The drugs problem

Pat494

Legendary member
Messages
14,614
Likes
1,588
I think the world Govts. need a re-think on the drugs problem. At present they unsuccessfully try to stamp out illegal drugs. Well this old approach has surely failed. About time the politicians recognised this fact. The situation in many countries, particularly South and Central America is dire. The drug gangs are so wealthy that they can buy police/political protection. They are out of all control.

I would suggest the better path is to recognise that the drugs problem should be managed properly and the billions in revenue should go to the state to fund health, education etc. Definitely not be wasted on criminal gangs.
 
Last edited:
I think most addicts would welcome this too. The quality of the drugs would be much better and programmes to control drug abuse could kick in when required.
 
legalisation does appear to be the solution ............counter productive to thinking but it would work eventually with tweaking
 
If they legalized marijuana and perhaps cocaine, they could tax it like cigarettes or alcohol and raise new tax revenue.

Think about it.....it would put the drug traffickers out of business and reduce our prison population. If it costs $30k a year to keep someone in prison for one year, think of how much money it would save.
 
The pharmaceutical companies would make clean versions of the drugs for less cost and they could be sold over the counter at pharmacies to anyone silly enough to want to buy them.

Of course there is the darker side - of politicians being bought by the drug lords to keep the present system going !!
 
If they legalized marijuana and perhaps cocaine, they could tax it like cigarettes or alcohol and raise new tax revenue.

Think about it.....it would put the drug traffickers out of business and reduce our prison population. If it costs $30k a year to keep someone in prison for one year, think of how much money it would save.


Very few people in the UK go to prison for possession only. If they do, sentences are generally short so financial savings would be very limited.

As far as traffickers are concerned - they are only a small group anyway. Think about it, both things can't be true at the same time - you can't say the drug war is lost and at the same time the prisons are stuffed with dealers.
 
Drug use was freely practised by those who could afford it during the 18th and 19th century and as far as I know it wasn't illegal. There didn't seem to be any dramatic impact on society but it did result in drug dens e.g. Chinese opium houses, but due to the working class's greater interest in acquiring food and other basic essentials it didn't become widespread throughout the population. It's very tempting to look at the legalisation of drugs if only on the basis that nothing else has worked and we might as well give it a try. My concern is that despite a regulated clean and economical supply, use would become widespread and we could well end up with a workforce of zombies with the rest of the population becoming unemployed zombies. And maybe the drug barons would move on to some other industry?

I wish I knew what the solution is.
 
Drug use was freely practised by those who could afford it during the 18th and 19th century and as far as I know it wasn't illegal. There didn't seem to be any dramatic impact on society but it did result in drug dens e.g. Chinese opium houses, but due to the working class's greater interest in acquiring food and other basic essentials it didn't become widespread throughout the population. It's very tempting to look at the legalisation of drugs if only on the basis that nothing else has worked and we might as well give it a try. My concern is that despite a regulated clean and economical supply, use would become widespread and we could well end up with a workforce of zombies with the rest of the population becoming unemployed zombies. And maybe the drug barons would move on to some other industry?

I wish I knew what the solution is.


I don't think there's a clear solution. War on drugs was always a messy title - a war is something that can be won, and the victory leads to peace (else, why fight it?). Sounds good for political vote-winning though.

Yes, of course the drug trade would turn to other means of income (tax evasion on legalised drug supply being just one sideline).

Drug abuse is illegal partly as it leads to physical self-harm. This costs the NHS a lot of money. There's no certainty that tax from a legalised drug trade and savings from scaled-back anti-drug trade enforcement would compensate for this. In any case, the drug gangs will move into another area of crime, requiring increased funding to combat this in its turn. Meantime, we risk an enlarged population of unproductive and injured drug-takers.

There's also the chilling thought that if you control an addict's supply, you control the addict. Do you really want a pharmaceutical corporation or government to have a hand in this?
 
From the replies above have we really " given up " enough to accept the status quo of back street dealing and drug smuggling ?

I should hope not.
 
