags) then I'm sure the well-off consumer would tuck in and happily boast about it at dinner parties.

The same applies to clothing. If there were a universally accepted kite-mark style grading system for high-street clothes and it were relatively easy to choose between Naughty Clothes and Good Clothes, then the pressure on large suppliers to get better grades would be tremendous. But asking the average consumer to buy all their clothes online from expensive and relatively unknown ethical brands is not going to happen.

Sorry M. Chair - a little off topic there.

[SeanMacGabhann]

I never said anything about buying expensive clothes

And nor am I picking on people with small incomes - a lot of well off people go mental in Primark

I was just tying in with Piers point that the legality of drugs (or otherwise) doesn't help the exploitation across the chain, but legalising it won't necessarily help on that score

I don't know what the solution is but agree with everyone who says that what we are doing clearly isn't working - and that it should be possible to explore (like Bunny!) alternatives without a tabloid frenzy. SHOULD be possible, But obviously won't be

[Moos]

Goodness me, I had no idea I was disagreeing with you - I just thought you had made a point that one could apply more widely.

I agree that legality doesn't affect the argument at all - my point was simply that if you can easily afford to be ethical, then many people will pay more to do it but will not sacrifice the item altogether.

Back more directly on topic, programmes that tackle poverty can surely be tools in helping people stay away from drugs without being politically unacceptable? After all, the 'Bunny' experiment wasn't about helping drug addicts but about helping neighbourhoods live without a drug problem..

[mockney piers]

I know what you're getting at Mou? but I think it's off the mark to say legality has nothing to do with it. As muh as there is lamentable exploitation of labour in countries less inclined to care (though no worsethan here a century ago) you don't find sweatshops bombing each other in turf wars or so rich due to artificaly inflated prices that they can take on the government.

Mexico have just committed more troops to one border town that is effectvely a war zone, than the uk have to Afghanistan and there have been 20000 deaths in the multifacted drug wars there in the last two years alone.

International decriminilisation would go along way to ending that sort of violence, suffering and the accompanying corruption.

[bignumber5]

Whilst I see the points behind the concept of addiction itself as fuel to the trade, I have to confess to getting a little bored of the constant stream of unrelenting wooly symapthy for those involved at street level. I'm not claiming for a second to understand the precipitating circumstances of each and every individual, nor do I think that the trade is dented for more than a second by putting a 17 year old dealer behind bars, but the concept that one can take a premeditated act with long term consequences for all involved that is against the law and absolve the involved parties on the grounds that "there's a bigger picture, that's where we should focus our efforts" does not ring true to me. Because it has significant implications regarding a variable tier of laws and their significance, and continues down a line of individuals failing to take any responsibility whatsoever for their actions which, though potentially politically and ethically appropriate for the issue at hand, sets a dangerous standard. I come down on the bleeding heart liberal side 95 times out of 100 on this forum, but I think this is a situation where 50/50 is more called for: I agree that targetting social welfare, poverty, unemployment and addiction will have profound effects on the drug trade, but I'm not sure ignoring the traders in the meantime is necessarily constructive, regardless of how pitiable their circumstances may be.

[mockney piers]

blimey, paragraphs!

I don't think anyone was suggesting a woolly stream of anything BN5. For my part I was mewrely suggesting that there are patently a great deal of social problems. I don't want to hug a hoodie, but i do want crime to reduce.

I think i was getting at the point that curing addiction is a good route to that, and if you have ?30k to spend in a year, then we can either spend it sending one oik to prison (actually including court costs, transportation etc etc it's alot more than that) for a year keeping him off the street, or we can fund one outreach/social worker and some facilities that may get five people off their addiction or off the street with it's consequent petty crime and/or violence that year.

simples economy stupid, to quote a half clinton half meerkat.

[Damian]

I think durgs (ALL drugs) should be legalised.

The demand will never be supressed and the current legal situation means that this demand can only be satisfied by those who are ready to disrespect the law and there's plenty of them. This market is simply left to criminals or those who are ready to become criminals.

[????]

I almost agree, but feel that from personal experience I would have indulged a bit more than I did - which would not have been a good thing - if i could have just gone down the shop for some Coke for example. Not fear of the law just that shitty waiting around fot 'the man' was always a big deterrent for me......I could never be arsed to chaise drugs(see what I did there) but if they were there I tended to partake.....

[Marmora Man]

Libertarianism would make all drugs legal. Then it becomes a matter of public health policy not a criminal matter, with campaigns to warn of the medical dangers of drug use. Legalisation and taxation would change the dynamics of the trade.

Poppy farming in Afghanistan would become a legal enterprise, as would cocaine production in Columbia and other drug producing centres. This would free up a lot of resources to concentrate on more worthwhile causes such as eradicating hunger and poverty.

Of course it wouldn't be that simple but that should be the point to aim at.

[brum]

Another point in favour of legalisation is that drugs weren't the problem they are today when they were available legally on prescription, up to the mid-1960's.