UK police chief: To reduce crime, we must end the war on drugs

Just saw this on the BBC website. I'm shocked on 2 counts. 1, that an ACTIVELY serving chief police officer has come out and said this, and 2, that the guy happens to run the force that's only the next county over from me.

 

"Think of the children" is a plea to emotion in an argument. A plea is made to emotion often times when the plea is a logical fallacy. It makes sense as it was used by the pro drug war police chiefs to make an emotional plea to continue a failed expensive war that has ruined and taken thousands of lives. So they are trying to use emotion to argue a position that is no longer logical.

Cost of drug war in the US $15 billion > source <

Americans spend approximately $65 billion>source < or "100.4" Billion >[URL="http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/page/files/wausid_report_final_1.pdf"] source[/URL] < per year on illegal drugs.

"Last year, $8.5 billion worth of narcotic painkillers were sold in the United States, according to the prescription-tracking company IMS Health. Enough of the drugs were prescribed last year to "medicate every American adult around the clock for a month," the CDC said." > source <


So we are spending billions to fail and not profiting on or collecting taxes on possibly hundreds of billions of dollars a year. Ruining families and peoples lives, Making criminals rich, losing out on needed revenue, and not making a shit of difference. It is way beyond time to end this pathetic drug war.

NSFW:

Average cost of an abortion $350 and $550" > source <

Average cost to raise a child $241,080 > source <

so the money would indicate that pro life would be better for those interested only in making money

 

Hmm interesting concept, but I don`t see it happening.

 

This joker card has rarely, if ever, worked for the pro-lifers who are trying to put an end to abortion. So why should it mysteriously work in another context?

Perhaps we could all try to understand this in simple terms so that even a retard can get their head around it: The pro-lifers aren't interested in creating enormous multi-billion dollar enterprises, there is NO MONEY TO BE MADE, so playing this card called "it's for the children" just magically loses it's power and turns into a joker.

But when there is MONEY TO BE MADE or MONEY BEING MADE, as the case may be, this joker card just magically turns into an ace.

1/ The pro-lifers can't use the "think of the children" - the fact that abortion is a MULTI-BILLION-DOLLAR-A-YEAR-BUSINESS, has turned the card they are trying to play with, into a useless joker, so they lose. CROSS. Big fat zero! Go sit in the corner and face the wall you dunce!!!

2/ The pro-drug-war can ABSOLUTELY use the "think of the children" card because the simple fact that the drug war is a MULTI-BILLION-DOLLAR-A-YEAR-BUSINESS, has turned this card into an ace, so they win. TICK. 100 percent perfect! Excellent student! I shall be having a good word with the principal!

Need I say any more?

It's all about the money. Anyone who is stupid enough to think otherwise is...well...stupid enough...

"Think of the children" isn't very persuasive to pro-choicers because they don't consider the zygote/embryo/fetus a child.

Also:

 

"Think of the children" isn't very persuasive to pro-choicers because they don't consider the zygote/embryo/fetus a child.

Nice try. I wouldn't exactly say that, because that is in fact a serious mis-estimation. Some pro-choicers actually DO believe it's a child - just that it's rights are NOT considered in relation to the woman who is carrying the child.
But you could argue, that, using the same logic, we could justify a woman killing her newborn child, which two high academics (I think from my OWN country!) were suggesting it could be legalized because abortion was already legal and that, in their opinion, they could justify neonatal infanticide. You can't make this shit up. It's for real.

But like the selective-logic fucking Nazis that they are, they believe that a CERTAIN class of human beings are INFERIOR to other classes or perhaps all classes, of human being.
Consider - Slavery and racism and the mistreatment of the mentally ill in the past. Consider - Germany in the 1940s. Consider - President Bush's warmongering administration that was, and still is, trading the lives of thousands of innocent foreign civilians to get it's hands on oil pipelines.

Consider - the WAR ON DRUGS. Which is a WAR ON PEOPLE. A WAR ON CERTAIN PEOPLE.

 

consider - the war on drugs. Which is a war on people. A war on certain people.

qft.. The people it is at war with do not deserve to have war brought to them. Let alone a drug war that creates far worse consequences than the ones it has miserably failed to prevent.

 

bravo to this man. finally some sense. illegality only furthers the cost in hospitals, funding for government and police and in human life, directly and indirectly. informed adults can put whatever they want into their body - and they're gonna do it regardless of whether it's against the law or not. not to mention the income for the government.

