http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6429239.stm Drug laws in Britain have been criticised as being "not fit for purpose" in a major report. An investigation by the RSA says illicit substances can be "harmless", while drinking and smoking can cause as many problems. It says the law has been "driven by moral panic", and suggests policy-making should be left to drug teams and local authorities. The Home Office says it does not accept all of the report's recommendations. Level of crime Anthony King, professor of government at Essex University, who chaired the Commission on Illegal Drugs, said the "great majority" of drug users did not harm themselves or others. "Current policy is broke and needs to be fixed," he added. The RSA's panel recommends scrapping the Misuse of Drugs Act and replacing it with a broader Misuse of Substances Act, and replacing the existing ABC classification system with an "index of harms". Panel members included Deputy Assistant Commissioner John Yates of the Metropolitan Police. This would extend the definition of drugs to include alcohol and tobacco - as well as illegal substances, which the report says have been "demonised". The report, entitled Illegal Drugs, Communities and Public Policy, also calls for so-called "shooting galleries" to be introduced where users can inject drugs as well as wider access to prescription heroin. It says policy should be about reducing harm and pursuing the criminal gangs behind the drugs trade rather than the level of crime. If drug taking does not harm anyone, then criminal sanctions should not be applied, the report continues. 'Harmless use' The report says: "The evidence suggests that a majority of people who use drugs are able to use them without harming themselves or others. "The harmless use of illegal drugs is thus possible, indeed common." It says drugs education is "inconsistent, irrelevant, disorganised", and its main focus should shift from secondary to primary schools. The Home Office has estimated that the social cost of drug abuse alone to Britain is between £10bn and £17bn a year. It said its strategy has led to a 16% fall in drugs crime and more people able to access treatment. Martin Barnes from the charity Drugscope said drug use needed to be addressed as a wider social problem. He added: "There's really far too great an emphasis on it being a problem solely associated with crime. "It's about public health, it's about poor mental health, it's about homelessness." 'Worryingly complacent' Former Conservative leader Iain Duncan Smith said the report was "worryingly complacent". He added: "The RSA has also failed to do its homework by not surveying the views of drug addicts - who want recovery and drug-free lives - not managed dependency on methadone." Former home secretary David Blunkett told BBC Radio 4's Today programme he wanted to see "a much more sensible debate" and that he supported a "substantial" expansion of the prescribing of heroin. But James Griffith-Edwards, emeritus professor of addiction behaviour at the University of London, told BBC Radio Five Live that he was sceptical about the report. He said: "I doubt whether any swingeing remedies would get one very far." However, Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman Nick Clegg called the report "an extremely important contribution" to the debate, adding: "The so-called war on drugs is failing." And Steve Rolles of drug law reform campaign group Transform praised the Commission's findings. "This really is a rational response to 30 years of dramatic failure," he said. MOST HARMFUL SUBSTANCES 1. Heroin 2. Cocaine 3. Barbiturates 4. Street methadone 5. Alcohol
I think the news this week about Granny Pat is a testament to the fact our cannabis laws, at least, are archaic...
Absolutely. I love the fact that she still isn't going to stop toking. Her sentence was ridiculous though...what good is giving an ill granny 250 hrs of community service going to do? it doesn't really help society in any way.
Can't see pills, acid or weed on their either, good call. I'm a firm believer that alcohol is more harmful than all three of them. And for the Lib Dems to say that the war on drugs is failing is slightly odd. It implies that it was, at some point, working. It was a failure from the first day, just like the so called war on terrorism....
weed is on there, just further down the list. For the full list, go to the website, it's at the bottom.
Regretamine came in number 6 above dirty amphetamine? That makes no sense. K is fairly safe as long a syou don't mix it with (too much) alcohol or other depressants, then it can mess up your breathing...But other than that I don't see how it can be number 6. Tobacco should be in the top 5, definitely, it kills shit loads of people, not just smokers either but through passive smoking...It's ceratinly more harmful than 'street methadone' (wtf?). Why is LSD above GHB? No one's ever died from an 'LSD overdose' (except one guy in the 60's or 70's who decided to inject a ridiculous dose)... *I left out the ones I havent tried or know nothing about, and the stupid one slike steroids and street methadone... Pete's List: Heroin Cocaine Solvents Alcoho Tobacco Amphetamine Benzos GHB/GBL Ketamine Ecstasy Cannabis LSD, mushrooms, mescaline have there own special 'These are great so eat them please!' list... Yep. My list is better I reckon. I'd legalise the lot anyway though...
Well, they are just making an example of her, aren't they? They must realise that with her health probs, she will have a harder time doing com service than she would sitting in a cell for a week. We are hatching an idea that might help her, and the cause all at once though; she has to report to her local police station next week, to start her sentence. Wouldn't the police, and everyone else be shocked if 250 campaigners all turned up, too, and offered to do an hour each on Granny Pat's behalf? I reckon the embarrassment it wuld cause the authorities, and the media whilwind it would attract, might just be enough to make them quash her conviction.
Northumberland, so I may not be able to go; not sure I can justify the train fare, while I am saving for a holiday! I am confident others will be there though, in one capacity or another. Granny Pat's a bloody legend, and I know tons of people that have followed her recipes
That graph is bollox and almost certainly biased. There are far to many ways to represent harmfulness and the most fitting way has obviously been choosen.
sounds like you're a cockehead and hostile! Don't you know that you're funding the evil civil war of Columbia!
Im certainly not a cokehead and id like to think im not a cockehead. Id say i was more objective than hostile. As for the evil civil war of columbia, are you serious? How can you throw around such insulting accusations when you dont even know me? Im all for changing the legal system concerning drugs, but that graph isnt going to change anything, for a start would you like to tell me how you can compare physical harm to mental harm? I just read the article linked in the box half way down the page, I quote "The commission shies away from defining its "harm index", but it does spend some time assessing the harms caused by different drugs." They know it would be very hard if not impossible, considering what we actually know about the long term effects of alot of these drugs, to take into account every type of harm from every drug and directly compare them. Theres no wonder nobody posts here anymore when you get acused of being a drug addict and convicted of assisting a civil war for giving an opinion. You are an intelligent girl and with that comes responsibility.
Ohhhhhhhh come on, I was just messing. Maybe if I put a winky face next time..you'll understand Please don't be offended.
I can see the funny side, just seemed a bit out of context. If this joke was anything to go by, id prolly just put joke in brackets at the end of the sentance if i was you.
