Wednesday, August 24, 2005
No case for legalising drugs - heroin is so passe.
From yesterday's Guardian Why can't you buy heroin at Boots?" which contained such gems as:
So even with legalisation the illegal market would still exist and would still be very large. Second, proponents of legalisation argue that "pure" heroin is OK health wise as the impurities and contaminants wouldn't exist. Well thats simply nonsense. Heroin is not a drug like alcohol or tobacco where users can function and live a life without it, heroin for the vast majority of users is all encompassing and nothing matters to the user apart from the drug. Pure, easily available and legal heroin would just multiply the problems of drug use.
In this respect having "freedoms" like easy access to legal hard drugs would not lead to people living liberated and free lives but to their enslavement, not only to the drug but to the controllers of the supply of the drug whether they be dealers or the government (like what happened with opium in China in the 1800s).
Heroin in fact used to be available on prescription in the UK. I'm not talking about pre 1950s when doctors could prescribe heroin much like any other opiate (such as morphine) but heroin on prescription as a way to deal with the problems of addiction. It was during the 60s that "recreational" drug use became a major problem and one policy used to try and tackle the rising rates of heroin addiction was through the clinical supply of heroin through medical clinics where addicts would come for treatment and get their heroin. However this programme was a total failure for a variety of reasons
. the number of addicts increased by over 100% in the 1970s when the clinics were running
. crime rates of addicts in the program were much the same as those of addicts outwith
. for addicts in the programme their death rate was about 30 times that of the general population
. most of the registered addicts in the programme continued to turn to illicit sources for more drugs
. most did not decrease their heroin dosage over time
. the black market for illegal heroin continued to thrive drawing in a disproportionate number of these new addicts who were younger than what had been using heroin before
So no legalised heroin or prescription heroin doesn't work.
What really annoys me however is that it is usually always people like Lionel Shriver or the Liberal Democrat MEP Chris Davies who are the ones advocating legalisation of hard drugs. Put simply these are not the sort of people who will have to put up with the consequences of such a decision and who will be forced to live in the communities which are already ravaged by drug abuse. It's not just the problems of crime that is there to feed the habit, it's the use of the drugs itself. It's not pleasant at all - the broken syringes laying on the ground, the users slumped in doorways and alleyways. It's the walking by the chemists or health centre in the morning with the lines of users outside waiting for their methadone. It can be extremely intimidating for staff working in these places or patients (often the most vulnerable is society like pensioners) picking up their prescriptions to have someone coming in looking for their methadone and then getting their hit - so what is it going to be like if it was the same for heroin but on a much greater scale? At least methadone is taken orally. And contrary to what Shriver may write most of these people do not want to be heroin or methadone addicts. They do not want to be junkies, they continue using however because that is the nature of addiction.
Most of us aren't heroin addicts because we don't want to be heroin addicts. Or coke heads or meth freaks. The people who do want to be junkies are junkies. Were hard drugs decriminalised, it's dubious that consumption would appreciably rise.First of all the massive increase in heroin users that would result from legalisation (and there would be a massive increase) would multiply the problems of drug abuse far more. Plus legalisation wouldn't take away the illegal market anyway (remember that the black market on cigarettes and alcohol, which are both legal of course, is worth billions of £ a year)
So even with legalisation the illegal market would still exist and would still be very large. Second, proponents of legalisation argue that "pure" heroin is OK health wise as the impurities and contaminants wouldn't exist. Well thats simply nonsense. Heroin is not a drug like alcohol or tobacco where users can function and live a life without it, heroin for the vast majority of users is all encompassing and nothing matters to the user apart from the drug. Pure, easily available and legal heroin would just multiply the problems of drug use.
In this respect having "freedoms" like easy access to legal hard drugs would not lead to people living liberated and free lives but to their enslavement, not only to the drug but to the controllers of the supply of the drug whether they be dealers or the government (like what happened with opium in China in the 1800s).
Heroin in fact used to be available on prescription in the UK. I'm not talking about pre 1950s when doctors could prescribe heroin much like any other opiate (such as morphine) but heroin on prescription as a way to deal with the problems of addiction. It was during the 60s that "recreational" drug use became a major problem and one policy used to try and tackle the rising rates of heroin addiction was through the clinical supply of heroin through medical clinics where addicts would come for treatment and get their heroin. However this programme was a total failure for a variety of reasons
. the number of addicts increased by over 100% in the 1970s when the clinics were running
. crime rates of addicts in the program were much the same as those of addicts outwith
. for addicts in the programme their death rate was about 30 times that of the general population
. most of the registered addicts in the programme continued to turn to illicit sources for more drugs
. most did not decrease their heroin dosage over time
. the black market for illegal heroin continued to thrive drawing in a disproportionate number of these new addicts who were younger than what had been using heroin before
So no legalised heroin or prescription heroin doesn't work.
What really annoys me however is that it is usually always people like Lionel Shriver or the Liberal Democrat MEP Chris Davies who are the ones advocating legalisation of hard drugs. Put simply these are not the sort of people who will have to put up with the consequences of such a decision and who will be forced to live in the communities which are already ravaged by drug abuse. It's not just the problems of crime that is there to feed the habit, it's the use of the drugs itself. It's not pleasant at all - the broken syringes laying on the ground, the users slumped in doorways and alleyways. It's the walking by the chemists or health centre in the morning with the lines of users outside waiting for their methadone. It can be extremely intimidating for staff working in these places or patients (often the most vulnerable is society like pensioners) picking up their prescriptions to have someone coming in looking for their methadone and then getting their hit - so what is it going to be like if it was the same for heroin but on a much greater scale? At least methadone is taken orally. And contrary to what Shriver may write most of these people do not want to be heroin or methadone addicts. They do not want to be junkies, they continue using however because that is the nature of addiction.
