UK - Don't legalise drugs, says former Grampian police chief

[edgarshade]

BBC News

16 July 2013

A retired Scottish police chief has spoken out against the legalisation of drugs.

Dr Ian Oliver said all drugs, including prescription and over-the-counter medicines, are "potentially dangerous". A police officer for 37 years, Dr Oliver served as Chief Constable of Grampian having previously held the same post in Central Scotland. He has written extensively on the subject and works as a consultant after leaving the police in 1998. He said: "Increasingly the assertion is made that international drug control policies have failed and the best solution would be to legalise drugs so that they would be controlled and distributed safely through Government authorised outlets, thus denying the trade to criminal traffickers."

High-profile

Dr Oliver, an independent consultant to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, added: "Regrettably, these assertions are often made by self-appointed groups with grand sounding titles which have their own reasons for supporting legalisation. "Frequently, high-profile people claim legalisation is the best way of addressing a major social problem without cogent supporting evidence. The data used and distributed is inaccurate but presented to impress people who believe it must be true because it is published by such impressive sounding organisations and respected 'celebrities'." He added: "The truth is that all drugs are potentially dangerous including prescription and over-the-counter medicines unless taken under medical guidance and supervision. "International organised crime has capitalised on drug trafficking to the point where the money generated often exceeds the GDP of many countries. "Traffickers spread false information aimed at convincing gullible people that drugs are safe 'recreational' and fun; it has to be remembered it is the demand for drugs that has made trafficking so profitable."

Since leaving the police service in 1998 he has worked as a consultant. Writing in The Herald newspaper he takes issue with those who claim "drug control is an abuse of human rights which should allow all people freedom of choice".

He continued: "The purpose of any effective drug policy should be to lessen the harm that illegal drugs do to society. Lowering or eliminating current legal and social restrictions that limit the availability and acceptance of drug use would have the opposite effect. "Any Government policy must be motivated by the consideration that it must first do no harm. There is an obligation to protect citizens and the compassionate and sensible method must be to do everything possible to reduce dependency and misuse, not encourage or facilitate it."

He concluded: "Criminals will not stop their crimes, change course and become honest tax-paying citizens if drugs were legalised. International drug control is working; fewer than 6% of people globally use drugs regularly and legalisation is not the answer."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-23331602

 

[opi8]

So much ignorance.

 

[ro4eva]

Dr Ian Oliver said all drugs, including prescription and over-the-counter medicines, are "potentially dangerous".

Thank you Captain Obvious. I'm pretty sure even the pro-drug legalization "self appointed groups" and celebrities acknowledge that. I know I do. They're fucking drugs, not vitamins!

"The data used and distributed is inaccurate but presented to impress people who believe it must be true because it is published by such impressive sounding organisations and respected 'celebrities'."

The data used and distributed is very accurate. Street drug use has actually gone down in parts of Europe - such as Belgium, Holland, Switzerland and Portugal - where most (if not all) of them have been decriminalized. Such arrogance.

"The truth is that all drugs are potentially dangerous including prescription and over-the-counter medicines unless taken under medical guidance and supervision."

Bull. Shit. Countless times I've had drugs prescribed to me "under medical guidance and supervision" which could have (worst case scenario) killed me. One example is a certain doctor who has repeatedly scripted me either Clarithromycin or Erythromycin (both potent CYP3A4 inhibitors) even though he clearly knows that I'm on Methadone and Alprazolam (both are CYP3A4 substrates). And here's the kicker - not even the pharmacy noticed the problem.

One time I ended up in the hospital because I was Rx'd high dosages of Prozac (3A4 inhibitor) in combination with Xanax (3A4 substrate) by the same shrink. I was found unconscious in my room and rushed to the ER by ambulance. I had my stomach pumped.

...he takes issue with those who claim "drug control is an abuse of human rights which should allow all people freedom of choice".

I take it extremely personal when you or anyone else decides to stick their noses where it don't belong. You mind your own damn business and leave us the hell alone. Is that too hard to comprehend? Leave. Us. Alone. Your opinion is not wanted.

"Any Government policy must be motivated by the consideration that it must first do no harm..."

Funny you mention that, because all I see, read and hear in relation to the war on drugs is how another non-violent user either lost his/her freedom or life.

Why yesterday I was reading about this young woman (was only 19 and in college) in Texas who decided to swallow her entire stash of methamphetamine because she got pulled over by one of you pigs. Can you tell me why you think she did that? Because the cop who pulled her over doesn't seem to have a clue. I think he forgot that methamphetamine possession in Texas is a serious felony. And he might have overlooked the fact that with that kind of record, her life would be ruined. Oh well, she's dead now. Thanks a lot, eh?

"Do no harm." What a joke.

More like, "Make sure to fill up that drug bust quota and remember to always act like a complete idiot when put on the spot regarding any controversial incidents."

 

[edgarshade]

Why did the BBC give this joker a soap box and not someone who talks more sense?

I can see this isn't the first time he's lectured us about drugs. Here is Transforms response to a previous article. Aparently he is not a doctor of medicine but his PHD is in "Public Administration". Though he never seems to clarify this when talking about drugs.