Illicit Drugs- Decriminalise and regulate or further enforcement?

[Franco Cozzo]

It looks like NSW is about to begin an inquest into drug related deaths at NSW music festivals:

https://www.9news.com.au/national/ns...5-1fa79d195b4f

Or do you think it's time for a further crackdown on drug users and dealers/manufacturers?

My opinion is we should regulate drugs, have a pharmaceutical company make them so it's 99.9% pure and sold in less lethal doses - tax the absolute **** out of it and use the funding to educate and treat addiction as a mental health issue.

Then use our existing police drug departments to stomp on illegal non-regulated drug dealers and manufacturing operations hard.

How many billions of dollars is this shady industry worth? If I was a politician I'd be pushing for a large slice of the industry, there is an opportunity to monopolise this under government control under the pretence of education and healthcare while getting another tax revenue stream - GST, licensing fees on manufacturing and distribution and further taxes like on alcohol and tobacco.

What's your opinion on drug use? Do you think it's time to regulate illicit drugs, tax them and make some spondoolies off this like we do out of smokers?

[Franco Cozzo]

Further articles:

There's only one way to deal with drugs to make Australia safer

The only way to ensure a safer Australian society is to legalise and regulate all drugs. This could save lives, earn huge revenue for the state and diminish the power of criminal gangs that make billions of dollars annually from the production and sale of illicit substances.

This doesn’t mean a free-for-all where heroin, cocaine, opioids, ice or methamphetamines will be easily available at the local supermarket but a considered way to tackle both soft and riskier drugs that doesn’t infantilise users.

No country on earth has yet legalised and regulated all drugs so it’s high time that Australia embarks on a sensible debate towards necessary change.

When radio broadcaster Alan Jones agrees with the NSW Bar Association and Uniting Church, backers of the successful King’s Cross medically supervised injecting centre, to decriminalise the personal use of all drugs including ice, it’s clear that the prohibition mantra is being challenged like never before.

After a horrific summer that saw the death of many young Australians ingesting dangerous pills, the NSW coronial inquest into the tragedies begins this week. Pill testing could have saved these lives. The process is proven from countless trials in Australia, the US and Britain.

I’ve spent the last four years reporting in countries that are being destroyed by the Washington-inspired drug war. From Honduras to Guinea-Bissau, the Philippines to Australia and the US to Britain, I’ve investigated how drug policy is used to marginalise minorities and the poor. Regulating and legalising drugs has the potential to fundamentally rewrite the narrative for a fairer and healthier world.

Canada, many US states and Uruguay have legalised marijuana. Portugal has decriminalised all drugs since 2001 and deaths from drug overdoses have massively declined. For the last 18 years, Portugal has viewed drug addiction as a medical issue rather than a criminal justice problem. The Global Commission on Drugs, comprised of former leaders from South America, Europe and Africa, released a 2018 report that called for the “responsible control of drugs” through legalisation.

The Global Drug Survey, the world’s biggest annual study of drug use with over 165,000 participants, this year included a question on whether users would want to buy ethically sourced cocaine. An overwhelming number said that they would. One of Britain’s leading drug reform groups, Transform, recently announced that it will publish a book on how to legally regulate cocaine and other stimulants. Psychedelic drugs such as LSD and ecstasy are increasingly seen as one possible method to help with post-traumatic stress and depression.

The regulation and legalisation of drugs is vital, writes Cesar Gaviria, the former president of Colombia, a country that has lost at least 220,000 people from a futile drug war in the last 50 years. Today it remains the world’s biggest producer of cocaine. “It’s not because drugs are safe but precisely because they are risky and we seek to manage and reduce those risks”, Gaviria says.

What would legalisation look like in Australia? Injectable heroin would only be available through medical prescription, an option that already exists in many European countries. Pharmacies would sell medium-risk drugs such as ecstasy in non-branded packaging while enforcing quantity and age controls as well as offering health and consumption advice. Licensed premises for sale and consumption, akin to a bottle shop, would sell cannabis and magic mushrooms while adhering to a strict regulatory authority. Never forget that legal alcohol is still the most destructive drug.

Regulated drugs means that substances would be cleaner and less likely to cause user harm. The state or approved private companies must produce and closely monitor the chemical make-up of drugs. Advertising cannot be allowed. If anybody fell victim to addiction or harm from drug taking, they would have a clear pathway to state-supported treatment.

