Reading another of the books that make up the series the wire "true stories" and the author makes a good case that the drug trade cant be beaten. He says in Baltimore about 100,000 are involved with the trade--- Dealers,suppliers,look outs,runners,users,safe houses,and robbers of the trade. To lock them up would be impossible and actually their prison system is full so most get 5 hits before they go inside (ifthey ever do).
So could it -- or should it ever be legalised ? could it be regulated , Policed, taxed ?. Would the benefits , be worth it?
I think even if legal "firms" would always be under ground selling "better gear" etc or cheaper as they do with fags and booze now.
Discuss or dont as is your thing.
0
Comments
Nobody should be allowed to live (and die) in the squalour portrayed in "Hamsterdam".
I think there is a case for legalising Class B/C drugs but not the hard stuff. Don't know too much about it all though.
If tobacco and alcohol had been "found" and started to be used in the last 50yrs then it would be illegal.
In fact there was a programme last year that listed of the top 20 or so drugs commonly available (both legal and illegal).
They were rated by a panel of scientists and various experts in their fields by addiction, damage they inflict, social impact and a couple of other categories and the top 10 were made up with "legal" drugs, such as alcohol, cigarettes etc
It smacks (no pun intended) of hypocrisy to me....
Should they be fully legalised abd availabel everywhere? No. Should we have a set up like the Dutch do? Yes
So as to the original question, some drugs are legalised, and some are not....there is a lot of money involved in both the legal and illicit trade in substances that change a persons state of being, there is no mystery in the notion that those with the upper legal hand (e.g. alcohol manufacturers) will use the law to suppress their rivals (e.g. crack cocaine dealers).
Years ago I volunteered for work with the St Mungo Community (homeless charity) and the squalour that springs from alcohol addiction equals the squalour that springs from addiction to other drugs.
Coming our way (already here) is the meth anphet (sic) as addictive as crack, mainly run by neo nazi gangs in the USA (coke/heroine by black and latino gangs). Its cheaper than the other two main drugs and can easily be made in someones hse.
In a smaller country as ours could we find a way to legalise some drugs and CONTROL its effects(on comunitys) and distribution ? who would have the front or the cash to go for it ?
Taking the crime out is the right thing to do, as done in Finland I believe. That might make our towns and cities better places for us non users to live.
The fact is the present systems that deal with drugs doesn’t seem to work. Maybe its time for a different approach.
Stopping people starting an addiction is the best way (stating the bleeding obvious) and god knows how that can be achieved. Educating the young is the first step and thats been done since the start of time, from there I havnt a clue.
Wouldn’t make the drug problem go away that’s for sure but at present its not only a criminal problem its also a public health problem.
Making drugs legal would almost certainly lead to a rise in drug users.
It will never happen though - never - because The War On Drugs is a massive industry - especially in America - where you have the absolutely bizarre situation of ultra conservatives advocating AGAINST the death penalty because they make shitloads more money from incarcerating people for life than they would for the few years they spend on death row before they're executed.
How can marijuana be illegal and "dangerous" whilst tobacco and spirits are sold freely?
Mind you think of the state on the economy if tax on booze and fags wasnt here ? If you had a tax on drugs (if we legalised it), that went to the NHS alone it must help, as at the moment we tax payers are paying for their treatment with nothing being payed in.
Bunny Colvin knows it makes sense: finest bit of TV drama ever?
Not really, think of all the moeny they'd have lost in tax.
however I do see both sides of the stories, we would have more adicks but we'd also have the money in order to treat those addicks properly and in the end firmly beleieve we would have less addicks come 20/30 yrs due to the money involved being spent properly on education and such. However we would have a 20/30 yrs of a free for all attitude especially in this country. The declasification on weed in Holland is a prime example of when it works, althou have you ever noticed how many 'dutch' ppl are actually in the smoking shops, even the ones out of the tourist areas?? Not very many atall, infact a smaller percentage of population smoke drugs in NL then in the UK. In the UK we seem to have a different attitude to drugs than the dutch, is this because of criminlisation of drugs or not??
If you go back to pre 2nd world war you could buy heroin and opium and such in fortland and masons, did we have more addickts per capita then than now?? No we didn't, and as prohibition of booze in the US proved, making something illegal doesn't mean you are stopping it, you just brushin the problem under the carpet and into the underworld, making things illegal doesn't mean you can stop them as being illegal you can not monitor the problem,
Make drugs legal and sort out the schl/NHS/social services with the taxation profits, aslong as they are monitored closly all drugs help will be present in the right areas, since they wouldnt be so taboo, you could properly teach ppl the side effects, and much the same as smoking now, uptake from tenagers is drastically lower than it was before, you can't open a mag/paper/watch the tv without being told how bad and 'uncool' smoking is.
