Opiates, MDMA and cocaine for example can be very cheaply manufactured. Its a myth that the costs are even in the double digits for cocaine. Shit they make this stuff in the middle of jungles for almost nothing.
There is even an Australian native plant (that grows in ACT/NSW) that has the alkaloids that could be used/converted to create cocaine. Poppies are a weed. The plants themselves grow with little effort and energy.
Manufacturing drugs by a government the size of Australia (or really any government) would create
economies of scale utterly unheard of making all narcotics and psychedelics so affordable and cheap that the issue of cost would utterly nullified. These drugs are already well understood in terms of manufacturing them no way would we need a
I also don't think the idea of going to a doctor to dictate that your ok to take drugs recreationally, then the power of who can have them is back in the hand of someone else. If someone with a weak heart wants to get on the rack that's their problem no one else's. having someone say you can t do it will just make that person find and obtain it illegally.
1. Conservatives - convincing the idiots
If we're talking about convincing large parts of our society to legalise drugs then we really need to concede some ground. These people think
a) Dealers should be imprisioned for great periods of time and/or shot
b) users should be imprisioned for great periods of time or be submitted to tortorouses rehabs (Thai style)
c) that the cops are winning the war on drugs and who have no idea that we have spent hundreds of billions since the 50/60s when we made most drugs illicit.
d) think about the hundreds of billions wasted (and trillions across the world). Think that they are more then happy to continue doubling down every year on this stupid idiotic campaign.
Conservatives want two things. money/profit/self-enrichment. When that isn't available (see my response above why we shouldn't corporatise drugs) then they will defer to other conservatives, mainly doctors and lawyers (which is why the Liberals are stacked with lawyers and doctors)
Thus why my proposal hinges the fact that we will leverage a system that already has bi-parisan support, that has already been operating for a good decade
- A proof in concept;
Opioid Treatment Program.
2. Doctors (the power struggle) and safety
So yes at the present the Opioid Treatment Program has some major problems. Firstly the Doctors. I myself have had major problems with my prescriber. They have committed profession malpractice including been deceitful, incompetent (where a colleague would not have done so in the same circumstances) and utterly disrespectful. They've failed to communicate treatment plans and even engage me on the decisions being made. They've applied duress/blackmail.
But I see this as a symptom of an overworked badly under resourced system. The doctors see dozens of people a day (hence why in my first post I argued the AMA - Australian Medical Association needs to drop its ridiculous tertiary entrance ranking scores/requirements - what is it 99% required to go into medicine? Australian needs more doctors. The best doctors learn on the job, not because they got 99% in three unit english). More doctors, lighter case load, more nurse and support would allow them to focus on the patient and not their idiosyncrasy (i.e. the patient calls the doctor a stupid cunt who needs a good fuck.
This is a major issue in Australia and not just for drug prescribing. We need thousands of doctors and at present the surgeons & specalist colleagues, and the AMA have sewed the system up so as to limit supply they can ensure that doctors get paid outragously massive amounts of money. I'm sorry but I don't believe any doctor should be earning over half million and yet they are.
Back to drugs: Basically don't throw the baby out with the bath water. We need a delivery system and pubs and supermarkets aren't appropriate for extremely powerful substances that need to be treated with respect. Pubs already serve far too much alcohol to their customers. What would happen if you were at the bar, mixing up your gram of pub supplied smack after you've just had 2 before so.
So we need a system that is already approved and functioning. This system with substantial funding, a rewriting of this rules and regulations and significantly expanding it to cover all drugs would provide the basis of controlled distribution without any of the massive harms that we have seen with uncontrolled (relatively) systems like that for alcohol and nicotine.
The only exception like I said would be for Cannabis and perhaps other natural based substances i.e. DMT, Magic mushrooms - where specialised clubs that could operate on retail premises could sell to the public under fairly rigorous controls and inspections. I could see several substances in very small quantities being allowed to be used by minors (no younger then 16). These clubs would be non-for profit and would have regulated incomes (like a chemist). Excess profits would though be donated to a government approved NGO.
There are a great many dysfunctional drug users out there. These people need urgent medical treatment. Giving power to specialist doctors who could prescribe narcotics would allow, along side a beefed up and properly functioning medical treatment system, the incentive to have these sick people to come in and interact with services. Drugs for trust & cooperation of people who are utterly dysfunctional, and many who have been made that way by the system and institutions who imprisoned them, beat and abused them, gave them poor defences, wrote chapters in medical research then properly caring for their patients and so on.
The expansion of the clinics would have attached to it a significant system of education & certification system.
I am utterly incredulous that right now I can buy a half-weight of heroin, a bottle of water (sealed - duh) and a box of a income an shoot up not realising the massive amount of harm I'm doing (especially with the water). I would argue there is a powerful case to require all drug users (functional & dysfunctional) to attend drug education lectures / courses. Now some may look upon this with some vision of a 80s American comedy where the protagonist is made to watch videos in a DUI class, shown the effects of drink driving in a graphical context.
I would argue that with the right funding an informative lecture series, run by talented & engaged educators could provide people with the knowledge and skills to use drugs safely. For example how many people on bluelight know that mixing alcholol with APAP is insanely stupid?
Every user would gain certification and points. Points would allow users certain privileges and responsibilities. Want to take home 5 grams of smack. Well you need to have done the Opiate Safety Cert 1, Securing Drugs Cert 1, Drugs and Kids Cert 1. Being employed, having no criminal record (or pending charges), a safe driver with no drug/drink driving charges and so would all be aggregated along with the mountains of other data and analysis to come to a recommendation regarding if the individual could take drugs home and use small quantities.
However other individuals who were dysfunctional and refused to attend education would be required to use the substances at the clinic.
3. Age, control, tracking and management
The government as you said will definitely need to create an authority that overseas this system. The great risk is that drugs are funnelled out of it into regions where they are still illegal. Drugs produced cheaply in Australia would make for massive profits in say Balia.
I would argue that some sort of tracking system, and embedding into drugs identifying data (like microdots on cars) would ensure that patients who had restrictions on them, and who sought drugs for those with no restrictions, would be effectively cocked block. If your drugs (Oldred3s) were found illegally in someone else possession then you'd lose your privileges and have to dose at the clinic.
With the widespread availability of drugs through the clinics the criminal enterprises across Australia would collapse. The few people who wouldn't jump the hoops/requirements set out by the clinics would be too few to create a troublesome black market which would really have to lift its game as it would have to compete guaranteed pure drugs. See at the moment the black market as it stands has very little competition. As a result it can sell shit (look at MDMA for the last 14 years - utter shit).
Age
This is a thorny and difficult area that if not dealt with could easily cripple the legalisation movement. I would argue that if you can join the military at age 16 then you surely can get high. Though would come with some straightforward requirements
a) more certification and clear objective results that showed that the courses were understood
b) certain drugs in certain quantities with certain period of rest between doses. I.e. cannabis once a week. not daily.
c) parental approval
d) automatic counselling and support.
You get the idea.
Control
Definitely an authority (that would be required to go under a mini-Royal commission style review every five years. Where money, lives and families saved would be calculated. Where everyone in the system would be required to undergo periodic random checks. Where drug inventories systems would under go rigorously monitored. Undercover agents would work in various parts of the department/clinics. Staff would be required to submit their financials for review if any charges were raised of wrongdoing. Security services would be replaced periodically (i.e. no cushy deal for one firm to provide security for the rest of time).
and so on.
anyway i'm falling asleep. I'll be back to either fix my terrible grammar or continue my arguments.