Because the Australian states and federal government could raise huge amounts of revenue from legal drug sales, this money would be spent on health, education and infrastructure. Look at the US where increasing numbers of states have legalised marijuana and are already investing the tax revenue back into communities.

Australia will inevitably embrace pill testing because it’s sensible public policy that minimises harm. Recall that Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews spent years opposing a safe injecting centre in Victoria before finally seeing sense last year and its success in saving lives is clear. However, pill testing is just one, relatively small tool in the arsenal of shifting the drug debate.

Any advocate of a regulated and legalised drug market should not ignore the fact that substances will still kill people. They will destroy families. Overdoses will happen. Addiction can occur. This isn’t a panacea to the problem; it’s a necessary corrective to decades of failed prohibition that has enriched cartels at the expense of the wider community. Australia could be a world leader in designing a regulatory framework that severely restricts access to drugs while pumping far more money into education and treatment.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/ther...07-p524v1.html

[Franco Cozzo]

**** - I posted this in the wrong section, can mods move this to the bar please?

[Vekgib]

The drugs will do that to ya

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Vekgib

The drugs will do that to ya

Which one? Alcohol or caffeine?

[Citroënbender]

Barely three months since an acquaintance died from opiate use. They mostly self-regulated with the odd bit of property crime and petty theft mixed in.

I’m a firm believer in decriminalisation of many drugs, the money spent on policing is better used on consolidating social support. Can’t see it happening under the present regime, however.

[Junkyard-Dog]

Meth runs this state. Something which can be sold for upwards of $50 per 0.1g has serious financial backers involved already. I doubt the individuals that are already involved in manufacturing it would give up their positions of considerable power without a fight tbh.

[M&Ms]

Considering Drugs, Alcohol and Gambling are (IMO) the roots of most evil in this country (Domestic Violence, Aggravated Violence, Thefts, Suicide, Road Trauma, etc), a responsible government should be doing all that is necessary to control these elements. Zero tolerance IMO to illicit drugs would be a good start.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by M&Ms

Considering Drugs, Alcohol and Gambling are (IMO) the roots of most evil in this country (Domestic Violence, Aggravated Violence, Thefts, Suicide, Road Trauma, etc), a responsible government should be doing all that is necessary to control these elements. Zero tolerance IMO to illicit drugs would be a good start.

Two of those are advertised all over TV and the government collects large amounts of taxes from both - there is a shrine to these two in Melbourne that's just about open 24/7/365 and takes up the majority of an entire suburb with 19,000 people living in it:



People are going to do it anyway then why not make it safer and collect a slice of the very large pie?

Look at prohibition in the USA and how that turned out - it kicked off organised crime in the USA and they gained huge influence.

[mick taylor]

I am for licencing party drugs, you pay to get a licence to use drugs and your doctor has control of what's in your interest to keep a handle on it.

I only have to look at my mum in her old age and all the prescribed drugs she takes she has been that spaced out, you can't even talk to her at times, she does not know jack at times and it's us kids who have had to do our best to get lowered all the drugs she is on. it's been a nightmare for years to deal with.

But that's just one thing but as to party drugs it comes across to me that the younger generation are much more stupid than my generation was in general and this mob will swallow anything or shoot up something from some moron that could not spell his name and that's the big problem.

I smoked leaf and tip from when I was 21yo on a occasion just a drag or two that was offered out side a nightclub say, but that's nothing to the dope that the idiots are smoking nowadays and the dope they are smoking is bad real bad and the fact is that anyone who smokes dope that is grown under lights is doing damage to your brain. all dope must be grown under the sun because their is a chemical imbalance when grown under lights and this must be stoped.

What I have seen with people who have a problem with dope is that they are compulsive obsessive types. most people grow out of taking dope that I know of.
And if one is that stupid to take another drug you are a moron but licencing is the only way to deal with such things, so as to keep the real idiot problem under some control because the way it is nowadays it's way out of control, not to mention f ing stupid as because it's not working.

[mick taylor]

Originally Posted by M&Ms

Considering Drugs, Alcohol and Gambling are (IMO) the roots of most evil in this country (Domestic Violence, Aggravated Violence, Thefts, Suicide, Road Trauma, etc), a responsible government should be doing all that is necessary to control these elements. Zero tolerance IMO to illicit drugs would be a good start.

I agree.

