The Global Commission on Drug Policy, of which Richard Branson is perhaps the most well known member and spokesperson, at least in the UK, was interviewed a couple of days ago, stating that the Commission has recently produced a comprehensive report based on the consensus of all the hard evidence obtained in the latest scientific research, and in the current conservative climate is seen as highly 'progressive' or 'way too radical and extreme' in its' conclusions and recommendations. Unsurprisingly the UK government has decided to completely ignore, or not even bother to read any single section of the report, if their policy making is anything to go by, if the report could be summarised in one sentence the general gist is that criminalising and locking up drug users is the worst possible outcome both for the drug users and wider society. A criminal record usually makes it extremely difficult to gain paid employment, so that even very talented people with a lot to contribute would become a 'burden on the state' for the rest of their lives. Such a shocking and willful waste of skills and talent, it's tragic for the individuals concerned and for the workplaces where those affected could be putting their skills and talents to productive use.
http://www.virgin.com/richard-branson/finally-a-change-in-course-on-drug-policy
"drugs should be treated as a health issue. My great hope is that today’s actions bring that day a little bit closer to reality, so that the millions who continue to be harmed by current policies can be helped instead."
There are 1.5 million people in prison in the USA on possession related drug charges. Despite a handful of USA states and other countries like Canada and Holland being far more enlightened and progressive it seems that the UK is not alone in being completely at odds with all common sense and scientific research in in policy making. Is there any other arena where governments willfully ignore all evidence, rationality, and basic common sense to the extent that they do with 'psycho-active substances.'
It's comparable to maintaining that the world is flat despite hundreds of years of incontestable scientific hard evidence to the contrary, or decades worth in the case of drugs. We might as well still be living in the dark ages as far as drugs policy goes.
Even the top brass of the police force like Peter Fahey, Manchester's now retired Chief Constable of GMP has stated that government policy on drugs has failed and continues failing, unenforcable in many cases, counter-productive and futile in others. When even a huge number of household names / respected public figures, role models to some people, are known to have a history of drug use and openly speak out against current policies, or even just by going 'on record' stating they have used illegal frugs, further undermining the credibility and legitimacy of the Law itself, I cannot imagine what it will take for the government to take any notice. It's a bit like the climate change caused by human activity issue no one listened to all the growing and increasingly compelling evidence for year after year until it was too late, and irreversible damage has already been done. Regarding drugs policy it's too late already for those whose lives have been ruined by being criminalised for actions that in the vast majority of cases are crimes without any victim. In that case how can drug use even be called a crime, when there is no victim, except for certain cases where it could be argues that the drug user themselves is the only victim. Putting drug distribution in the hand of organised crime syndicates rather than being state controlled does in some cases directly lead to acquisitive crime, where an addict needs to steal to fund his or her addiction.
I wonder at what point in the future things will change, and what it will take to cause that change; 10 years, 50 years, 100 years? Maybe it will be when the wealth and power of organised crime has become so pernicious, pervasive and obvious that no government anywhere in the world could be free of some level of corruption (if that isn't already the case in many a case of 'bent politicians' from local councilors right up to the highest levels of government and power - a donation here, a donation there, in return for a blind eye) that even the likes of people who are so gullible and poorly informed about everything that they believe every word of what they read in the likes of the Daily Mail will have to sit up and take notice, and actually engage their brains for one minute and wonder if there isn't a better, more sane way, of dealing with the issue after all.
) so it was Hobson's choice which service i did make use of. 