Unbelievable replies as usual.

The reason drug use will never be legalised is glaringly obvious. You cant have a situation where One persons irresponsibility leads to another persons harm.
 
Unbelievable replies as usual.

The reason drug use will never be legalised is glaringly obvious. You cant have a situation where One persons irresponsibility leads to another persons harm.

Everyone must take responsibility for their own actions which includes drug use. And not be a burden on the NHS ( others ).
The " do-gooders" ( lovely people ) will never grasp the nettle on this one or other problems. So we all have to suffer - probably too much.
 
Everyone must take responsibility for their own actions which includes drug use. And not be a burden on the NHS ( others ).
The " do-gooders" ( lovely people ) will never grasp the nettle on this one or other problems. So we all have to suffer - probably too much.


Forget about the burden to the NHS/Prison/Courts etc all of that is skirting around the edges.

The central issue is, do no harm to others.
 
All drugs should be at the discretion of the user and free to choose and use.

Secondary crime is by far the bigger part of the problem not the primary use by users. Enough studies have shown this to be the case. NHS could supply the UK's drug habit for about £50m back in the 80s. I doubt it has risen much since then compared to cost of dealing with it now.

Man made laws on drugs are an absolute mind flux to any logic. :mad:
 
All drugs should be at the discretion of the user and free to choose and use.

Secondary crime is by far the bigger part of the problem not the primary use by users. Enough studies have shown this to be the case. NHS could supply the UK's drug habit for about £50m back in the 80s. I doubt it has risen much since then compared to cost of dealing with it now.

Man made laws on drugs are an absolute mind flux to any logic. :mad:

The only logical position is to protect the innocents from the reckless.
Thats why we have rule of law.

There are hundreds of thousands of examples where one persons anti social habit affects the lives of others. Sometimes terminally.
 
All drugs should be at the discretion of the user and free to choose and use.

Secondary crime is by far the bigger part of the problem not the primary use by users. Enough studies have shown this to be the case. NHS could supply the UK's drug habit for about £50m back in the 80s. I doubt it has risen much since then compared to cost of dealing with it now.

Man made laws on drugs are an absolute mind flux to any logic. :mad:


But the UK already recognises that adults have free will and may indeed choose to take illegal drugs: so, like I said above, and as we all know, its very very unusual for anyone to get a jail term for possession, i.e. for personal use. And drug rehabilitation is available.

As far as secondary crime is concerned, anyone who burgles or robs is a scumbag criminal. I have no reason to believe he wouldn't do it if he thought he could get away with it for some easy money whether or not he was on drugs.
 
Everyone must take responsibility for their own actions which includes drug use. And not be a burden on the NHS ( others ).
The " do-gooders" ( lovely people ) will never grasp the nettle on this one or other problems. So we all have to suffer - probably too much.

Definitely, not. Young people are targeted by drug pushers. I thank God that my kids and grandkids are free from the habit but a lot of parents are not in this fortunate position. If we do not protect thes youngsters, then we do not deserve to have them.

It's evil and cannot be condoned. It is a far, more serious world problem than Isis.
Any solution to it has to be tried, whether it be legal, or any other way, but whatever we do will only be provisional until the cartels think of something else.

There is far too much money involved for them to give up, just like that.
 
My idea would be for a type of open prison where an addict can enter voluntarily and be prescribed as much heroin (for example) as he wishes. He can stay as long as he wants and leave at anytime, providing he's been clean for 24 hours. Within this highly controlled environment, the addict can be closely monitored and efforts can be made to rehabilitate them. More importantly, they are separated from wider society where their drug use impacts others so detrimentally.
 
My idea would be for a type of open prison where an addict can enter voluntarily and be prescribed as much heroin (for example) as he wishes. He can stay as long as he wants and leave at anytime, providing he's been clean for 24 hours. Within this highly controlled environment, the addict can be closely monitored and efforts can be made to rehabilitate them. More importantly, they are separated from wider society where their drug use impacts others so detrimentally.


Who pays for this?
 
Top