Legalising Drugs

Whilst I hate to bring it up, most of you lot are Posting what you may/not have read in the Press.

Oh, no…..not another “you’ve not smelt the cordite” post…

…well, you wait until somebody starts a thread about mugging old ladies…..then I ll have my say!!! 😉

Whilst I hate to bring it up, most of you lot are Posting what you may/not have read in the Press.
I had 30 yrs of dealing with people of all ages who were drug users or dealers. Most of the dealers don’t take drugs themselves.
You may have read this before from me, but for those who havn’t, I will tell the story again.
I went out with the C.H.P. in San Diego, whilst out on Patrol, we arrested a youth in a Mazda 323 from Colorado, and took him back to the Nick in S.D.
Whilst in there, there was a tremendous racket, shouting going on from the cell block, we went to see what was going on, and a Police Crew had arrested one of the largest “Coloured” chaps I had ever seen, more like a Gorilla than a man, several Officers were trying to restrain him, but he was HIGH on Crack Cocain. I actually saw this man take 5 Tazers without effect , and he was throwing Officers all over the place, like bits of paper.By sheer weight of numbers he was finally subdued. You have to have been, “In the job”, before sweeping statements can be made, regarding the legalising drugs.Addicts will use any means to fuel their habit, burglary, robbing, mugging, etc, etc.
No, leave things as they are, regarding the Law, but by all means stiffen up the Custodial sentances.
Just my opinion……………………..after dealing with it for 30 yrs
Jim.
Lincoln .7

Sadly, I think the days of the ‘free-at-source’ NHS are numbered…

…we (the taxpayer) simply cannot afford (even if we wanted to) to have people drink / eat / dope / smoke / sloth themselves into a critical condition and then have the NHS pick-up the pieces.

That raises another issue (another issue not really for this thread)…..the issue of identity, of ID Cards?

Anyway, I digress.

Interesting post, CD. When I posted earlier that he had made a good start it was too early in the morning to make a serious assessment of his clauses, and I jumped the gun. You have no done that effectively. A further problem occurs to me in connection with NHS treatment. It seems to me that you either have a system which is free at the point of use or you do not. Once you start to restrict use for various reasons related to an individual’s responsibility for their reason for needing the NHS, you change the whole basis for its existence.

No surgery or treatment for problems brought on by drug misuse…

But can they claim damages from the drug supplier?

Any crime caused by drug users is subject to a mandatory 5 year minimum prison sentence…

Using dugs will not be allowed as a valid excuse in law to get a lighter sentence…

Does the same go for people who commit crime when drunk? If not, why not?

They are entered on a drugs register and finger printed…

Anyone found dealing drugs should also have a mandatory term of 10 years to life…

Mandatory ten years / life for ‘dealing’ in a legal product? Who is going to supply these legal drugs if you get ten years / life for ‘dealing’; Boots-the-chemist?

And a finger-print register for all users? For something that is quite legal?

I know that you are suggesting these measures with the best intention but, seriously, they need to be a bit better thought-out. I am not any sort of ‘apologist’ for drug-use and am acutely aware of the damage drug-use does to society, both here and abroad, but I think most of your measures are simply unenforceable.

In terms of the self-harm people do with drugs (or alcohol for that matter) I see no difference between that being done with legal or illegal drugs (and actually some merit to legal drugs) so from that score I have no problem with legalising (some) drugs.

I also agree that legalising drugs would have a benefit to some areas of crime but legal drugs will still cost something (or who will manufacture and supply them) and plenty of crime is committed to fund legal habits. Will drug users ever have enough money for drugs (legal or not)? Legal drugs could be cheaper but wouldn’t that just increase their use?

And even if drugs are legal what is to stop the unscrupulous ‘watering-down’ (‘cutting’) the purity to increase their profits? So do we regulate drugs like alcohol? Who pays for that? Do we tax drugs?

Alcohol is quite legal but not cheap, not without health an social problems, and not free from criminal gangs making, distributing and selling, counterfeit spirits.

Just legalising drugs will not solve all these issues and the criminal elements, the large supply train, that distributed illegal drugs (and made a decent living from it) will not simply throw-up their hands and open a flower-shop…

…they’ll have to find something else to make a living at, something else to ‘push’…..and it won’t be flowers!

It’s no laughing matter!:rolleyes::eek:

go into the general pot

Ho ho ho!

You have made an interesting start, although as you well know taxes are not hypothecated so all the taxes we pay on each item go into the general pot, so your argument relating to tobacco taxes is not sustainable. And I am also a ex-smoker.
I am surprised you omitted the single most significant aspect of the proposition. Crime. I have not looked at the figures but illegal drugs are the basis for a high percentage of petty and serious crime. So, at a stroke, you remove a major cause.

As for alcohol I believe we have sufficient penalties for the misuse of that if we can find the resources to enforce them. Tobacco My view is as an ex smoker I have paid many times over for the tax I have had extorted by HMG to expect treatment for any damage I have or may have done due to this drug during nearly 60 years of smoking. I started when I was 7 and gave up when I was 66 I am 68 now

Can we add alcohol and tobacco use for all those clauses?