The drugs policies don't work
By Mark Vernon on Saturday, October 31 2009, 07:15 - In the news - Permalink
![]()
The latest drugs row here in the UK - resulting from the home secretary sacking the chief drugs adviser - is surely a proxy war. The real issue is not whether drugs policy should just follow the science, which it clearly shouldn't because there are more subtle issues involved than empirical research alone can reflect. (This much Professor Nutt, as the adviser is called, himself unwittingly confirmed when he said taking ecstasy is no more dangerous than riding a horse: I know which activity I'd prefer my daughter to engage in at the weekend.) Rather, the issue that no-one quite tackles is that the legally sanctioned drug of alcohol is far worse for people and society than several of the recreational ones also widely available.
That said, I don't myself believe that legalizing drugs would fix it, as liberals are wont to advocate. You see enough of drugs on the streets of London where I live, legal and illegal, not to want the obviously highly leaky stopper of criminality removed entirely - as if the criminals would just disappear and their clients would resort to some drug-free state of nature. The other truth that gets mislaid during such rows is that, when it comes to the drug problem, there's no magic pill.










Comments
Trials in Portugal would suggest that legalising drugs works.
This is a complicated issue, of course, but the case for decriminalisation gets more compelling as more countries experiment with it as a political option. The Economist's Frances Cairncross recently advocated decriminalisation as a serious consideration; it's the second time the Economist has explored the issue. Without wanting to dig into this too far, my general impression is that prohibition creates criminal opportunity. It certainly did with alcohol. And as the previous commenter notes, Portugal has enjoyed significant reduction in drug usage since bringing in its new policy.
If your concern is that the removal of the illegal "stopper" allows drugs to reach a wider audience (which is a reasonable concern), I would ask you to consider whether heroin would be a bigger or a smaller market if it was being supplied cheaply behind a barrier of bureaucracy versus being supplied by criminal cartels who profit from encouraging its use. This for me is an important test case in considering the merits of decriminalisation, although as with all of the complex political issues, this one cannot be pre-empted and the debate is certainly worth having.
Best wishes!
Chris - I don't think usage in Portugal has actually decreased, but it certainly hasn't increased and the adverse health issues are seriously on the decline.
Chairman Bill - this article at Scientific American suggests they have decreased:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/a...
As does this article from Time:
http://www.time.com/time/health/art...
A brief quote from the latter: "...in the five years after personal possession was decriminalized, illegal drug use among teens in Portugal declined and rates of new HIV infections caused by sharing of dirty needles dropped, while the number of people seeking treatment for drug addiction more than doubled."
There are other factors here, but the main story here is that decriminalisation achieved all its goals in Portugal, and none of the predicted negative consequences have emerged.
Hope this info is of interest! :)