The amount of crime committed so an addick can get their 'fix' is also enormous and this is what usually concerns the public in general, not the harm and suffering of the user but the price the non users pay in terms of muggings, thefts, burlgaries etc., and the cash rewards of illegal drug dealing is so high many people are prepared to risk becoming involved, and the supply of users is so readily available the market is always open to another punter...
To make drugs legal and have have government run drug user centres would go a long way to help clean up the dangers that users present, such as needles left lying about and the spreading of dangerous diseases, it would probably also help reduce the numbers of dealers too, but when it comes to the personal human suffering that druggies go through then there is no real answer or solution...
An amazing book, imho.
How can marijuana be illegal and "dangerous" whilst tobacco and spirits are sold freely?[/quote]
When the Corporations find a way to sell it without getting a bad reputation, or without it hurting other aspects of their business then it'll get legalised.
There is a strong if not overwhelming case for medical marijuana to be legalised to treat a range of diseases from cancer to MS, trouble is that would mean sales of other pain-relieving drugs would go down. Do you think the pharmaceutical companies will allow that?
Crystal meth (known over here as 'tina') has been widespread in London for two years now. It's pretty much the drug of choice amongst the gay community - 'cause apparently you can shag for up to 17 hours non-stop on it. I know top executives on 150k+ pa who spend every weekend off their noggins on crystal meth.
Prohibition simply doesn't work. Legalise everything, use the money you rake in on tax to pay for the healthcare of those who are heavily addicted (rather than the NHS having to cover it with money they could be spending elsewhere). You will be able to undercut the street prices anyway, as - even though they aren't paying tax or marketing - if you put more effort into catching the smugglers (as you can as you'll have less other drugs crime to deal with) it only taxes a few seizures to bankrupt the buggers or force them to charge more than the corner shop anyway. Whole thing is common sense. It's only a fear of how conservative old folks will react that has stopped governments from acting earlier. However, given how much drug use has spread since the mid-60s every decade sees a more "drug savvy" general population, which is why the percentage in favour of legalisation grows every decade. Sooner or later, there comes a tipping point when so many are in favour it, the goverment of the day stops chickening out and does what it should have done at the outset. All drugs will be legalised by (In The Year) 2025, I am convinced of it. Think how much easier the war against the Taliban would be if it was governments rather than criminal gangs controlling the world's heroin trade?
1. if you sell this stuff in legal, licensed locations you will have to have legislation and enforcement covering purity/stregnth of the product - this all smoney that illegal suppliers will not have to spend
2. You will only undercut them if you reduce their supply. However by allowing the drugs in legally to the UK you make it a lot easier for illegal smugglers to get their shipments in, meaning the costs of this kind of enforcement will increase drastically.
3. By giving a legal base for import this close to mainland europe you will presumably greatly increase the pressure on border forces to stop exports to the continent where (unless you assume the EU make it legal) the drugs will still be prohibited as well as inviting a larger cadre of criminals to setup shop here as a base of operations to smuggle stuff to the rest of europe.
I also can't see the value of the alcohol/tobacco arguments either. The logic that we should legalise this stuff because booze and fags are just as bad is right out of the 'two wrongs make a right' school of thinking that I presume most of us learnt was pretty dodgy thinking quite early on in life.
sorry but count me into the keep them illegal camp.
yet you cannot die ... of mary jane, unless you drop a big chunk of it from a very tall building and it falls on your head....
the whole thing stinks....
Alchohol is a class A no doubt but its socially acceptable to puke and fall over and fight and all the rest of it....
the black budget ....
who do you think is really making the money here...
Bill hicks .... genius...
We have SOOOO many problems with our society this is just one.....
"I was walking threw new york the other day ... and Im doing this bum hurdle, looking at this guy who could be dead.... and i thought to myself, maybe our system doesnt work.."
and one more because im pissed...
"why not take all that money that we spend on weapons and defence each year, and instead spend it feeding, clothing and educating the poor of the world, which it would many times over, not one human being excluded, and we could explore space, together, both inner and outer, for ever, in peace.'
and a slightly deeper one guys....
I think it's interesting the two drugs that are legal - alcohol and cigarettes, two drugs that do absolutely nothing for you at all - are legal, and the drugs that might open your mind up to realise how you're being fucked every day of your life? Those drugs are against the law. Coincidence? See, I'm glad mushrooms are against the law, cos I took 'em one time, you know what happened to me? I laid in a field of green grass for four hours, going, 'My God, I love everything.' Yeah, now if that isn't a hazard to our countries...How are we gonna justify arms dealing if we know we're all one?
Bill Hicks
good book
I'd sell drugs through pharmacies.
That sounds like a Top idea BFR !
"Sheeeeeeeeeeeeit"
America is never going to be able to be forward-thinking when there's an evangelical church opening every two days. The UK Government needs to make a move sooner rather than later.