But we have a f whit up the road who sells what ever for years and the cops do nothing, he is an informer for sure, so the cops use him.

Thing is that the top of governments are involved in all this crap making heaps out of it for themselves, so they do not want to stop it. it's a cash cow.
Not to mention Casinos are created to launder money as such is totally corrupt, no one would be so stupid to build a Casino if you knew the fact that they are truly just another pain in the **** in reality to the wellbeing of the people in a State over all, it's a curse and the pokies as such only creates a hell of a lot more problems to deal with in reality and no one can say that it does not, even the moron QLD ALP Premer who took over after Sir Joh woke up to the fact some years after and he was the one going mental ranting and demanding this go ahead full on before they all pushed and demanded Sir Joh into having to sign and Joh had to sign due to the corrupted morons in his own party wanting to get in with the action but Sir Joh pointed out the evils of such and his words were totally correct as to it all.

[JC]

Originally Posted by M&Ms

Considering Drugs, Alcohol and Gambling are (IMO) the roots of most evil in this country (Domestic Violence, Aggravated Violence, Thefts, Suicide, Road Trauma, etc), a responsible government should be doing all that is necessary to control these elements. Zero tolerance IMO to illicit drugs would be a good start.

Darwin Award for anyone who takes these drugs knowing it could be the last thing they take.

[pottery beige]

is this like where every kidlet with add got shaker pills.....

single mums flogging pills off and buying meff with profits??

[aussiblue]

Portuguese approach https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal
Or Philippines approach: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine_Drug_War
I think Portuguese.

[Franco Cozzo]

Also could be price thats a big decider in what people decide to put into themselves, go out in Melbourne and you're paying $10-$12 per stubby at a bar or restaurant or $20-$25 for a cocktail if you're into the fancy crapola.

Its $20 a pop for MDMA pills and one of those and you're having the time of your life for the night - you're spending 10x less than if you were sinking plain ol' alcoholic cocktails or a night on the stubbies for a bender in the city.

Poor uni students lol

I went to F1 in Melbourne this year and I spent about $250 on alcohol alone and it wasn't like I was overly trashed either and I'm not a huge drinker by any stretch of the means, I could still walk alright.

[redxm]

Dumbo puts unknown chemicals in his body
Dumbo dies
Gene pool cleaned up

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by redxm

Dumbo puts unknown chemicals in his body
Dumbo dies
Gene pool cleaned up

The government needs to GTFO of our lives, but I guess thats the Australian public in general, bunch of convicts, need the government to tell us how to live our lives because we can't think for ourselves.

[TheInterceptor]

Originally Posted by redxm

Dumbo puts unknown chemicals in his body
Dumbo dies
Gene pool cleaned up

Basically. It's user risk, if you die, you die. Why make more laws to stop people killing themselves? This is why there is an alarming amount of morons in existence and it's getting worse by the year.

[Cav]

I saw something on the TV last night where one bloke took 5 of these pills and another took 9.

It also said 95% of the crowd have taken these pills at some stage.

One wag asked what would happen if he lit up a cigar which is not illegal, in the crowd and what would their response be?

[Franco Cozzo]

Look at all the damage alcohol has on society, from assaults to domestic violence and health issues but they advertise it all over TV, sponsor sporting events and have venues centered around alcohol consumption.

It's the same with gambling, another industry that's bad for society and causes untold damage to addicts but it's advertised all over TV, sponsors of sport and has it's presence all over the country.

Tobacco literally kills people and has this army of addicts feeding revenue to the government through it's taxes, so much so that if everyone quit smoking tomorrow we'd all be paying extra taxes.

One is a drug, the other two have its addicts also - all three contribute huge amounts of taxes to the government.

[Citroënbender]

Indeed.

And in terms of illegal substances... It would be very interesting if everyone who swore an oath of office in Australia was subject to drug testing with public disclosure of the results.

[ebv8]

i think they should decriminalise the "social drugs" but be firmer on punishment for 'anti-social' drugs
i have adopted a child from ice parents and no matter how hard anyone tries to get the parents off it, they get straight back on and they have no convictions, so in their eyes they can do what they want
they might go to jail for a few months at a time for petty stuff but that's it

i'd like to see welfare drug tests, no more new joggers if you are in the pipe

[russellw]

It's a vexed question. Being in my teens and early 20's in the 70's, I was obviously exposed to the plethora of recreational drugs that were around at the time but didn't really fancy anything more than the Friday night puff of weed with a few mates.

