tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3881762807913180318.post698554755680911270..comments2024-01-23T16:53:02.428+00:00Comments on Mark Thompson: Is public opinion way ahead of MPs on drug policy reform?Mark Thompsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00744387583593537268noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3881762807913180318.post-12934673101211991302009-06-18T11:15:47.730+01:002009-06-18T11:15:47.730+01:00If the LibDems were actually Liberals they would s...If the LibDems were actually Liberals they would support legalisation or at least decriminalisation. It makes sense and would result in drugs and society being a safer place. The party hypocrisy is further illustrated by their support of draconian legislation regarding smoking. They supported the smoking ban, which is the Nanny state at its most viscious and draconian. There are far less restrictive alternatives,and the so-called evidence about second hand smoke was blindly accepted, as it fits with the real illiberal 'i know whats good for you, better than you do' attitude in a party that wants to give away our freedom and democracy to European bankers. Liberal my arse!Andyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02791104221799133550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3881762807913180318.post-66780128465054462892009-06-16T14:12:59.781+01:002009-06-16T14:12:59.781+01:00Although Mark W is right about parts of the public...Although Mark W is right about parts of the public there is also a large section of the public that is head and shoulders above the hypocritical posturing of the main political parties.<br /><br />You only have to hear the politicians admitting they once smoked a joint but didn't enjoy it - I suspect large numbers of people would either think 'liar' or 'you're doing it wrong'.<br /><br />Until the political classes ditch the censorious attitudes around drugs where they are unable to admit even basic and obvious facts we'll never get a decent debate.<br /><br />Millions of people in the UK have a far more balanced view of drugs than either the tabloids or the parliamentary parties - whether they are the majority or not though I wouldn't like to sayJim Jeppshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17410387006098326671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3881762807913180318.post-49038817596898288702009-06-16T09:58:58.072+01:002009-06-16T09:58:58.072+01:00Speaking of the Economist on drugs, they were advo...Speaking of the Economist on drugs, they were advocating legalisation <a href="http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13251312" title="Hooked on just saying no" rel="nofollow">already in 1989</a>.<br /><br />Perhaps this is a demonstration of the limitations of the written word in changing minds? Supposedly everyone who is anyone reads The Economist, but that hasn't stopped politicians from covering their ears and ignoring rational argument just like toddlers do.Niklas Smithhttp://www.csld.org.uk/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3881762807913180318.post-64438025075297801452009-06-16T09:42:20.780+01:002009-06-16T09:42:20.780+01:00This seems to be a classic case of the political a...<i>This seems to be a classic case of the political and media classes conspiring with each other to keep debate about a particular issue completely under wraps and I cannot for the life of me fathom why this should be.</i><br /><br />Perhaps it's because politicians <b>like</b> running our lives? I agree with you that there seems to be something of a stich-up going on. There are praiseworthy exceptions, such as the famous Guardian front page about the study that showed that cannibis was a much smaller public health problem than alcohol. The Economist has also stuck its head above the parapet to advocate legalisation more than once, most recently on <a href="http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13237193" title="How to stop the drug wars" rel="nofollow">5 March this year</a>.<br /><br />It was actually that Economist issue (there were several articles on drugs in it) that changed my mind about legalisation. Legalising cannibis is a no-brainer if you believe in evidence-based policy or in the harm principle.<br /><br />One of the most common recent arguments against legalising cannibis has been that it has now become more powerful and is full of dangerous additives. In other words, our political leaders are telling us that it was all right for them to smoke dope when they were rebellious teenagers but it's wrong for today's teens.<br /><br />In fact this is an argument <b>for</b> legalisation: the state can only enforce quality control if distribution is legal (perhaps through a system of licensed shops). Additionally, separating cannibis distribution from the distribution of other drugs such as crack cocaine (one of the cases where the harm principle <b>can</b> justify a contined ban) could well reduce demand for them.Niklas Smithhttp://www.csld.org.uk/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3881762807913180318.post-88527571140553917362009-06-15T21:35:37.657+01:002009-06-15T21:35:37.657+01:00I did initially post a rather flippant reply but I...I did initially post a rather flippant reply but I will try and do better.<br /><br />There is a strong argument that much of the harm that drugs cause is because they are illegal. Trying to make them "more illegal" presumably by making the penalties more harsh would be completely self-defeating.<br /><br />Drug problems should be seen as a public health issue and be dealt with accordingly. Similarly why should someone who takes cannabis or ecstacy recreationally, not harming anyone else find themselves on the wrong side of law? Are these drugs really any worse than alcohol?<br /><br />I don't agree that public opinion is with you on this. Received opinion maybe.Mark Thompsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00744387583593537268noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3881762807913180318.post-38133985203698184332009-06-15T21:28:58.593+01:002009-06-15T21:28:58.593+01:00I think 'public opinion' is very much '...I think 'public opinion' is very much 'drugs are harmful and cause crime so should be even more illegal than they are'.<br /><br />Facts and logic are lost on these people.Mark Wadsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07733511175178098449noreply@blogger.com