Thread: Legalise all drugs: chief constable demands end to 'immoral laws'

News from Wales, years ago a senior police manager up North made similar but not quite so radical comments, i.e. let the police focus on criminals instead of harassing pot-smokers:

One of Britain's most senior police officers is to call for all drugs – including heroin and cocaine – to be legalised and urges the Government to declare an end to the "failed" war on illegal narcotics.
Richard Brunstrom, the Chief Constable of North Wales, advocates an end to UK drug policy based on "prohibition". His comments come as the Home Office this week ends the process of gathering expert advice looking at the next 10 years of strategy.
In his radical analysis, which he will present to the North Wales Police Authority today, Mr Brunstrom points out that illegal drugs are now cheaper and more plentiful than ever before.
The number of users has soared while drug-related crime is rising with narcotics now supporting a worldwide business empire second only in value to oil. "If policy on drugs is in future to be pragmatic not moralistic, driven by ethics not dogma, then the current prohibitionist stance will have to be swept away as both unworkable and immoral, to be replaced with an evidence-based unified system (specifically including tobacco and alcohol) aimed at minimisation of harms to society," he will say.

...

Chief Constable says: legalise all drugs and end 'immoral laws'

Wrong forum - many on here seem to favour throwing all drug users in jail for however long local law stipulates (including indefinitely) ...because ...that's what the law says! Regardless of how draconian and stupid the legal system involved.

They're never going to stop it so should just get on with taxing, purifying & regulating the whole thing.

Everyone's a winnner.

Before anybody starts banging on about people suffering from taking drugs, think of this - it's their body to do whatever they like with & no concern of yours what they do with it (unless they are harming someone else) so mind your own business & stop telling other people what's best for them.

^
Agreed, but ideally we'd want people to take care of themselves, their bodies and mental state, just as they should be aware of the damage booze, cigs and sugar cause and act accordingly.


I believe providing factual information to citizens and packaging drugs in a way that encourages sensible use, together with a licensing system, is the way to go.

Originally Posted by stroller

packaging drugs in a way that encourages sensible use, together with a licensing system, is the way to go.

Spot on.

If people want to drink themselves to death or smoke themselves into oblivion after being given the proper facts then that is entirely a matter for them.

I don't care if people abuse their own bodies. I do care if their incoherent states cause suffering to others coz they rob and mug people, or get in fights and abuse folks, etc. Throw them in detox.

Tax them

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

I don't care if people abuse their own bodies. I do care if their incoherent states cause suffering to others coz they rob and mug people, or get in fights and abuse folks, etc. Throw them in detox.

I feel much the same way. But lets face it, alcohol is here to stay.

When was the last time you heard of a pot-smoker mugging people or starting fights?

Some people have no respect for the rule of law.

If you want to smoke marijuana, I suggest going to a community where it's allowed. It ain't allowed here; it ain't allowed most places. If, at some future point, the majority of people think it's OK, they'll pass such laws and then it'll be legal.

I'm amused at people who want to do things against the law (like tackling a state-sponsored torch relay in the name of some cause or another) and attempting to justify it as righteous.

Criminals with weak moral character and little to no discipline who can't live within the framework of their communities often feel put out. Harden up.

Originally Posted by stroller

When was the last time you heard of a pot-smoker mugging people or starting fights?

You don't they are normally to stoned

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

I don't care if people abuse their own bodies. I do care if their incoherent states cause suffering to others coz they rob and mug people, or get in fights and abuse folks, etc. Throw them in detox.

That really can depend on the drug of use jet

Originally Posted by stroller

i believe providing factual information to citizens and packaging drugs in a way that encourages sensible use, together with a licensing system, is the way to go.

i Agree stoller

Originally Posted by Texpat

Some people have no respect for the rule of law.

If you want to smoke marijuana, I suggest going to a community where it's allowed. It ain't allowed here; it ain't allowed most places. If, at some future point, the majority of people think it's OK, they'll pass such laws and then it'll be legal.

I'm amused at people who want to do things against the law (like tackling a state-sponsored torch relay in the name of some cause or another) and attempting to justify it as righteous.

Criminals with weak moral character and little to no discipline who can't live within the framework of their communities often feel put out. Harden up.

First, it is not disrespect for the rule of law to disagree with it and canvas for a change.

Secondly, what do mean by "It ain't allowed here" - the thread is about the UK.

Thirdly, you are trying to make this an issue of criminal activity and "weak moral character": kindly read the OP and what the topic is about - it is not a sign of weakness to speak out in public, like the chief constable did.