We did, however, watch some of those around us ruin (and in some cases lose) their lives as some of the drugs weren't a good choice for some of the people and therein is the dilemma.

Let's look at the two current legal drugs: alcohol and tobacco. They are both heavily taxed and a great source of revenue for Govco but, in a twist of irony, the one that causes the least social issues (tobacco) is the more vilified and more restricted in use.
The commonly used argument against tobacco is the health cost but it's currently (using 2016 numbers) only about half the cost of alcohol related health issues so there's more hype than truth in the concerns.

The biggest issue that I can see is the reaction to drugs by various individuals. We all know people who become aggressive, anti-social, maudlin (etc. etc.) after sufficient quantities of alcohol have been consumed while others are less negatively impacted but there isn't much doubt that alcohol and it's abuse have created massive social and economic problems as well as being a significant contributor to road trauma and other deaths. Do we really want to add to the list of drugs that people can react badly to?

Cheers
Russ

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by russellw

The biggest issue that I can see is the reaction to drugs by various individuals. We all know people who become aggressive, anti-social, maudlin (etc. etc.) after sufficient quantities of alcohol have been consumed while others are less negatively impacted but there isn't much doubt that alcohol and it's abuse have created massive social and economic problems as well as being a significant contributor to road trauma and other deaths. Do we really want to add to the list of drugs that people can react badly to?

Cheers
Russ

People already abuse them as it is with the current legal situation anyway, the only difference is the drug dealer and organised crime manufacturing it is the one making the profit here, not the Government that would get a slice of the pie in the regulation scenario.

if they were legalised I'd say you might get the odd fence sitter throw their hat in the ring and dabble but it's like tobacco, I've never touched cigarettes in my life, it's perfectly legal, I can buy them everywhere it just doesn't interest me.

[mick taylor]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

People already abuse them as it is with the current legal situation anyway, the only difference is the drug dealer and organised crime manufacturing it is the one making the profit here, not the Government that would get a slice of the pie in the regulation scenario.

if they were legalised I'd say you might get the odd fence sitter throw their hat in the ring and dabble but it's like tobacco, I've never touched cigarettes in my life, it's perfectly legal, I can buy them everywhere it just doesn't interest me.

I have smokes 3 cigarettes in my life and I hated my mum and dad smoking and I only smoked them when I was in grade 8 and then said that's it never again, as for smoking dope I hated anyone who smoked dope or did anything other, but I had a mate that smoking was, is his life ambition he was terrified of his dad finding out that he smoked fags that he would hide them in his car. and then he started smoking dope at 20yo and then one day I had nothing to live for, totally hated my job not to mention being ripped off totally and had no girlfriend lived in a town that I hated, so I thought f it ! but I met many wonderful people who smoked dope and had great times and they never wanted to fight anyone, but as for all the morons who drank grog about that town, they were always itching for a fight.
I met a Dutch girl and she said no one as a view to smoking dope like we do hear, it came across that the Dutch had their head screwed on right about drugs and the childishness of Australians would see something taboo and go and do it just in spite ect. but she said no one had such immature childish antics regarding what we seen it here for, we are much like the USA in being simpletons and West Europe never looked up to the USA as a role model of culture that's for sure that I knew of back then but they look like total fools nowadays due to the Political Correctness cancer that has poisoned their cultures body and soul.

[Junkyard-Dog]

Screenshotted your response for future reference.

Spot on imo.

[MattSAU2XR8]

Decriminalising drugs is a very broad concept. At one end of the spectrum it might mean a person caught smoking a joint in his living room after putting in a ten hour day at work doesn't get fined or whatever - and this seems pretty sensible.

But at the other end of the spectrum lets assume someone buys some MDMA legally at the pharmacy, and suffers a brain injury, or some cocaine and has a heart attack, or some LSD and then goes mad and kills someone, who is to blame and who pays for the aftermath? Not saying it will happen often, but it would be silly to say it will never happen.

As things stand at the moment:
- Legal drugs of abuse are limited to cigarettes and alcohol
- Illegal drugs of abuse include most medical drugs (including opiates, benzoes), and then of course heroin, speed, MDMA, LSD, marijuana.
- Quite a few people take presently 'illegal' drugs and a small percentage of them come to grief.

The argument for decriminalisation seems to be that if it is not illegal then the drugs will be purer and users will be more likely to seek help, and so less harm will result.

