• ARRSE have partnered with Armadillo Merino to bring you an ARRSE exclusive, generous discount offer on their full price range.
    To keep you warm with the best of Merino gear, visit www.armadillomerino.co.uk and use the code: NEWARRSE40 at the checkout to get 40% off!
    This superb deal has been generously offered to us by Armadillo Merino and is valid until midnight on the the 28th of February.

War on Drugs

Should we change policy on drug distribution & use?

  • No, lets carry on regardless.

    Votes: 14 15.2%
  • Yes, and tax them!

    Votes: 72 78.3%
  • Whoa... heavy. What was the question man?

    Votes: 6 6.5%

  • Total voters
    92
P

pp0470

Guest
#1
BBC News - Global war on drugs 'has failed' say former leaders

The global war on drugs has "failed" according to a new report by a group of politicians and former world leaders.

The Global Commission on Drug Policy report calls for the legalisation of some drugs and an end to the criminalisation of drug users.

The panel includes former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, the former leaders of Mexico, Colombia and Brazil, and the entrepreneur Sir Richard Branson.

Anyone think we are winning the 'war on drugs'?

I don't, and think the only people benefiting from current policy are the criminal gangs shipping & dealing the shit.
 
#2
Call me old fashioned but I still believe that it would be immoral for society to legalise and tax drugs. Most of them are still quite dangerous and the level of addiction they often cause cannot be compared to anything legal bar tobacco, which we cannot ban because it is so deeply ingrained into our society (apologies to any smokers out there but I agree with the idea that if tobacco were discovered today it would be an illegal drug).
However ineffective our drugs policy is surely it maintains the moral high ground (which our legal system should) and acts as some sort of deterrant to young people especially. It also, critically, reduces availability because as the addict who offered a statement to the BBC said he would have killed himself in a month if he could buy any of the drugs he wanted at a reasonable rate and free of suspicion from the law.
 
#3
Anyone think we are winning the 'war on drugs'?
No, but thats because in wars people die. I don't see many drug dealers in western countries getting the good news. Therefor it isn't a war. The law pisses about with these ******* instead of cracking them over the head repeatedly.
 
P

pp0470

Guest
#4
America tried alcohol prohibition because of the harm alcohol was doing to society. When it realized they could never stop the consumption of alcohol, or prevent criminal organizations supplying and profiting from this trade they reversed their policy.

In what way is the current drug problem any different?
 
#6
Because the majority of the population prior to the US prohibition drank. This is not, and has never been the case with illegal drugs. They are taken by a small social minority. The issues around the drugs problem are mainly caused by the vast criminal organisations which are needed to run the drugs. Alcohol prohibition ended in no small part due to the VAST crimewave it heralded, with its tendrils permiating every level of society. The drugs cartels are not, and have never been this big or powerful and donot threaten the integrity of our politics or legal institutions.

The war on drugs is similar to the prohibition, but on an infinitessimally smaller scale. We should keep on fighting.
 
P

pp0470

Guest
#7
No, but thats because in wars people die. I don't see many drug dealers in western countries getting the good news. Therefor it isn't a war. The law pisses about with these ******* instead of cracking them over the head repeatedly.
Please tell that to the Mexicans - 34,600 people dead in 4 1/2 years.

Or the 2000 Thai yaba dealers shot dead by extra judical murder squads
(yaba still widely available & the trade commonly believed to be controlled by the Thai Generals importing from Myanmar)
 
#8
Make the consumption of something illegal and you put the supply of it in the hands of criminals. If sufficient numbers of idiots want it, all the ban achieves is to make the criminals far more powerful than they were before.

As to protecting people from overdoses, I don't think we should be in the business of protecting people from suicidal stupidity.
 
#9
The issue is that it isn't stupidity. I don't care if some moron drinks ammonia and dies because he though it was lemonade. The problem is that its addiction. Some people simply cannot stop themselves from taking drugs until they overdose and die. People should be protected from substances which they compulsively take until they die. It is morally wrong to legalise drugs, and to tax them would be making money from some people's suffering.
 
#11
I've seen first hand the harm some of the higher classification drugs can do, and I personally believe that dealers and traffickers ought be hanged or shot. My bezzer has recently started smoking weed every so often, and I've told him that if I catch him at it I'll give him a fair ole' kicking and never talk to him again. It's a severe problem in society that needs to be dealt with properly instead of the limp wristed approach going on today, where every so often the police in a certain area decide to have a "crackdown" on drugs, kick a few doors in and hope for some good publicity. Sorry ole' state of affairs.
 
#12
Please tell that to the Mexicans - 34,600 people dead in 4 1/2 years.

Or the 2000 Thai yaba dealers shot dead by extra judical murder squads
(yaba still widely available & the trade commonly believed to be controlled by the Thai Generals importing from Myanmar)
Despite their location I don't class them as western, by western I meant the all the liberal countries that puts the needs of smackhead scumbags above those of the law abiding citizens.
 
#13
The issue is that it isn't stupidity.
Taking highly addictive and harmful substances because they make you feel good for a bit is a pretty good definition of stupidity, IMO. I can't see why they have less of a duty to themselves than we apparently have to them.

If they want to kill themselves, I won't stand in their way. At least it's not so inconsiderate as jumping in front of a train.
 
#17
Winning the war on drugs? I'm coming across more and more jobs involving possession in the army. Sadly, I think we're not even scratching the surface.
But is that a true indication that soldiers are being attracted to drugs or is it just that it's an easy route to discharge? So what you see on the surface may be close to what you have in total.
 
#18
Don't worry, he's off again. Mexico isn't in the West and the war on drugs isn't a war because nobody dies. Just smile, don't make any sudden movements, don't let your hands or feet stray near his jaws, and don't make eye contact.
Oh sorry. I was only going to point out that 100,000 plus troops from around the world are currently stationed in the single largest exporter of 'smack'.

I'll go away and have another beer, can't do any harm cant it.
 

udipur

LE
Book Reviewer
#20
Addiction is something that certain people have whether it's for drugs, alcohol or shopping. Them's the personalities. It is entirely treatable.

Trying to cut off the source of the addiction e.g. the smack, booze and Versace just doesn't work because the addict will seek it out with an admirable level of dedication.

Granted that a lot of the stuff that they throw down their necks/veins ain't so special but it's generally not the drug per se, more the quantity and ignorance of methods of ingestion. Basically, they take it to feel better.

A lot of the balderdash about drugs that still gets peddled around to sate the moral majority (generally those who think being gay is a sin and interracial marriages are not for them i.e. well adjusted and modern, educated folk) was disproved post Vietnam when so many of the grunts came back having used heroin on tour. Amazingly, the majority didn't descend into a morass of depravity and societal damage. They put down the foil and picked up a briefcase.

No one seems willing to do the maths, either. The Yanks spend over $18bn a year on this yet government treatment per 'addict' costs up to $3,500. Therefore they could treat over 5 million a year rather than the 800,000 they manage to merely arrest and prosecute.

Alcohol is little but a dressed up poison (the taste has to be 'acquired' and it's often the sensation that people seek) and it might be worth noting that a lot of the major brands in America were actually established as a result of the prohibition e.g. Bacardi, Seagram etc.

Far too easy to get righteous as opposed to addressing the psychology of use and seeking longer lasting alternatives.
 

Latest Threads

New Posts