This is an example of free speech and discourse in a democratic society, curious you should advice those who disagree with existing law to go somewhere else as if they had no right to disagree or seek change in the society they are part of.
Seems your support for freedom and democracy stops when and where people have different opinions from yours.

Seems your support for freedom and democracy stops when and where people have different opinions from yours.

Not at all. Seek to change the laws if you don't like them as they are. But breaking them in the interim based on your opinion of what is right is criminal.

btw, its quite a stretch to link local drug laws with ideals of freedom and democracy. Good effort.

do gooders who have decided they have the right to impose their belief on what is good and not good for others

Communities make any number of rules to moderate civil societies:

helmets
seat belts
no shoes, no shirt, no service
age of consent
traffic signals
children in bars
smoking areas
immigration laws
marriage laws
prostitution
alcohol consumption laws

and drug laws

There are arguments for/against each of these and penalties vary widely across the globe. Ultimately, communities (the do-gooders and the do-badders) decide for themselves. Except for the criminals in jail who can't vote.

Originally Posted by Texpat

btw, its quite a stretch to link local drug laws with ideals of freedom and democracy. Good effort.

I have not done so, though the case could be made.

I asserted that the open discussion of legal issues is part of freedom of speech and democracy, which would be nice to indulge in without someone trying to denigrate those who partake in it as "criminals with weak moral character".

Originally Posted by Texpat

There are arguments for/against each of these and penalties vary widely across the globe. Ultimately, communities (the do-gooders and the do-badders) decide for themselves. Except for the criminals in jail who can't vote.

Agreed. Communities/local governments have the right to impose laws but that doesn't make them acceptable. Some are for safety reasons and subsequent health costs (helmets, seat belts, traffic signals and alcohol consumption laws). Some are for legal/contractual/national security issues (marriage laws, immigration laws). Some protect those too young to make informed decisions (children in bars, age of consent). Some to prevent annoying others (smoking areas). I have no issue with these.

The laws I have big problems with are the ones that are based purely on the moral beliefs of the do gooders (prostitution, drugs, sharia law). In this case criminalizing "illegal" drugs, the subsequent cost of enforcement and the miserable record in reducing drug usage have no place in so called enlightened society. Laws such as these can only be attributed to the imposition of religious, moralistic beliefs of others.

If enlightened societies want to make laws that really have a positive cost impact by reducing health problems then let them make fast foods illegal, pass maximum food consumption laws and tax the shit out of obese citizens. After all, obesity is a major cause of disease.

^ It's well within the rights of citizens to do that. Just as it's within their rights to determine certain substances should be illegal. Seems self-evident to me the majority agree with labeling certain substances illegal -- otherwise they wouldn't be. If tomorrow the government made mushroom omlettes illegal, there would be outrage, protests, hearings, testimony, and law changes. If that didn't work, those elected officials would be voted out. Remember prohibition?

Originally Posted by Texpat

It's well within the rights of citizens to do that. Just as it's within their rights to determine certain substances should be illegal. Seems self-evident to me the majority agree with labeling certain substances illegal -- otherwise they wouldn't be.

Gratefully as it relates to some of the "illegal" drugs, the moral "majority" are rapidly becoming extinct. Several states in the US have decriminalized marijuana usage and cultivation. More states are in the process of passing similar legislation. Expect other drugs will follow.

My arguments for legalization are not related to ones obligation to obey local law or face the consequences but rather relate to the OP which in summary says drug laws are equivalent to old style prohibition, unenforceable and ineffective. The good Welsh constable is not alone in law enforcement circles in his opinion. The "War on Drugs" (why do we have to call everything a War) has the same result.

My point is treat these so called illegal drugs like the drug alcohol.

Originally Posted by Norton

Several states in the US have decriminalized marijuana usage and cultivation. More states are in the process of passing similar legislation. Expect other drugs will follow.

I don't believe this is realistic, the DEA are busy adding more substances to the CSA as they are becoming popular.

Prohibition of drugs has never worked, and the illegal drug trade has thus become an emormous industry (one of the worlds biggest) putting untold billions of dollars profit into criminal hands, such as the Taliban.

It is so mind numbingly obvious, I tire of repeating it. Decriminalise drugs, and tax them like the legal recreational drugs of cigarettes and alcohol. Treat drug addiction as the medical and psychological condition it is.

The substantial money saved on law enforcement can be put to good use, the very substantial tax revenue gained also. Drug distributors would have to pay tax on their profits like other citizens also.

Most drugs are fairly benign in the average persons hands. The ones that are more of a problem to society- alcohol, PCP, and yaba/speed in particular- devote some resources to off the enormous revenues gained.