PDA

View Full Version : Legalise drugs, says former defence secretary



daledo
16th December 2010, 10:15
Bob Ainsworth describes war on drugs as 'nothing short of a disaster' and calls on government to look at other options

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Admin/BkFill/Default_image_group/2010/12/16/1292486452832/Former-Defence-Secretary--007.jpg
Bob Ainsworth has called on the government to replace 'failed war on drugs' with strict regulation. Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA

Former defence secretary Bob Ainsworth has called for the government to consider legalising drugs, saying prohibition has failed to protect the public.

The war on drugs had been "nothing short of a disaster" and it was time to study other options, including decriminalising possession of drugs and legally regulating their production and supply, Ainsworth said.

Referring to the legalisation of alcohol in the United States after 13 years of prohibition, he said: "After 50 years of global drug prohibition it is time for governments throughout the world to repeat this shift with currently illegal drugs."

The Labour backbencher, who was previously a Home Office drugs minister, went on: "Politicians and the media need to engage in a genuine and grown up debate about alternatives to prohibition, so that we can build a consensus based on delivering the best outcomes for our children and communities.

"Prohibition has failed to protect us.

"Leaving the drugs market in the hands of criminals causes huge and unnecessary harms to individuals, communities and entire countries, with the poor the hardest hit.

"We spend billions of pounds without preventing the wide availability of drugs.

"It is time to replace our failed war on drugs with a strict system of legal regulation, to make the world a safer, healthier place, especially for our children.

"We must take the trade away from organised criminals and hand it to the control of doctors and pharmacists."

Ainsworth called on those on all sides of the debate to support "an independent, evidence-based review, exploring all policy options, including further resourcing the war on drugs, decriminalising the possession of drugs, and legally regulating their production and supply".

"One way to do this would be an impact assessment of the Misuse of Drugs Act in line with the 2002 home affairs select committee finding – which included David Cameron – for the government to explore alternatives to prohibition, including legal regulation.

"As drugs minister in the Home Office I saw how prohibition fails to reduce the harm that drugs cause in the UK, fuelling burglaries, gifting the trade to gangsters and increasing HIV infections.

"My experience as defence secretary, with specific responsibilities in Afghanistan, showed to me that the war on drugs creates the very conditions that perpetuate the illegal trade, while undermining international development and security.

"My departure from the front benches gives me the freedom to express my long-held view that whilst it was put in place with the best of intentions, the war on drugs has been nothing short of a disaster."

Ainsworth criticised the government's new drugs strategy, which aims to shift the focus from reducing the harm caused by drugs to recovery as the most effective route out of dependency.

"It is described by the home secretary as fundamentally different to what has gone before; it is not," he said.

"To the extent that it is different, it is potentially harmful because it retreats from the principle of harm reduction, which has been one of the main reasons for the reduction in acquisitive crime in recent years."

Former Conservative party deputy leader Peter Lilley said it was time "for all politicians to stop using the issue as a political football".

"I have long advocated breaking the link between soft and hard drugs – by legalising cannabis while continuing to prohibit hard drugs," he said.

"But I support Bob Ainsworth's sensible call for a proper, evidence-based review, comparing the pros and cons of the current prohibitionist approach with all the alternatives, including wider decriminalisation and legal regulation."

Crime prevention minister James Brokenshire said: "Drugs are harmful and ruin lives – legalisation is not the answer.

"Decriminalisation is a simplistic solution that fails to recognise the complexity of the problem and ignores the serious harm drug taking poses to the individual.

"Legalisation fails to address the reasons people misuse drugs in the first place or the misery, cost and lost opportunities that dependence causes individuals, their families and the wider community."

The One
16th December 2010, 11:11
Apparantley scientific advisers are now allowed to disagree with Government over policy

David Willetts, the Science and Universities Minister, said on 9th June 2010 that it is of the utmost importance that independent scientific advice is respected by the Government. The Tory minister is attempting to repair the damage caused by the sacking of David Nutt, the chief drugs adviser, for disagreeing with policy on cannabis and Ecstasy classification.Mr Willetts said he would transform the Government’s relationship with science by giving experts the right to disagree with policy.Yeah right when have the government ever listened.

The truth is David Nutt who was the chief drugs advisor was sacked for disagreeing with government policy. I truly believe that if it doesn’t fit into what the government want in their policy then there really is no point in having advisors in the first place. They just don’t listen if it’s not their way then it’s nobody’s way. If the government are not willing to listen to the top man who was sacked then who are they going to listen to (Themselves).

Statistics show that David Nutt was 100% correct when advising the government on drugs but they don’t listen. When confronted with the truth if it dosent fit into their policy then they try to discredit the experts.


http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBYQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.guardian.co.uk%2Fscience%2Fpo litical-science%2F2010%2Fdec%2F07%2Fscientists-drugs-advisory-council-acmd&ei=RfQJTdjPDIXKhAfE2M2YDw&usg=AFQjCNHCtueisu_t29duTSG-30thIpFQlQ

John Parslow
16th December 2010, 11:26
If we start to legalise drugs what will the C.I.A. do for pocket money? JP :cool:

The One
16th December 2010, 12:17
If we start to legalise drugs what will the C.I.A. do for pocket money? JP love it

They could always take a percentage of the big issue:o . The Big Issue is a business solution to a social problem, demonstrating that an organisation can succeed whilst being simultaneously driven by commercial aims and social objectives

kouby
16th December 2010, 16:00
I like this guy. It would probably drive those CIA totally nuts, I can already imagine them loosing hours of sleep over this!

