Jump to content

does decriminalization of drugs work?


bud

Recommended Posts

it has in portugal:

Compared to the European Union and the U.S., Portugal's drug use numbers are impressive. Following decriminalization, Portugal had the lowest rate of lifetime marijuana use in people over 15 in the E.U.: 10%. The most comparable figure in America is in people over 12: 39.8%. Proportionally, more Americans have used cocaine than Portuguese have used marijuana.

The Cato paper reports that between 2001 and 2006 in Portugal, rates of lifetime use of any illegal drug among seventh through ninth graders fell from 14.1% to 10.6%; drug use in older teens also declined. Lifetime heroin use among 16-to-18-year-olds fell from 2.5% to 1.8% (although there was a slight increase in marijuana use in that age group). New HIV infections in drug users fell by 17% between 1999 and 2003, and deaths related to heroin and similar drugs were cut by more than half. In addition, the number of people on methadone and buprenorphine treatment for drug addiction rose to 14,877 from 6,040, after decriminalization, and money saved on enforcement allowed for increased funding of drug-free treatment as well.

link

lets assume that u.s. had no say in our drug policies. why shouldn't we look at doing this in canada?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest American Woman

Interesting. When I suggested rehab in the Insite thread, I was told that addicts must want to rehabilitate - that they couldn't be forced to do so.

Rather than criminalising people found in possession of drugs, they are sent to a "dissuasion commission" for treatment and the results have been spectacular.

link

Evidently they can be "forced."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Drugs are decriminalized informally as we speak - go out into the street and buy some pot - no cop is going to trail you home and toss you down and cuff you - go and see your local cocaine dealer who operates with impunity year after year - go get a script for some synthetic opiates from a corrupt doctor...no one is going to bother you _ It's not like the old days when I was caught with a roach...and crimminalized for life --- there is no will within law enforcement or in political circles to curb the use of "illegal substances" - UNLESS - it is a million dollar load of dope - then they take notice cos...its then about the money...big money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting. When I suggested rehab in the Insite thread, I was told that addicts must want to rehabilitate - that they couldn't be forced to do so.

Rather than criminalising people found in possession of drugs, they are sent to a "dissuasion commission" for treatment and the results have been spectacular.

link

Evidently they can be "forced."

I think you should re-read your own article.

"The drugs are confiscated and you are compelled to undertake a rehabilitation programme. It's still illegal to be in possession of drugs, but the consequences are very different from here."

The number of addicts registered in drug-substitution programmes rose from 6,000 in 1999 to over 24,000 in 2008, reflecting a huge rise in treatment but not drug use.

"Before decriminalisation, addicts were afraid to seek treatment because they feared they would be denounced to the police and arrested," says Manuel Cardoso, of the Institute for Drugs and Drug Addiction, one of Portugal's leading drugs-prevention agencies.

"Now they know that they will be treated as patients with a problem and not stigmatised as criminals."

It sounds like they wanted help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman

I think you should re-read your own article.

The drugs are confiscated and you are
compelled to undertake a rehabilitation programme
.

It sounds like they wanted help.

It sounds like they were "forced" to me.

compelled past participle, past tense of com·pel (Verb)

1. Force or oblige (someone) to do something.

2. Bring about (something) by the use of force or pressure.

At any rate, I wasn't the one who said being "forced" wouldn't work - that was the response to my suggestion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one can force you to take dope - it is a decison made or broken...people are responsible for themselves....If we live in a country where one group that profits from the sale of alcohol gets preturbed by a competator growing pot - so what...how come the booze seller gets police and governmental assistance in the protection of their enterprise and the dope dealer does not? Both who are selling the toxic substances are both parasites...why is it one is high class and the other lowly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The drugs are confiscated and you are
compelled to undertake a rehabilitation programme
.

It sounds like they were "forced" to me.

compelled past participle, past tense of com·pel (Verb)

1. Force or oblige (someone) to do something.

2. Bring about (something) by the use of force or pressure.

At any rate, I wasn't the one who said being "forced" wouldn't work - that was the response to my suggestion.

Ohhhh my god Woman. :angry: YES THEY WERE FORCED to under take a rehabilitation programme They were not forced to quite or change. But as I've underlined previously it sounded like they wanted help, and wanted to change.

