Endorsement of the Global Commission on Drug Policy report led Carter to feel safe to weigh in on the failed war on drugs.
Though here in Canada, since PM Harper got tough on drugs, drug crime led to more deaths as less drugs got into the country.
The scarce supply of drugs led to gang rivalry to control the shrinking market.
This talk of ending the war on drugs in the US began with Avaaz's campaign that showed the UN the public support for an end to the war on drugs.
Though anti-drug officials may be in denial:
"Drug addiction is a disease that can be successfully prevented and treated. Making drugs more available — as this report suggests — will make it harder to keep our communities healthy and safe," Office of National Drug Control Policy spokesman Rafael Lemaitre said.
Contrary to Lemaitre's statements, drug use didn't rise in Switzerland after drug use was decriminalized and made a health issue.
Portugal's decriminalization saved lives from opiate addiction.
Locally in Vancouver, the InSite program reduced both health issues involving heroin and related drug crime.
With ex US presidents and other politicians giving pro and con opinions about ending the drug war, let's hope they'll listen to reason.
Reference:
World leaders says US drug war a failure: http://blog.mpp.org/prohibition/world-leaders-senate-report-say-u-s-drug-war-is-a-failure/06092011/
Avaaz campaign supporting end to war on drugs: http://www.avaaz.org/en/june_2011_report/?slideshow
Drug war a failure: http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5hqsXp_uEPMQw-bsYzDEK2EzHvEcw?docId=7028558
Showing posts with label drug reform. Show all posts
Showing posts with label drug reform. Show all posts
20110622
20100602
Commentary on Massive pot bust made near Prince George
http://www.bclocalnews.com/news/95176849.html
June 2, 2010: This is not a a new item of importance, except to illustrate how the war on drugs works: publicize grow-ops as "evil" and demonize marijuana.
It too is a form of oppression against a harmless drug made harmful by act of parliament (the drug laws in Canada in particular).
Ottawa's stance on marijuana is what continues to criminalize marijuana and to demonize pro-420 activists and the medical marijuana community.
Free Marc Emery NOW!!
June 2, 2010: This is not a a new item of importance, except to illustrate how the war on drugs works: publicize grow-ops as "evil" and demonize marijuana.
It too is a form of oppression against a harmless drug made harmful by act of parliament (the drug laws in Canada in particular).
Ottawa's stance on marijuana is what continues to criminalize marijuana and to demonize pro-420 activists and the medical marijuana community.
Free Marc Emery NOW!!
20070430
The Utopia called "Drug Legalization"
"The goal of legalizing drugs is to bring them under effective legal control. If it were legal to produce and distribute drugs, legitimate businessmen would enter the business. There would be less need for violence and corruption since the industry would have access to the courts. And, instead of absorbing tax dollars as targets of expensive enforcement efforts, the drug sellers might begin to pay taxes. So, legalization might well solve the organized crime aspects of the drug trafficking problem. On average, drug use under legalization might not be as destructive to users and to society as under the current prohibition, because drugs would be less expensive, purer, and more conveniently available." -- National Institute of Justice
With legalization would come reduced violence and corruption. Expensive enforcement would vanish. Finally, the manufacturers of drugs would pay taxes, as would the drug dealer.
With drugs less expensive, purer and conveniently available, maybe users would moderate their habits and not be given to excess by also going into therapy to treat the tendency of some addicts to go to excess due to psychosocial issues which precipitated their substance abuse.
If America was so enlightened, then the State's experience with pushing alcohol, tobacco and pharmaceutical drugs could be applied with gusto to recreational drugs; but the only reason why drugs will remain illegal is because media hype would die down and moral reprehension would cease.
Yes, the only reason why drugs are illegal are to sell product. In this case, it is the demon called "drug addiction" which barely accounts for 10% of users of any drug.
And, contrary to the hype, when 100 people take a drug, about 10 will get hooked, depending on their background, motivation, and peers.
Alas, this utopia of drug legalization will never come to pass because neither statistics nor medicine enlighten the voter. Only education of the harm of drug prohibition will do so.
So in essence, harm reduction implies eventual drug legalization. For that would reduce the stigma and the costs of a senseless and stupid war.
With legalization would come reduced violence and corruption. Expensive enforcement would vanish. Finally, the manufacturers of drugs would pay taxes, as would the drug dealer.
With drugs less expensive, purer and conveniently available, maybe users would moderate their habits and not be given to excess by also going into therapy to treat the tendency of some addicts to go to excess due to psychosocial issues which precipitated their substance abuse.
