Pubdate: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 Source: Times, The (Malta) Copyright: 2014 Allied Newspapers Limited Contact: http://www.timesofmalta.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/2310 Author: Robert Callus Note: Robert Callus is spokesperson for Social Policy for Alternattiva Demokratika BE FRANK ABOUT WAR ON DRUGS Auxiliary Bishop Charles Scicluna has challenged the politicians to deny that the decriminalisation of drugs would help the drug barons. Alternattiva Demokratika, which has consistently opposed the criminalisation of people who are in possession of drugs for their own use, would like to take up the challenge. Portugal decriminalised the personal use of all drugs in 2001 and there has been no apocalypse. Far from that. There was no significant increase in the use of drugs since 2001 (actually the increase was less than that of the EU average), drug related crime went down and so did related diseases. It was such a resounding success that, with the exception of the far right, Portuguese politicians across the board agree that Portugal is now better off. They don't want to turn the clock back.How could this be? Simple. The widely criticised war on drugs is based on two myths and it's about time that these are addressed. Myth 1: making drugs illegal stops the flow. When former US President Richard Nixon declared a war on drugs 50 years ago it was thought that in around five years all illegal drugs will be abolished in the US. He couldn't have been more wrong. Drug use in the US and worldwide is actually tenfold higher compared with 50 years ago. The harsher the laws, the higher the stakes. Drug barons and traffickers make money from taking a risk and the higher that risk is, the higher the profits. If someone is deterred from importing and trafficking drugs because of harsh penalties, there is always someone else willing to take his place. This perhaps explains why the country with the biggest number of drug addicts in the world, Iran, is also one that has the harshest laws on both drug use and trafficking, including the death penalty. The drugs are not coming. They're here and they will remain here no matter how harsh the laws are. I'm sure this isn't what most people want to hear, but let's not kid ourselves. Myth 2: criminalising the users will deter them from taking drugs. Except that it doesn't. Research such as that carried out by the Global Commission for Drug Policy shows clearly that - while accurate information about drugs and their effects, coupled with investing in our children's self-esteem, significantly reduces drug use and addiction - the threat of criminal prosecution does not. Logically this makes sense. If I buy a stash of heroin and use it, it's extremely unlikely that I'm going to get caught and prosecuted. On the other hand, I know that it's very likely I will carry on to become a full-blown junkie and my life will become hell. What is more likely to deter me, the knowledge of a hellish future or the possibility that I might get caught? Auxiliary Bishop Charles Scicluna is also mistaken when he says that decriminalising drugs for personal use sends people "the message that taking a small amount of drugs was OK". Legal and OK are not the same thing. Is our society telling young people that smoking tobacco, drinking large amounts of alcohol and staying for long hours in the sun without protection is OK, just because these aren't illegal? Decriminalising the personal use of drugs will in no way help drug barons. It will only stop criminalising the same people the war on drugs calls "victims". And let's be frank. You don't turn people into criminals for their own good. You don't punish the victims. It's not only illogical but also highly immoral. - --- MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom