Pubdate: Mon, 17 Dec 2007
Source: Irish Independent (Ireland)
Copyright: Independent Newspapers (Ireland) Ltd
Contact:  http://www.independent.ie/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/213
Author: Patricia Casey

WHY WE MUST THINK TWICE BEFORE LEGALISING DRUGS

Cocaine has scarcely been out of the news in recent  weeks and tragic 
deaths have led to calls in some  quarters for drugs to be decriminalised.

The arguments are as follows: most of the problems  attached to drugs 
relate to the criminal gangs  involved. If these were removed, the 
drug content and  purity could be monitored, gangland crime would be 
redundant and the state would acquire revenue from the  taxes.

In addition, users of "soft" drugs would not have  contact with 
traffickers and so would be less likely to  be lured into "hard" drug use.

The impact of prohibition in the US is cited as a  lesson that we 
should learn from, when the ban on  alcohol from 1919 to 1933 
resulted in little change in  consumption and the growth of gangs 
around its illicit  production and sale.

Those of libertarian persuasion have additionally  contended that, if 
people choose to harm themselves,  then it is their own affair, 
provided nobody else is  harmed.

Appealing though these arguments are, they remain  superficial and 
poorly conceived.

Prohibition in the US occurred in the context of other  bordering 
countries, such as Mexico and Canada, not  having any such 
restriction, making the importation of  alcohol easy.

There was little popular support for the measure and  alcohol had 
been a legal substance in most states  before that, so the 
restriction was new and unwanted.

Illicit drugs are of a different order, since they  remain illegal in 
almost all countries worldwide, for  the very good reason that their 
harmful effects are  recognised internationally.

So nations are willing to put up with the problem of  gangland 
warfare, and even tragic deaths and illnesses,  in order to protect 
that which they see as the greater  common good.

Some of the drugs now illegal, such as cocaine and  opium, were for a 
time legal after their initial  discovery, but were then criminalised 
when the  associated psychiatric and medical problems were  identified.

So, in asking the state to now make these legal, we are  requesting 
that it makes available substances that it  knows cause harm.

The libertarian argument breaks down here, since those  who are 
damaged by drugs require treatment (even if  nobody else becomes 
addicted) and this impacts on the  taxpayer.

Would doctors be excused if they refused to treat those  who had 
drug-induced psychosis? Or if they prioritised  those whose psychosis 
arose without a trigger over  those whose illness was drug- related?

A further question that the anti-prohibition lobby have  failed to 
consider is which drugs would be sold legally  -- would it only be 
cannabis, or would cocaine and  heroin also be available? Would the 
quantity be  restricted?

This would be difficult to support, since those who are  addicted 
need increasing doses to achieve the same  effect -- otherwise 
withdrawal symptoms develop, some  of which are fatal.

Countries such as Holland, which have had lenient laws  towards drugs 
such as cannabis and "magic mushrooms"  are now rethinking their 
policies and have recently  reintroduced some restrictions.

Instead of citing Holland as the model, libertarians  fail to 
pronounce on the Swedish policy of creating a  drug-free society.

There, the consumption of drugs, including cannabis, is  lower than 
it was in the 1970s.

According to a UN report from February 2007, this  appears to have 
been achieved by a determined policy of  "zero tolerance" to drug 
abuse and the compulsory  treatment of drug abusers, coupled with 
harsh penalties  for suppliers.

And this from the country that had the most liberal  approach to 
drugs in the 1960s, such as the infamous  Stockholm Experiment in 
which amphetamines and opiates  were freely available.

Like Sweden, we may have to decide if we should provide  free drugs 
or be drug free.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Keith Brilhart