Ahkenaten
16th December 2010, 17:53
Bob Ainsworth describes war on drugs as 'nothing short of a disaster' and calls on government to look at other options

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Admin/BkFill/Default_image_group/2010/12/16/1292486452832/Former-Defence-Secretary--007.jpg
Bob Ainsworth has called on the government to replace 'failed war on drugs' with strict regulation. Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA

Former defence secretary Bob Ainsworth has called for the government to consider legalising drugs, saying prohibition has failed to protect the public.

The war on drugs had been "nothing short of a disaster" and it was time to study other options, including decriminalising possession of drugs and legally regulating their production and supply, Ainsworth said.

Referring to the legalisation of alcohol in the United States after 13 years of prohibition, he said: "After 50 years of global drug prohibition it is time for governments throughout the world to repeat this shift with currently illegal drugs."

The Labour backbencher, who was previously a Home Office drugs minister, went on: "Politicians and the media need to engage in a genuine and grown up debate about alternatives to prohibition, so that we can build a consensus based on delivering the best outcomes for our children and communities.

"Prohibition has failed to protect us.

"Leaving the drugs market in the hands of criminals causes huge and unnecessary harms to individuals, communities and entire countries, with the poor the hardest hit.

"We spend billions of pounds without preventing the wide availability of drugs.

"It is time to replace our failed war on drugs with a strict system of legal regulation, to make the world a safer, healthier place, especially for our children.

"We must take the trade away from organised criminals and hand it to the control of doctors and pharmacists."

Ainsworth called on those on all sides of the debate to support "an independent, evidence-based review, exploring all policy options, including further resourcing the war on drugs, decriminalising the possession of drugs, and legally regulating their production and supply".

"One way to do this would be an impact assessment of the Misuse of Drugs Act in line with the 2002 home affairs select committee finding – which included David Cameron – for the government to explore alternatives to prohibition, including legal regulation.

"As drugs minister in the Home Office I saw how prohibition fails to reduce the harm that drugs cause in the UK, fuelling burglaries, gifting the trade to gangsters and increasing HIV infections.

"My experience as defence secretary, with specific responsibilities in Afghanistan, showed to me that the war on drugs creates the very conditions that perpetuate the illegal trade, while undermining international development and security.

"My departure from the front benches gives me the freedom to express my long-held view that whilst it was put in place with the best of intentions, the war on drugs has been nothing short of a disaster."

Ainsworth criticised the government's new drugs strategy, which aims to shift the focus from reducing the harm caused by drugs to recovery as the most effective route out of dependency.

"It is described by the home secretary as fundamentally different to what has gone before; it is not," he said.

"To the extent that it is different, it is potentially harmful because it retreats from the principle of harm reduction, which has been one of the main reasons for the reduction in acquisitive crime in recent years."

Former Conservative party deputy leader Peter Lilley said it was time "for all politicians to stop using the issue as a political football".

"I have long advocated breaking the link between soft and hard drugs – by legalising cannabis while continuing to prohibit hard drugs," he said.

"But I support Bob Ainsworth's sensible call for a proper, evidence-based review, comparing the pros and cons of the current prohibitionist approach with all the alternatives, including wider decriminalisation and legal regulation."

Crime prevention minister James Brokenshire said: "Drugs are harmful and ruin lives – legalisation is not the answer.

"Decriminalisation is a simplistic solution that fails to recognise the complexity of the problem and ignores the serious harm drug taking poses to the individual.

"Legalisation fails to address the reasons people misuse drugs in the first place or the misery, cost and lost opportunities that dependence causes individuals, their families and the wider community."

The government rolled out its replacement for the War on Drugs shortly after 911 - the Never-Ending War on Terror(ism)....................the beauty of the new war is that it employs more people, makes more money for TPTB, and inasmuch as it conveniently is positioned in the highest drug-producing countries in the world, permits certain forces to maintain control over the drug supply and profits, thereby maintaining the War on Drugs as a subtext of the War on Terrorism. Private Prisons continue to proliferate, civil liberties and rule of law contrinues to deteriorate......all in all, another beautiful 'solution' to solve a problem created by those offering it. EXCEPT FOR ONE THING: this is an assault on our minds, souls and bodies, make no mistake.

Fredkc
16th December 2010, 17:58
"... Private Prisons continue to proliferate..."

In my opinion, one of the most despicable acts a government can engage in.

jack
16th December 2010, 18:28
Maybe with their legality people might have a new found respect for some of the consciousness expanding effects of certain compounds. I'm not going to call them drugs because the word has become something that brings to mind scenes of devestation and destruction. I'm talking about compounds like Lysergic acid diethylamide and Dimethyltryptamine. The same compounds that received months of research during the 60's with some fascinating results bringing people a glimpse of something more then this third dimensional reality, the first taste of an expanded sense of reality. But we wont talk about that. We wont talk about the increased inteligence and intense urge towords spiritual inclinations without any need to continue using the drug to bring about the effects. Its as if the catterpiller had twisted its cocoon with this one experience to inevitably take to the skys in the time to come. But somehow, im guessing, they wont make these particular drugs legal.

Lost Soul
16th December 2010, 19:00
Drugs do nasty things to the body and mine. However, I'd rather legalize it than lose any more of our civil rights because of a predestined losing war on drugs.

It's a sorry state of affair that people aren't taught spirituality so as to turn inward for expanding the mind as opposed to relying on chemical substances. Still, free will should be respected and if someone is on a self-destructive path, let them go so long as they don't steal or hurt others or rack up the emergency room or ambulance expenses.

BMJ
17th December 2010, 13:18
Bob Ainsworth is WRONG.

I have seen first hand what it can do to a person and the government should never legalise drugs like speed or ice.
An addicts only concern is how to get the next hit and so they will do "almost anything" to get the money so that they can get that hit. If they don't get that hit when they need it they turn into monsters and can become very violent and dangerous.

MargueriteBee
17th December 2010, 15:54
TPTB won't allow this because they are the criminals making the money.