I was the one who said that trying to force a person to change won't work they have to want it.

You can force a horse to water but you cannot make it drink.

Edited by CitizenX
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman

Ohhhh my god Woman. :angry: YES THEY WERE FORCED to under take a rehabilitation programme They were not forced to quite or change. But as I've underlined previously it sounded like they wanted help, and wanted to change.

I was the one who said that trying to force a person to change won't work they have to want it.

You can force a horse to water but you cannot make it drink.

Do you even understand what my stance is?? Obviously not. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lets assume that u.s. had no say in our drug policies. why shouldn't we look at doing this in canada?

Why should we - because statistics on a foreign country say it works for them? What I am getting at is that there are significant cultural, political and environmental differences between Canada/US and Portugal. Who's to say that implementing programs like theirs is going to have any effect on our society at all? Or that it won't result in disaster?

You can fit 10 Portugals in Ontario and Portugal has less people than the province.

I am all for a movement towards decriminalization, but there is no requirement to do it like Portugal. Have you also examined the statistics for China, India and the Faroe Islands? It seems like you are cherry picking here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a select group of people who are so addicted to their drug, be it, smokes, alcohol or drugs, they they can't ever get off even if they go to a rehab and get clean only to fall back into their addiction once back in their own and these people usually will end up dead from their habit. If anything, I think the government should ban tobacco, stronger laws on alcohol and do a better job of stopping drugs coming into this country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a select group of people who are so addicted to their drug, be it, smokes, alcohol or drugs, they they can't ever get off even if they go to a rehab and get clean only to fall back into their addiction once back in their own and these people usually will end up dead from their habit. If anything, I think the government should ban tobacco, stronger laws on alcohol and do a better job of stopping drugs coming into this country.

So much for freedom. However, can every inch of ground be policed? Should it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pick one.

No, you pick one, since you are the one saying that the current approach isn't working. If you choose to measure our approach against, say, the Portugese, then that leads back to my question about the applicability of the Portugese model and the underlying issues they started with in the first place.

Alcohol Consumption in Portugal: The Burden of Disease

The World Health Organization has estimated that 3.2 percent of the "burden of disease" around the world is attributable to the consumption of alcohol. Portugal is currently ranked eighth in the world in alcohol consumption. A new study has found alcohol consumption in Portugal represents a heavy economic burden for that country's health system.

So we decriminalize drugs and turn them all into alcoholics?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why should we - because statistics on a foreign country say it works for them? What I am getting at is that there are significant cultural, political and environmental differences between Canada/US and Portugal. Who's to say that implementing programs like theirs is going to have any effect on our society at all? Or that it won't result in disaster?

You can fit 10 Portugals in Ontario and Portugal has less people than the province.

I am all for a movement towards decriminalization, but there is no requirement to do it like Portugal. Have you also examined the statistics for China, India and the Faroe Islands? It seems like you are cherry picking here.

i've actually looked into china's policies and it's a failing system. furthermore, portugal's population is 10.5 million. 1/3 of canada's. whereas india's and china's populations are over a billion. socially and economically, portugal can be compared to canada, whereas china and india cannot be. so i'm not sure where you're trying to go with your comments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want decriminalization. In Winnipeg you always hear about problems of gangs, we just had a provincial election yesterday and one of the campaign promises the Tories had was they were going to get hard on crime and gangs. Why not legalize drugs so gangs don't have a multi-billion dollar industry to fund their operations.

Even if drug use went up which I am not convinced it would, why do we push this industry into the underground market which inevitably leads to street violence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is up to parents to set a good example regarding the alteration of perception for medical and recreational reasons... dope is dangerous - just like booze....either make booze illegal along with dope...or set the whole dirty mess free - and let nature take it's course - the mentally ill are now allowed to wander about and die in the street - so should the boozer and doper - the strong and intelligent will surive.

Having lived a life where I took adventures...that were dangerous - I had one rule - if it makes you sick - or weakens you - or proves to be a problem - YOU PUT IT DOWN... The people that I knew that are now dead because of substance use and abuse - were not very smart - If they had a hang over they would take a drink - stupid...one must heal ---------If dope was destroying their lives - and they became unhappy - they would continue to use dope in a quest to be happy - now they are gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...