Future of Drug Laws in the UK- Get your unfounded speculation here.

[Mr Smokes Blunts.]

Yes, they won't vote, you're right, but they also won't vote against, they'll be less prone to believing the knee-jerk responses and they'll, be more understanding of drug losers. There's certainly nothing to lose by teaching them. If you teach them the economic benefits, they may even argue a little in our favour.

On a side note, I wholeheartedly believe that a change in drug law would be a HUGE step towards fixing the economy. The drop in crime would need less funding for policing - a few billion right there. Then there's tax revenue if the government is regulating supply. There is no way that potential harms, establishing regulatory bodies and education will cost more than we currently spend on policing and harms. [Quick economic summary]

Don't get me wrong, I know the economic benefits. It would go from costing us billions to making us billions. However this economic gain would be cancelled out 10x over if the kind of party willing to legalise drugs (i.e. the Green party) got into power. Even if a party promised to legalise, like the Lib Dems (who are the only party who are going to do such a thing in the next 50 years), it would be fairly low on their agenda of random promises given out to try and get into power. It would also require a leader with a backbone and a force of will, which now that politics has descended into simply 'managing' what we have already created is very unlikely. David Cameron wouldn't piss off his MPs and constituents, and Ed Milliband has such small balls he may as well be a eunuch... That leaves Nick Clegg who is never going to see full parliamentary power over this country anything short of a revolution.

Our best hope is that public opinion shifts dramatically in America and that they begin to experiment with legalisation all over the place (which is possible under Obama), and this prods our parliament and press into finally giving up this failed war.

I used to be in the SSDP a few years ago, and they were very up on going out and telling people and campaigning, as was I. But we hardly made a dent. All the politicians know what they're doing is bullshit, and there are daily marches through London over one thing or another so no one cares about that.

 

[Ismene]

If we spent our Afghanistan military budget on subsidising farmers, even assuming 20% of the country's population farm poppies we could double their yearly wage with subsidies.

If we cut the military budget wouldn't the taliban just go round to all the farmers we were subsidising and say "Grow anything but poppy and we will come back and make you eat your own shit smothered in ketchup before we fuck you up the arse"?

 

[knock]

With the cannabinoid ban, rather than try to prohibit anything derived from napthoylindole in such and such a way, they just banned all synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists.

Where are you getting your information from? This is the relevant legislation:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2009/3209/article/2/made

Nowhere do they say they are banning all synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists. It says in the "explanatory note" that the intention is to ban synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists, it does not say all of them, the implication is that it bans "some". The wording of the legislation is in the familiar "chemical and derivatives thereof" style.

As an example, AM-694, a synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonist, is currently available legally in the UK.

If I'm wrong please direct me to the appropriate amendment to the MoDA.

 

[Vader]

^Right you are, I couldn't find the text, my understanding was that they'd banned any synthetic agonist, obviously I was wrong. Thank you.

 

[knock]

Cool - I'm glad that's right, it would be frightening otherwise! More frightening than things already are, anyway.

 

[BecomingJulie]

How long do you think before they try to get rid of all the complex legislation and just impose a simple blanket ban on any substance, device or technique that can be used for getting high?

 

[Shambles]

Till Hell freezes over, I'd say. Not possible to make legislation like that. Far too vague even for politicians and lawyers to try.

 

[Transform]

Our best hope is that public opinion shifts dramatically in America and that they begin to experiment with legalisation all over the place (which is possible under Obama), and this prods our parliament and press into finally giving up this failed war.

Nothing is going to happen dramatically IMO. I agree with your points more or less, but that isn't going to make me give up. The more people who are aware of the benefits, the more support it will get, which will gradually snowball to the end result we're hoping for.
I'd be surprised if full regulation occurs even within this century, but the small victories along the way are worth fighting for, and without support, future generations will just be in the same place we are; apathetic because they don't think they can make a difference.

If we cut the military budget wouldn't the taliban just go round to all the farmers we were subsidising and say "Grow anything but poppy and we will come back and make you eat your own shit smothered in ketchup before we fuck you up the arse"?

