Drug reclassification. A problem for our puritanical politicians.
This looks quite interesting. A committee of MPs have recommended a total revamp of our way of classifying drugs. Read more here.Interesting that tobacco and alcohol are high up there on the list. With all the changes taking place with smoking and drinking is it possible that there will be radical changes made? I can't quite see them being at the stage where they will ban either of those. But why make it a criminal offence to use ecstasy when both tobacco and alcohol score much higher in the harm stakes?
Of course the argument could be that making ecstasy, or similar, legal would lead to changes in their positions on the table. That may have a case but then the same case would undoubtedly stand for classifying alcohol and tobacco as it would reduce their harm. So, if it is about reducing harm they can't have it both ways. It's discrepancies like these that make people ignore the laws because they are based on our politicians views and not hard facts. As in alcohol equates to a class A drug but is not one and ecstasy is a class A drug but is a lot less harmful. Nearly everyone drinks in moderation so they equate it to their own experiences and think 'Screw them'. And who can blame them.
My view is that we should declassify all drugs. Let's treat them like commodities and make sure they are to a good standard and we get a tax input from them. Knowing our government and it's love of taxes the street price for most will probably rise.
A good idea, surprisingly from politicians, and needed doing before now. Bit of a problem for them though with alcohol and tobacco being so high up the table.
posted by Bag @ 12:57 pm
2 Comments:
The reclassification of tobacco and alcohol seems to be nothing more than a distraction to the actual aim of getting more drugs legalised.
Do you have to worry about getting a bad pint of lager that could kill you? Does taking a single alcoholic drink cause permanent changes to the brain? It's not at all clear that ecstasy is less harmful than alcohol- the last research I read about it (some time ago I have to say) indicated that it has a lasting effect on the very wiring of the human brain. Not quite the same as a glass of sherry.
The problem seems to be here that comparisons are made between those who abuse alcohol and those who take drugs.
The drugs situation might not make a whole lot of sense but in reasonable quantities alcohol has very mild neurological effects. The same cannot be said of the standard dosages of illegal drugs.
Even marijuana has permanet effects on the brains of teenagers who use it.
Legalising all drugs may seem like a reasonable solution to a problem that doesn't seem to make much sense but if this does cause horrendous problems, how hard will it be to make them illegal once more if Pandora's Box is opened?
It is a problem but my view is simple. These people are screwing themselves and taking them anyway. At least if they were legal we would get some tax revenue and this would help fund the NHS element of it. We would also get rid of the killer doses by making them meet standards. We could then put instructions on them for dosage and use. Most people would follow this. After all not everyone smokes russian cigarettes or drinks moonshine when they can have a little high using the milder legal ones.
The current policy is just not working. Jails are full of people who only have little doses of cannabis or cocaine. Save the jails for those that break laws that impact on others.
Let Darwin sort out the abusive drug users. Legal or not they will be going the same way.
Post a Comment
<< Home