whats the point in drug policies?

Question

so many different countries now use different policies to stop drug use, but do any of them actually work?!

Answer 1

No, and probably never will. There will always be drug users in whichever guise

Answer 2

It is possible to maintain drug use recreationally(obviously there are some massively addictive drugs to which this does not apply-Maybe cocaine heroine tobacco) so what is actually wrong with 'drug users'? it's only too easy to connect this term to a burnt out crack-head, but you probably know at least a few without realising.
The problem therefore is that drug money pays for far worse vices as it travels up the criminal chain. Obvious answer- legalise drugs. I'm loathe to see more money find it's way into the Government coffers but it's better than some Drug dealer/ pimp/ people trafficker/ terrorist. This is quite a generalisation but you get the picture and perhaps with a new source of income the Government could lower taxes elsewhere. I don't see this as likely but at least there would be a legal way to kill the pain.

Answer 3

Its all about the reduction in use and acceptable level of controlled drugs and their misuse.
By introducing controls they stop the majority of the population from partaking in this activity.
No country or control has ever fully stopped the misuse of controlled drugs by any measures. Even the death penalty in certain countries does not stop people from trying to beat the system. Big gamble.
The irony in this country is the biggest killers of the population, tobacco and alcohol, are legal.
I do not condone the use of controlled drugs as I've seen the effects, where they come from and the criminality it sustains. Drug dealers see themselves as service providers/entrepreneurs rather than criminals and accept prosecution as an occupational hazard. In reality they prey on the weaker members of society who then cannot get support from the government to help them out.
The only true deterrent from drug use is education and not the damp eyed Nancy boy education that today's schools are obliged to teach. I want to see drug addicts wheeled into classes with cysts on their arms, the teen mothers who took no precautions through a drug induced euphoria, why not even a few photos of the ultimate cost of drugs shown to the younger pupils to put them off? This shock tactic combined with proper education as to the effects of drugs and how these dealers actually get the product (up backsides for example) into the country should help in the long term
So, to answer your question, no. Especially not in this country where the courts won't impose a substantial custodial sentence.

Answer 4

To be honest, no.

But politicians are responsible to the money that ensures that they are elected, and the fools who think that they will represent them. Much of the money comes from a conservative set of businessmen, who demand some sort of control over the elements that make their businesses and neighbourhoods less valuable.

Drugs are not controlled in any way, so the content of the drugs is un-regulated, thus the suppliers, who are themselves buisnessmen, want to sell as much as they can, and get rich.

The pushers, get a smaller share, but have the same goals to get rich quick, so the end result is a bunch of addicts who need to support a very expensive habit.

This equals crime, and the supporters of the politicians would remove the funding if they were seen to do noting to combat this crime. Thus they have to go through the motions of making policies to try and control this uncontrollable trade.

If you could remove the pushers, and guarantee the content of the drugs, then you may stop further addicts, long enough to to actually remove the problem, but the sad truth is that some people will always be addicted to something, and politicians can not afford to be seen to ignore one area of their problems, because the opposition would slaughter them.

Answer 5

If you want to know what works and what doesn't, you can find the full text of the major government commission reports on the subject at http://druglibrary.org/schaffer under Major Studies of Drugs and Drug Policy.

In short, no policy is perfect, but non-criminal approaches work better than criminal approaches.

Answer 6

Control of distribution. How many pharmaceutical companies and alcohol manufacturers get into power. The idea is to control the chemicals in our bodies and make a lot of dosh at the same time.

No intention to malign the synthesising the chemicals into useful medicines. The political control of poisons is at the best haphazard and at the worst hazardous (being a play on words) and I am not so sure I care a damn!

Answer 7

All of our drug laws are based either on racism or hatred of a different specific group. It's a way to control them.

There is pretty much no medical reason for any drug to be illegal, except meth. Addiction is easily dealt with, and if drugs were legal even easier.

Answer 8

There is no point as it is all propaganda for the masses.
It is difficult to believe the politicians who talk of drug control when they are the primary cause of allowing and condoning the highest yields in the world coming out of Afghanistan, all since the USA & Uk got involved there.
The poor Afgan farmers need to earn a living????? what kind of politicians have we got???

Answer 9

I think David C has hit the nail on the head very true nothing will ever work

Answer 10

They should make all drugs legal.

As soon as they are legal im gonna rush out and inject myself with heroin, cocaine and smack - of course i am.