If America was so enlightened, then the State's experience with pushing alcohol, tobacco and pharmaceutical drugs could be applied with gusto to recreational drugs; but the only reason why drugs will remain illegal is because media hype would die down and moral reprehension would cease.
Yes, the only reason why drugs are illegal are to sell product. In this case, it is the demon called "drug addiction" which barely accounts for 10% of users of any drug.
And, contrary to the hype, when 100 people take a drug, about 10 will get hooked, depending on their background, motivation, and peers.
Alas, this utopia of drug legalization will never come to pass because neither statistics nor medicine enlighten the voter. Only education of the harm of drug prohibition will do so.
So in essence, harm reduction implies eventual drug legalization. For that would reduce the stigma and the costs of a senseless and stupid war.
20070409
Life for Drug Dealers and Traffickers
For all dangerous drugs, excluding cannabis, the penalty should be a life sentence.
This includes alcohol and tobacco, and applies to legitimate sellers of alcohol and tobacco too.
Suspected drug dealers would also include doctors and psychiatrists too, since some prescription drugs (benzodiazepines, certain neuroleptics and anti-depressants) are potentially harmful too.
Such a penalty would also convict alcohol and tobacco manufacturers, who could offer a substantial fine in lieu of their CEO.
Life for all dangerous drugs. It's the most sane solution.
This includes alcohol and tobacco, and applies to legitimate sellers of alcohol and tobacco too.
Suspected drug dealers would also include doctors and psychiatrists too, since some prescription drugs (benzodiazepines, certain neuroleptics and anti-depressants) are potentially harmful too.
Such a penalty would also convict alcohol and tobacco manufacturers, who could offer a substantial fine in lieu of their CEO.
Life for all dangerous drugs. It's the most sane solution.
20070404
Busting the Gateway Myth about Marijuana
"Cannabis itself is not a cause of other drug use." --
CANNABIS : OUR POSITION FOR A CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY
REPORT OF THE SENATE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON ILLEGAL DRUGS
SUMMARY, SEPTEMBER 2002
There you have it, evidence that cannabis is not a cause of other drug use, that it is not a gateway drug, and that, given the evidence that cannabis is not more harmful than caffeine, it is a safe drug.
It was originally because of racism that marijuana was made illegal in Canada.
Thus the law is inherently racist but currentlyt targets a benign drug culture of whose members, very few of them have acted harmfully towards themselves and/or others.
At the very least, given evidence that alcohol and tobacco are many times more harmful, why are they not also included in any drug law nationally? Why are they treated separately? Because they are legal and any addiction to them is treated as a health problem.
Indeed, it is because both alcohol and tobacco have been regulated by the government. Consequently the media has "hidden" alcohol and tobacco from public scrutiny, and thus downplays their role in violence and/or death in Canada?
If so, then it may be possible that marijuana is demonized by media and by legal enforcement agencies for moral reasons unrelated to whatever potential harm this drug may cause. Essentially then, mass media has practiced propaganda against marijuana first by targeting an ethnic group and later by doing the following: associated early use in grade school with symptoms associated with idiopathic schizophrenia, used hyperbole to exaggerate the risk of lung disease caused by smoking marijuana, and used ad hominem attacks against regular marijuana users.
As well, the aggressive methods used by police to regulate marijuana use is a significent contributor to the rise in other drug use including methamphetamine, cocaine, and other stimulants.
If anything then the real gateway is the drug law, since it is because the law makes drugs illegal that criminals manufacture drugs for profit.
For legalization of all drugs would reduce the harm caused by such drugs.
CANNABIS : OUR POSITION FOR A CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY
REPORT OF THE SENATE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON ILLEGAL DRUGS
SUMMARY, SEPTEMBER 2002
There you have it, evidence that cannabis is not a cause of other drug use, that it is not a gateway drug, and that, given the evidence that cannabis is not more harmful than caffeine, it is a safe drug.
It was originally because of racism that marijuana was made illegal in Canada.
Thus the law is inherently racist but currentlyt targets a benign drug culture of whose members, very few of them have acted harmfully towards themselves and/or others.
At the very least, given evidence that alcohol and tobacco are many times more harmful, why are they not also included in any drug law nationally? Why are they treated separately? Because they are legal and any addiction to them is treated as a health problem.
