Wasteful Unwinnable War

In the news today we have the stunning revelation that drugs 'swoops' have little or no effect on the amount of drugs available on the streets.

Anyone else find this news unsurprising?

I'm no great fan of drugs, but I do acknowledge that some of the worlds greatest art and music has been inspired by moods or images induced by the use of drugs. I've dabbled in a bit of dope in my time as well. I learnt that it makes you laugh uncontrollably , usually kicking in when least appropriate moment, it does give you the munchies and that it doesn't mix well with alcohol and not at all with a combination of alcohol and Distalgesic. In fact the latter (accidental) combination can be very frightening. Don't do it kids!



I do however resent millions of pounds being pumped into the administration of the 'drug problem' in the relentless 'war on drugs'. By this I specifically mean the money frittered away in the legal and judicial systems on policing the issue, arresting people and then charging them and then either banging them up or fining them. I have no issue with spending money on rehabilitating addicts if is their choice to come off the drugs, just as I don't resent taxpayers money being spent on alcoholism or smoking related diseases. Similarly other people who need NHS treatment for risky things such as sport, motor cycling, gardening or drinking a hot coffee will never find me moaning about their treatment.

I've probably ranted on this before, but I can't be arsed to look back through all my posts, but in essence drugs are all about personal choice. If you're an adult, that is over 18, and are considered old enough to drink, smoke, vote or die for your country then why not just legalise the whole lot and sell them through pharmacies. Make it illegal to use them in public, I have no issue with that but if people want to snort some Charlie, or stick a needle into themselves in their own or someone else's home then let them do it. It could be that pharmacies sell the drugs under licence as Pubs and Off Licences do for alcohol, and it wouild be a good idea to make the sale subject to photo i.d being presented irrespective of age (an argument for i.d cards?) and that every purchase is signed for, as with a prescription, with a disclaimer that absolves the vendor from any action that might come about through the injury or death of the buyer.

Just think about this. Drugs would be price controlled and set to match the 'street price' thus squeezing the illegal traffickers and dealers out of business. The drugs would be taxed. Licenses to produce them to a minimum quality standard would be issued, allowing the likes of Glaxo Smithkline Beecham and Eli Lilly to produce them in proper hygienic plants. The state could even make a profit which is then ploughed into the NHS. The user would know the risks, and accept them through the signing of the disclaimer. The state would have no culpability in the event of any accident, disease or death occurring as a consequence of taking the drugs. I am really struggling to find flaws in this.

The idea was mooted in Ben Elton's excellent book, High Society, and it's hard to see why we persist with a flawed 'war on drugs' which is as doomed to failure as the 'war on terrorism'. Would any current politician or political party be brave enough to have this on their election platform? Of course not, because the majority of them have no spines or balls. They are too scared of losing the vote of the Daily Mail brigade rather than pushing for a radical re-think in the way we treat drugs.

One thing is for sure, my Liberation TM party would adopt this policy!

Later, GJ