UK Government call for drug penalties to be relaxed
20 replies, posted
[B]The penalties for drug misuse should be relaxed so that possession of small amounts would no longer be a criminal offence, the government has been urged.
[/B]The recommendation comes in a report from the UK Drug Policy Commission, which undertook six years of research.
Its detailed report concludes the UK is [B]wasting much of the £3bn it spends each year on tackling illicit drugs[/B].
The Home Office says drug use is falling and it does not plan to alter its approach.
The report, [URL="http://www.ukdpc.org.uk/publication/a-fresh-approach/"]called A Fresh Approach to Drugs,[/URL] says the annual estimated cost to England and Wales of class A drug use is £15bn.
It says that while drug use and drug problems have declined in the UK in recent years, there are still about 2,000 drug-related deaths each year and 380,000 problem drug users.
[B]Some 42,000 people in England and Wales are sentenced annually for drug possession offences and about 160,000 given cannabis warnings, it says, which "amounts to a lot of time and money for police, prosecution and courts".[/B]
The commission says [B]giving people cautions and criminal records for having small quantities is not "proportionate"[/B] and suggests imposing civil penalties, such as fines, or drug treatment orders instead.
It also recommends individuals who grow a small number of cannabis plants should be treated leniently, to undermine organised crime networks that produce stronger types of cannabis.
[B]However, it does not call for the decriminalisation or legalisation of most drugs.[/B]
"We do not believe that there is sufficient evidence at the moment to support the case for removing criminal penalties for the major production or supply offences of most drugs," it said.
It calls for a review of the Misuse of Drugs Act and drugs classification, which it says has "lost credibility" for many people.
[B]It suggests technical decisions about the classification of individual drugs should be taken by an independent body, with parliamentary oversight.[/B]
The report says some key planks of government policy - including major drug seizures - have little or no impact, and [B]some programmes in schools could even have increased the use of drugs.[/B]
It says there is "little evidence" that a recent increase in prison sentence lengths for drug production and supply has deterred dealers or affected availability.
It recommends that the main political parties should establish a cross-party forum to agree on how drug problems can be addressed "in a cost-effective and evidence-based way".
[URL]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19942378[/URL]
Nothing will change. The UK government has a history of ignoring evidence on drugs (Ala Professor Nutt). The Tory's are 'officially' more hardline on drugs than Labour, so I think it'll get poo-poo'd again, especially with Theresa May in charge.
We waste so much money prosecuting petty drug offenses, filling up prisons to bursting and then giving child molesters half their sentence because the government won't build more.
Watch as absolutely fuck all happens, yet again.
A quite sensible conclusion; Shame that nothing'll happen.
The move has been done to free up prisons and police time honestly, not because they want to push ahead drug decriminalization. Though, I think this will act encourage legalization in the future.
All that criminalization of drugs is just wasting precious judicial resources that could be used on tackling actual crimes like human trafficking or thievery or murder. If they just legalized and regulated all the drugs in the UK, not only would the police have to deal with less bullshit, but it'd probably be makin' it rain for the government what with all the money raked in from drug sales.
Still, the drugs should definitely be restricted to people of legal age, since kids with drugs is almost as bad as kids with guns. Also there should be tons of awareness programs recommending that people Toke/Snort/Smoke/Shoot Up Responsibly (tm), so as to avoid the health problems associated with substance abuse, and even if some people fail to heed the dangers of abusing drugs, it means more business for rehabilitation clinics, which in turn means that we'd ideally have more people training to go into medicine and psychology to help addicts kick any habit they might acquire from regular visits to the "Candy Shop".
[QUOTE=ironman17;38050055]All that criminalization of drugs is just wasting precious judicial resources that could be used on tackling actual crimes like human trafficking or thievery or murder. If they just legalized and regulated all the drugs in the UK, not only would the police have to deal with less bullshit, but it'd probably be makin' it rain for the government what with all the money raked in from drug sales.
Still, the drugs should definitely be restricted to people of legal age, since kids with drugs is almost as bad as kids with guns. Also there should be tons of awareness programs recommending that people Toke/Snort/Smoke/Shoot Up Responsibly (tm), so as to avoid the health problems associated with substance abuse, and even if some people fail to heed the dangers of abusing drugs, it means more business for rehabilitation clinics, which in turn means that we'd ideally have more people training to go into medicine and psychology to help addicts kick any habit they might acquire from regular visits to the "Candy Shop".[/QUOTE]
Isn't that just exploitation?
[QUOTE=Yuskolov123;38050275]Isn't that just exploitation?[/QUOTE]
Same rules apply for alcoholics and smokers.
aka no
Well, I can see your concerns about rehab costing tons of money, but on retrospective maybe the NHS could deal with it if they get more staff, as well as not being shat on by those ghastly Tories. Also, to address your concerns about the government exploiting users of drugs by making money off of them, they already do this with taxes on cigarettes and alcohol, which are technically drugs already; some would call them "soft drugs", but they're still drugs.
[QUOTE=ironman17;38050380]Well, I can see your concerns about rehab costing tons of money, but on retrospective maybe the NHS could deal with it if they get more staff, as well as not being shat on by those ghastly Tories. Also, to address your concerns about the government exploiting users of drugs by making money off of them, they already do this with taxes on cigarettes and alcohol, which are technically drugs already; some would call them "soft drugs", but they're still drugs.[/QUOTE]
we wouldn't need a rehab if people didn't have reasons to turn to hard drugs in the first place. the first and foremost concern in that case should be revamping the educational system and ensuring that everyone in the UK has a high standard of living.
[QUOTE=ZombieDawgs;38050342]Same rules apply for alcoholics and smokers.
aka no[/QUOTE]
I'd argue that smoking is exploitation. Alcohol on the other hand is sold in fairly small percentages so it's not a huge problem when it comes to exploitation since you have to make a serious effort to get addicted.