Indeed, it is because both alcohol and tobacco have been regulated by the government. Consequently the media has "hidden" alcohol and tobacco from public scrutiny, and thus downplays their role in violence and/or death in Canada?
If so, then it may be possible that marijuana is demonized by media and by legal enforcement agencies for moral reasons unrelated to whatever potential harm this drug may cause. Essentially then, mass media has practiced propaganda against marijuana first by targeting an ethnic group and later by doing the following: associated early use in grade school with symptoms associated with idiopathic schizophrenia, used hyperbole to exaggerate the risk of lung disease caused by smoking marijuana, and used ad hominem attacks against regular marijuana users.
As well, the aggressive methods used by police to regulate marijuana use is a significent contributor to the rise in other drug use including methamphetamine, cocaine, and other stimulants.
If anything then the real gateway is the drug law, since it is because the law makes drugs illegal that criminals manufacture drugs for profit.
For legalization of all drugs would reduce the harm caused by such drugs.
20070401
'Moral panic' of drug laws isolates users and fuels crime
MOST people who take illegal drugs do not cause any harm to themselves or anyone else, according to a study which calls for the current "crude" ABC classification system be abandoned.
The two-year RSA Commission on Illegal Drugs argued that Britain's drug laws should be replaced by a system which recognises that drinking and smoking can cause more harm.
Advert for SuperScotCasino
Current laws are "driven by a moral panic" and a more effective drug policy would focus on harm reduction rather than cutting crime, the commission's report concluded.
The report said: "The use of illegal drugs is by no means always harmful any more than alcohol use is always harmful. The evidence suggests that a majority of people who use drugs are able to use them without harming themselves or others."
The flaws in drug policy are demonstrated, it claimed, by the categorisation of ecstasy along with heroin and cocaine as a Class A drug. Such a classification "probably does most to undermine the credibility of our drug laws in the eyes of that section of the population that is most likely to use drugs: namely, the hundreds of thousands of people for whom 'dance drugs' are a routine feature of a good night out," the report said. - The Scotsman, March 9, 2007
Substance use is not solved by criminalizing use based on morals, but based on education and harm reduction.
By using moral panic, drug laws criminalize drug users as traffickers, and the way laws are written, serve to manufacture drug criminals.
Thus drug war policies only cause harm and worsen drug use.
Only education and harm reduction are necessary, not draconian drug laws.
The two-year RSA Commission on Illegal Drugs argued that Britain's drug laws should be replaced by a system which recognises that drinking and smoking can cause more harm.
Advert for SuperScotCasino
Current laws are "driven by a moral panic" and a more effective drug policy would focus on harm reduction rather than cutting crime, the commission's report concluded.
The report said: "The use of illegal drugs is by no means always harmful any more than alcohol use is always harmful. The evidence suggests that a majority of people who use drugs are able to use them without harming themselves or others."
The flaws in drug policy are demonstrated, it claimed, by the categorisation of ecstasy along with heroin and cocaine as a Class A drug. Such a classification "probably does most to undermine the credibility of our drug laws in the eyes of that section of the population that is most likely to use drugs: namely, the hundreds of thousands of people for whom 'dance drugs' are a routine feature of a good night out," the report said. - The Scotsman, March 9, 2007
Substance use is not solved by criminalizing use based on morals, but based on education and harm reduction.
By using moral panic, drug laws criminalize drug users as traffickers, and the way laws are written, serve to manufacture drug criminals.
Thus drug war policies only cause harm and worsen drug use.
Only education and harm reduction are necessary, not draconian drug laws.
Dangerous Drugs Decriminalization/Legalization
Rates for people with substance abuse would be 2-6%.
With drug education, including information regarding risk of mania and/or psychosis and to reinforce that substance use is not "getting high" or "having fun" but "entering a probably manic and/or psychotic state of mind through the use of intoxicating drugs", potential users have the choice between entering a potentially harmful state of mind or not.
This also includes recreational use of pharmaceutical drugs which may induce hypomania e.g. benzodiazepines, anti-depressants, and neuroleptics.
However, emphasis must be made on increased drug education to replace the deceptive use of euphemisms for substance use i.e. "getting high", "having fun" and street slang for substance use with the correct terms i.e. "substance use which causes transient states of mind which may induce behavior consistent with hypomania, mania and/or psychosis".
It is drugs laws that make recreational substance use harmful and such drugs dangerous.
This article promotes substance use with informed consent within the context of safe set and setting. It does not promote the current circumstances as criminalized by current local and State laws.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)