But the flipside is that if the drugs are not illegal, will more people end up taking them, so that although the drugs are less dangerous, more people taking them can still lead to the same amount of harm?

I don't have a 'moral' position to push here. Don't really care what other people put in their bodies. But at the end of the day there will always be a subset of the population who are inclined to take more drugs than is good for them, or not pay takes, or not wear seatbelts, or not fence their pool, or not wear lifejackets, or drink while boating at night, of not vaccinate their kids, or not educate their kids, and so on. So why decide to decriminalise drugs only - why not just decriminalise everything?

[mick taylor]

Originally Posted by MattSAU2XR8

Decriminalising drugs is a very broad concept. At one end of the spectrum it might mean a person caught smoking a joint in his living room after putting in a ten hour day at work doesn't get fined or whatever - and this seems pretty sensible.

But at the other end of the spectrum lets assume someone buys some MDMA legally at the pharmacy, and suffers a brain injury, or some cocaine and has a heart attack, or some LSD and then goes mad and kills someone, who is to blame and who pays for the aftermath? Not saying it will happen often, but it would be silly to say it will never happen.

As things stand at the moment:
- Legal drugs of abuse are limited to cigarettes and alcohol
- Illegal drugs of abuse include most medical drugs (including opiates, benzoes), and then of course heroin, speed, MDMA, LSD, marijuana.
- Quite a few people take presently 'illegal' drugs and a small percentage of them come to grief.

The argument for decriminalisation seems to be that if it is not illegal then the drugs will be purer and users will be more likely to seek help, and so less harm will result.

But the flipside is that if the drugs are not illegal, will more people end up taking them, so that although the drugs are less dangerous, more people taking them can still lead to the same amount of harm?

I don't have a 'moral' position to push here. Don't really care what other people put in their bodies. But at the end of the day there will always be a subset of the population who are inclined to take more drugs than is good for them, or not pay takes, or not wear seatbelts, or not fence their pool, or not wear lifejackets, or drink while boating at night, of not vaccinate their kids, or not educate their kids, and so on. So why decide to decriminalise drugs only - why not just decriminalise everything?

I know a bloke from South Australia and he pointed out that decriminalising dope their, was a stupid thing to do.

Licencing is the only way to bring about change in how to deal with drugs as to a cultures wake up call as to what is seen as pathetic and the line draw as to what should or can be tolerated. until them points are ingrained into the peoples culture their will only be hell to pay. you can not put a handle on such until we do.
But then again their will always be x amount of blow fly's and pond life that we can do nothing about, but that's life.

[Fev]

World wide evidence overwhelming supports decriminalization of Cat 1 drugs and treatment of users. While pot should be legalized for recreational use 18 and over for the tax and that people will actually use less.

You have to back up both with strong support networks and no interference from the conservatives and bible thumpers. You can't just decriminalize it and leave it as a free for all for the dealers, it doesn't work and never has worked. You need to cut them out and make it more attractive and easier for users to go the legal route.

[mick taylor]

Originally Posted by Fev

World wide evidence overwhelming supports decriminalization of Cat 1 drugs and treatment of users. While pot should be legalized for recreational use 18 and over for the tax and that people will actually use less.

You have to back up both with strong support networks and no interference from the conservatives and bible thumpers. You can't just decriminalize it and leave it as a free for all for the dealers, it doesn't work and never has worked. You need to cut them out and make it more attractive and easier for users to go the legal route.

Look to the Dutch do they have a problem like us with drugs.

I am a Conservative and a Bible thumper.
To be a conservative means that one does not experiment with nonsense.
Bible wise has foundations that are solid, problem is that some don't understand that the Law is under Grace with true Christianity and not just only the letter of the Law as it was 2000 years ago, stuck in the mud like and unwilling to think beyond the letter in ignorance. we have a problem Houston ? so lets try work something out that will actual work in the long run.
It's like back in the 1970's their were only X amount of people and cars on the road, but now the rules have had to change because you can't have everyone driving about ****ed like once was common to see and thought nothing of it really because in 15 km you may only drive by 3 cars on the road home where I lived but now it's could be 1000.
So we can not just stick our head in the sand and hope that things will get better with a program that clearly does not work, not to mention kids that are way out of control now because they lack direction, so they are lost and bingo one ends up dead because morons are making the drugs.