Quote:
Originally Posted by clive milne
Honestly answer this simple question:
To what extent has the legal status of any substance influenced your choice to either take or not take it?
A recent study by the UK government across a number of countries has confirmed that there is zero correlation between the severity of drug laws and the use of drugs in those countries.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-29824764
Two interesting examples stand out. Since Sweden toughened its drug laws, the consumption of drugs in that country has increased. Portugal on the other hand, decriminalized the possession of all drugs (even heroin) and now has a lower consumption of drugs amongst its population than before.
I think any rational attempt to understand the problems associated with drugs, (assuming the intent is to minimise the damage they do to society) must make a clear distinction between the harm that the drugs actually do and the harm that is done by attempting to police the issue. ie) the billions spent on law enforcement and the creation, enrichment & empowerment of criminals.
The war on drugs has not resulted in any tangible benefit to society but has come at an extraordinary cost.
By any metric I can think of it is an abject failure, so why not consider the words of Albert Einstein:
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. |
I believe that in Australia the consumption of legal drugs is decreasing while the consumption of illegal drugs is increasing.
When considering the harm drugs do you need to consider not just the drug but also the circumstances under which it is consumed. There is a huge difference between a well fed person consuming too much booze in their home and then sleeping in a warm bed and a homeless person, who has been dumpster diving for dinner, drinking the same amount and then sleeping in the local park. And if it's metho they drink the problems are far far worse. Similarly there have been numerous rock stars (and presumably other wealthy people who fly under the radar) who have had a major addiction for years, even decades, and have managed to stay relatively healthy. They have been able to afford pure heroin and clean needles while still being well fed and housed. Of course they would be better off without the drugs but they don't go downhill nearly as quick as the addicts in your local slum. If harm minimization is the aim this is a real consideration.