It needn't be the entire budget - it would be foolish to simply remove our troops at a moment's notice. The idea would be to gradually shift farmers away from poppies. At the moment a crop of poppies sells for about 6x more than wheat iirc, that's the motivation to grow, because otherwise it's hard to feed your family.

 

[charlie clean]

If we cut the military budget wouldn't the taliban just go round to all the farmers we were subsidising and say "Grow anything but poppy and we will come back and make you eat your own shit smothered in ketchup before we fuck you up the arse"?

I think that's what the warlords in the pay of the coalition say to the farmers about growing corn or bananas or whatever's today's bright alternative crop idea.

Do these synthetic cannaboid receptor agonists like AM-694 get you stoned? Are they comparable to good hash or skunk?

 

[Shambles]

^ Synthetic cannabinoids are a mixed bunch. Some are brilliant, some are just plain nasty. AM-694 was okay but not amazingly strong, from memory. Only tried it once though. Think some of the JWH series are still legal but not 100%. They should all get you stoned but not all do so in an enjoyable stylee.

It needn't be the entire budget - it would be foolish to simply remove our troops at a moment's notice. The idea would be to gradually shift farmers away from poppies. At the moment a crop of poppies sells for about 6x more than wheat iirc, that's the motivation to grow, because otherwise it's hard to feed your family.

Surely it would make far more sense to let the farmers grow poppy (as we do now) but buy it off them for a fair price - especially given the supposed world opium shortage for medicinal products. The farmers don't grow other crops partly for financial reasons but mostly cos there's simply not the infrastructure to be able to sell other crops. Creating the infrastructure was of course a promise made when invading and is of course totally forgotten about now in favour of keeping the black market opium trade flourishing.

 

[Transform]

Absolutely. It's not something I exhaustively considered, I just think that the billions we spend fighting fire with fire could be put to better use by removing the oxygen that keeps the flames burning.

 

[dee_dee]

Some flames never appear to die down, alas.

 

[Shambles]

^^ I don't think there's any appetite to actually clamp down on poppy growing in the region. Far too big a can of worms to open - especially when the only viable options for curtailing poppy growing would mean investing many millions in creating infrastructure and the associated security required to make it even slightly feasible. Not gonna happen so buying the crop and putting it to good use is the only real option for governments who genuinely want to cut illicit production. Fortunately no government wants to cut back the black market opium trade so will be biznizz as usual for the forseeable. Only with US/UK military backing to keep it running smoothly.

 

[Ismene]

It needn't be the entire budget - it would be foolish to simply remove our troops at a moment's notice. The idea would be to gradually shift farmers away from poppies. At the moment a crop of poppies sells for about 6x more than wheat iirc, that's the motivation to grow, because otherwise it's hard to feed your family.

Can't see us paying the farmers god knows how much for wheat long-term tho. We want to be out of there by 2015.

The best idea would be to pay them for poppy and use it for western production of diamorphine. But even then the taliban would either pay better or threaten them more. And the farmers probably prefer growing poppy anyway - can you grow much wheat on a farmers field in Afghanistan? How large is the average farmers field over there?

 

[Shambles]

It's not so much the size of the fields but the poor quality of the soil and the complete absence of usable and/or safe roads to take the crop to the non-existent markets to sell it. I'm pretty sure the West could easily outbid the Taliban to buy the poppy crop legitimately but it's just not gonna happen. Especially as the West actively supports the black market opium trade. It's worth far more to them to keep it unofficial and leave things as they are.

 

[Ismene]

I was reading somewhere that there was a shortage of diamorphine too. They could pay the farmers and cure the shortage too but I suppose it's too politically incorrect. The UN wanted an "End to all drug use" by 2008 didn't they.

 

[charlie clean]

^^^^^

Including prozac?

 

[Vader]

I was reading somewhere that there was a shortage of diamorphine too.

Could it have been in the many, many posts in EADD talking about a heroin drought that's been stretching on for months?

 

[botfly]

Afghanistan and Mexico aren't the only places where Opium is grown, New Zealand is growing vast amounts now under license.

 

[Munroe]

The 40th anniversary of the Misuse of drugs act is this May. Don't suppose there's some sort of protest planned?
It's yet another issue the coalition are divided over.