[editline]15th October 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Bobie;38050434]we wouldn't need a rehab if people didn't have reasons to turn to hard drugs in the first place. the first and foremost concern in that case should be revamping the educational system and ensuring that everyone in the UK has a high standard of living.[/QUOTE]
We need more employment, something the Tories have no intention of solving. In fact they plan to cut back spending to the point where our spending will be less than that of the US.
[url]http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/15/graph-cameron-wants-shrink-state[/url]
So no hope of new jobs if they get reelected
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;38050456]I'd argue that smoking is exploitation. Alcohol on the other hand is sold in fairly small percentages so it's not a huge problem when it comes to exploitation since you have to make a serious effort to get addicted.
[editline]15th October 2012[/editline]
We need more employment, something the Tories have no intention of solving. In fact they plan to cut back spending to the point where our spending will be less than that of the US.
[url]http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/15/graph-cameron-wants-shrink-state[/url]
So no hope of new jobs if they get reelected[/QUOTE]
i have my doubts for a tory re-election, regardless. it's just a shame we now live in a two-party system.
[QUOTE=Bobie;38050507]i have my doubts for a tory re-election, regardless. it's just a shame we now live in a two-party system.[/QUOTE]
I'd happy with labour for now, just wish they'd drop some of their conservative policy and put a bit more socialism back into their policies.
[QUOTE=Bobie;38050434]we wouldn't need a rehab if people didn't have reasons to turn to hard drugs in the first place. the first and foremost concern in that case should be revamping the educational system and ensuring that everyone in the UK has a high standard of living.[/QUOTE]
Yep, that's a right important thing; scrapping uni fees would be one step closer to that, not to mention finding some way to make a bunch of new (and possibly engaging) jobs to decrease the general percentage of unemployed folks, like having a load more carpenters and stonemasons for when we start running out of the oil we need to make plastics with. But to create jobs, we need money, and if governments decide to finally cash in on the drug trade once the electronic old men finally pop their clogs, they'll have a good source of revenue with which they could invest in new jobs and ignore David Cameron's fetish for nuclear yachts that run on champagne and orphan blood.
Also, I'm probably voting for Labour next election, since even though they weren't the best of chaps back in the day, they're still probably better than David Cameron's fizzy orphan blood booze-cruise that pisses all over the "lower" classes. Ideally i'd prefer a Labour-LibDem Coalition with a LibDem PM/Deputy PM who isn't a total jellyfish made of anal Cleggma. Socialism that serves the people will always be better than Conservative special interests, even though some people twisted the ideals into something completely different and abhorrent. It's also better to remain socialist and not embrace some of the less desirable parts of old world Communism.
[QUOTE=ironman17;38050645]Yep, that's a right important thing; scrapping uni fees would be one step closer to that, not to mention finding some way to make a bunch of new (and possibly engaging) jobs to decrease the general percentage of unemployed folks, like having a load more carpenters and stonemasons for when we start running out of the oil we need to make plastics with. But to create jobs, we need money, and if governments decide to finally cash in on the drug trade once the electronic old men finally pop their clogs, they'll have a good source of revenue with which they could invest in new jobs and ignore David Cameron's fetish for nuclear yachts that run on champagne and orphan blood.
Also, I'm probably voting for Labour next election, since even though they weren't the best of chaps back in the day, they're still probably better than David Cameron's fizzy orphan blood booze-cruise that pisses all over the "lower" classes. Ideally i'd prefer a Labour-LibDem Coalition with a LibDem PM/Deputy PM who isn't a total jellyfish made of anal Cleggma. Socialism that serves the people will always be better than Conservative special interests, even though some people twisted the ideals into something completely different and abhorrent. It's also better to remain socialist and not embrace some of the less desirable parts of old world Communism.[/QUOTE]
Labour were good back in the blair days, but their mistakes got brought up more than their successes.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;38051109]Labour were good back in the blair days, but their mistakes got brought up more than their successes.[/QUOTE]
the thatcher era brought everyone way over into the crazy right side though. even the lib dems are more conservative than anything these days
maybe if a way way left guy got elected, then it would create the same kinda instance. who knows.
[QUOTE=Bobie;38050507]i have my doubts for a tory re-election, regardless. it's just a shame we now live in a two-party system.[/QUOTE]
Can you even call it that? Tories seem to run fucking everything while Libs sit in a corner finger slamming themselves.
[QUOTE=spekter;38051770]Can you even call it that? Tories seem to run fucking everything while Libs sit in a corner finger slamming themselves.[/QUOTE]
i meant more in the sense that the only choice is labour or tory. lib dems don't really have a chance at winning a majority and can only succumb to one of the two's will
[QUOTE=Bobie;38051138]the thatcher era brought everyone way over into the crazy right side though. even the lib dems are more conservative than anything these days
maybe if a way way left guy got elected, then it would create the same kinda instance. who knows.[/QUOTE]
If the greens would drop the green title and drop some of their more crazy policies then they could be an actually decent party, but they don't seem to have any plans on doing that.
[QUOTE=Bobie;38051817]i meant more in the sense that the only choice is labour or tory. lib dems don't really have a chance at winning a majority and can only succumb to one of the two's will[/QUOTE]
Ah right, very true.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;38051988]If the greens would drop the green title and drop some of their more crazy policies then they could be an actually decent party, but they don't seem to have any plans on doing that.[/QUOTE]
i want to like the green party, i really do, but.. ugh. some of their policies emphasise the 'green' a bit too much.
we need a social democrat party to be honest, or just an entry-level left wing party that doesn't scream "SOCIALISM!" so it's not a niche and the general public can trust them. alas it's probably just a pipe dream
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.