Daily Mail - The day Britain lost the war on drugs: The liberals who left us a devast

edgarshade

Bluelighter
Joined
Aug 31, 2010
Messages
1,954
Location
UK
The day Britain lost the war on drugs: The liberals who left us a devastating legacy

Peter Hitchens
PUBLISHED: 22:00, 25 August 2012

With reader comments

The British Establishment formally surrendered to the drugs culture at a Cabinet meeting shortly before lunch on Thursday, February 26, 1970. It was the quiet end of a war that had been surprisingly brief and gentle, if not actually phoney.
Since that date there has been no serious official resistance to the view that the use of drugs, especially cannabis, is inevitable and not specially damaging.
It is generally accepted that those who use them are either the pitiable victims of others or are pursuing a reasonable pleasure that is no business of the State.

There has been an near-hysterical official hostility to the production and sale of the same drugs. But this hostility is made almost entirely futile by the law’s leniency towards those who buy the very substance whose supply and sale is considered so villainous.
This contradictory, self-defeating hysteria has successfully given the impression – to credulous and ill-informed observers – that a non-existent ‘War against Drugs’ is taking place.
The idea is spread, in debate and in popular TV dramas such as The Wire, that most of the evils caused by drug abuse would end if we legalised drugs.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...eft-devastating-legacy.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
 
A moment’s thought shows that this argument is ridiculous. In one sense, all crimes are caused by laws. But the logic of ‘less law, less crime’ leaves out the issue of crime’s unpleasant effects on its victims. It does not consider that there might be good reasons for laws against cannabis, ecstasy, cocaine and heroin.

The drugs named in the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 are illegal for a simple reason. The State still accepts that, even in their pure form, there is no safe dose.

So cannabis is illegal because there's no safe dose. Thanks daily fail.

The cannabis user can cause terrible distress to others. He could wreck his life and the lives of his friends and close family through irreversible mental illness. He could destroy his good prospects. Its use by teenagers is associated with under-achievement in school. Many who fail in school go on to fail in life, and so become an unquenchable grief to those who love them, and a costly burden to us all.

Campaigners for cannabis legalisation often claim that the drug, especially in comparison with alcohol, promotes peaceful behaviour. I am unconvinced by this broad claim, partly because of the frequent newspaper accounts of violent acts by people who are known cannabis users.

Yeah, lots of violent potheads out there.

This raises the question of alcohol, a horribly damaging and dangerous drug which – being legal – devastates the lives of millions. If alcohol had recently been invented and was as widely used as cannabis is now in our society, I would support the most severe legal measures to penalise its use and drive it out of our society.

But alcohol is too well-established here for such measures to work. A key part of this debate is involved here. Once a substance is legalised, it is extremely difficult to declare that it is illegal. That is why we should be so careful about legalising currently illegal drugs. If this turns out to be a mistake, it will not easily be put right.

My cat can produce a better argument than that. Alcohol is a terrible evil drug, but it's OK because it's been grandfathered in. Cannabis is bad because it's illegal, and illegal because it's bad, and we should keep it that way because it's illegal right now.

Something certainly changed the general attitude towards drugs, which had been confined to insignificant fringe minorities for the first two-thirds of the 20th Century. Although it is hard to believe now, Britain had no significant drug problem at all before 1964.

According to the Wootton Report (whose full and significant title was ‘Report of the Hallucinogens sub-committee of the Advisory Committee on Drug Dependence’, published on January 3, 1969), United Kingdom convictions for cannabis possession stood at four in the whole year of 1945, rising to 79 in 1950, 235 in 1960 and 626 in 1965.

So you didn't have a problem until you decided to make one. Very nice.

And the asshole even has the audacity to plug his book at the end. We never fought the drug war, my ass.
 
Last edited:
the authorities force bus drivers, postmen, doctors, nurses and school dinner ladies to buy stupefying drugs for criminal parasites, who would otherwise steal directly to obtain them.

8( :? 8)
Heroin is likewise extremely bad for the user’s metabolism, general health and longevity,

How are they allowed to publish out right lies?
I thought there were laws against this kinda thing?
 
Last edited:
This piece would be really funny if it weren't so sad. Peter Hitchens sounds like the biggest ignoramus in the hemisphere, and his arguments are terrible. Why can't he be as smart as his late older brother? Sigh...
 
Top