wakeytom
New member
Please sign there are many reasons that this should be looked in:
https://submissions.epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/45969
https://submissions.epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/45969
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
e-petition Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 - Impact Assessment
- Thread starter wakeytom
- Start date
Done.
Billy the Fish
Technocrat
Done
pastafarian
Well-known member
am i missing something(honest question).
Caroline Lucas is asking for the government to analyse whether current policy is cost effective and working.
Isnt this something government departments,police and agencies do as a matter of course anyway,and report back to each other and debate how current policy can be improved.
Seems a rather pointless exercise.
Caroline Lucas is asking for the government to analyse whether current policy is cost effective and working.
Isnt this something government departments,police and agencies do as a matter of course anyway,and report back to each other and debate how current policy can be improved.
Seems a rather pointless exercise.
Cheshire Cat
The most curious thing..
So which ones do you want to legalise?
wakeytom
New member
- Thread starter
- #8
Does anyone truly know what would be best? Is it not about time a full review took place to really tell us? Should some if not all be legalized for many reasons?
The controlling of them, revenues from taxes, better quality to reduce the burden on the NHS, policing time reduced??
So many questions with no true answer ever found
You have a point. Any other policy which has had so many billions thrown at it for such a crazy length of time with no improvement would have been dropped or changed ages ago. I wonder why this one hasn't?
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,297
Don't see how legalisation will stop a black market, just like cigarettes and alcohol whose black markets are worth billions.
It's the nature of the product that's important, not whether it's legal or not.
You tax it but someone will find a way of supplying more cheaply. A serious addict will source the cheaper illegal product.
However having said that, I can't see the point spending billions on policy that does little or nothing to stop the trade and usage.
You might as well pump it into education.
How does it work though ? Do I set myself up as a heroin importer and try and get a deal with Tescos ? That's the bit I've never understood.
It's the nature of the product that's important, not whether it's legal or not.
You tax it but someone will find a way of supplying more cheaply. A serious addict will source the cheaper illegal product.
However having said that, I can't see the point spending billions on policy that does little or nothing to stop the trade and usage.
You might as well pump it into education.
How does it work though ? Do I set myself up as a heroin importer and try and get a deal with Tescos ? That's the bit I've never understood.
Not ever taken or about to take drugs only thing I would comment on is if there was some sort of license to sell would this help with making sure that the drug was pure and not mixed with crap
spring hall convert
Well-known member
As pointless as pissing billions of pounds down a black hole globally with little or no perceivable benefit?
In some ways I actually agree with you, what happened when the Government's own drug Tzar made noises around legalisation a few years ago. They sacked him. The problem here is that it isn't a cost/benefit thing, it's a political thing.
Having said that, I signed it ages ago. Can't do any harm to have a look, can it?
pastafarian
Well-known member
you would still keep prosecuting someone driving a car whilst stoned i presume or sacking someone for being under the influence of even soft drugs in the workplace
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,297
Yes but I said as much. But how will this actually work. What does decriminalisation actually mean ?
It has to be thought out beyond don't nick someone for smoking a spliff.
Speaking from experience, I lived in Lambeth when they had the cannabis decriminalisation trial.
What I observed was people openly smoking in street (we can debate about that) but also just off the road I used to live a marked increase in people trying to flog harder drugs. Why ? Well Clapham was then the place you went to smoke. Possibly encouraging dealers to try and attract what they perceived as a good potential market ? Or the soft market disappearing thus having to move into something else ?
So a trial in one area doesn't work, It has to be nationwide and thought out. Can you smoke legally at home? In the street ? Should be have Amsterdam style Café s etc.. ?
Last edited:
pastafarian
Well-known member
as i said i thought government,police and the relevant agencies look at this constantly,what makes this petition so different?
not trying to start an argument i genuinely seem to missing the point.....its been a long weekend.
fat old seagull
New member
I have completed the necessary ...... Is there a delivery charge ? 
spring hall convert
Well-known member
I think the problem is that even if the institutions involved do review this policy periodically, the reasons behind it are entrenched in politics rather than what's best for the taxpayer and how best we deal with the demand for drugs, which isn't going anywhere any time soon.
My hunch - if we have this review, is it will conclude categorically that in order make best use of our tax dollar we need to have a radical rethink about the law, how addicts are treated, what the police spend their time on, means of distribution but nothing will happen because it's not an easy message to sell to the average punter.
However, that does not change my mind that to have an indpendent review based in hard fact rather than opinion can only be a good thing.
spring hall convert
Well-known member
Interesting that both Farage and Clegg are in.