 

they're gonna do it regardless of whether it's against the law or not.

Bullshit.

 

Bullshit.

Wonderfully succinct answer there 8) Care to expand as to why you think it is bullshit?

 

Wonderfully succinct answer there 8) Care to expand as to why you think it is bullshit?

Oh you know what. I just did not spend enough time researching and deliberating this with myself. It turns out laws don't make a difference. Oh you know what, obviously I should spend the time validating my twisted viewpoints before just blurting out nonsense.

 

Well written and well thought out. As a pain management physician, I have suggested this to our local leadership and am ostracized because of it.

 

The previous Top Cop in North Wales spoke out and pretty mush said exactly the same, Good on em, They know theyre wasting funds fighting a losing battle. Respect to em for speaking out as its not gonna make life easy for em in that line of work.

 

obviously I should spend the time validating my twisted viewpoints before just blurting out nonsense.

This.

 

Think of the children Mr. Policeman. Are you thinking of the children? I do not think you are thinking of the children. Do you hate children? They are children. How can you hate them? You monster.

^A typical SR user from New Zealand crying after finding out Silk Road was shut down devouring a piece of paper disguised as Colby Jack that contains PCP

 

This guy couldn't have said it better.

The war on drugs is not working. It never was working. Drugs should be available to the people who want them, however, they should never be freely available. Having things like Codeine and certain prescription drugs that are good for controlling pain (such as Gabapentin and Pregabalin) I think would actually be a great thing to have OTC. But extremely addicting and recreational drugs shouldn't be OTC or available to the general public.

 

Another cop speaks out. Great.
Drugs supply would have to be regulated too though. You can't have non-criminal drugs consumption and criminal drugs supply. That's asking for problems. Just see what happens in Holland.

 

that is exactly right.. a system based of the prescription system is the only thing that makes sense to me. Unless it MJ then have at it.

 

Not many people who advocate for the legalization of drugs suggest a free-for-all model.

It's a difficult issue, but if it's never debated or discussed, how can we come to a conclusion?

 

Well written and well thought out. As a pain management physician, I have suggested this to our local leadership and am ostracized because of it.

Well done. Please keep up this important work, despite being ostracised. Drug addiction should have been medicalised decades ago instead of being criminalised, particularly opiate addiction.

 

The guy is simply telling it plain. This is what LE and health services deal with day in and day out. Removing the criminal element from the drug supply chain is crucial. Providing safe cheap alternatives to addicts and social services to help rehabilitate them (not all addicts will be willing to quit but at least they will have clean gear and supplies at a cost effective price and they don't spend every cent they get on H or whatever). This alone will reduce hep c and hiv infections.

Drugs should not be a free for all like the RC industry seems to be. I think a set amount of substance should be allowed for recreational purposes based on say a monthly total. An example being you may be able to purchase 2 x 120 mg MDMA a month on a valid ID card. In addition you may also be able to purchase a small amount of other substances, again set to a monthly basis. If someone is overusing/purchasing the card will identify them and they will be able to access free support services. I think a chemist or similar as a point of sale would be the best way to ensure compliance. Also to obtain a valid card you would need a psych evaluation and the occasional say 5 year physical health/psych evaluation to ensure recreational substance is not impacting your physical/mental health. Cannabis, alcohol and tobacco would also be controlled in this fashion.

More addictive substances would have a lower monthly amount than substances identified as lower risk of addiction. Any issues of addiction would be a medical issue and social services. So someone who is a fifty a day smoker will get special consideration and still be able to maintain their habit, however they would receive compulsory NRT or similar along with psychosocial support with the aim of gradual reduction and tapering off/quiting. Education would be essential to help with harm minimization and to enable users to have a better understanding of the substances they consume. This would mean that someone who notices they had smoked a few cigarette's previously now is craving them constantly and the monthly quota is approaching fast. They would then have enough education to realize they have an issue and then they would feel comfortable to contact support services who would provide non-judgmental support and medical intervention, in this case NRT or similar.

 

Making drugs legal but controlling supply will still permit a violent black market to exist.

The government is not going to be able to stop people from altering their consciousness. It's not their choice and never has been. All they can decide is if they want access to be safe or dangerous -- that's it.