Drug policy reform

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It has been suggested that this article or section be merged into Drug liberalization. (Discuss)

Relative harm assessment of various drugs from the scientific Journal "The Lancet"

Drug policy reform is a term used to describe proposed changes to the way most governments respond to the socio-cultural reality of psychoactive substance use. Proponents of drug policy reform believe that prohibition of currently illegal drugs—such as cannabis, opioids, cocaine, amphetamines and hallucinogens—has been ineffectual and counterproductive. They argue that rather than using laws and enforcement as the primary means to responding to substance use, governments and citizens would be better served by reducing harm and regulating the production, marketing and distribution of currently illegal drugs in a manner similar to (or some would say better than) how alcohol and tobacco are regulated.

Proponents of drug law reform argue that relative harm should be taken into account in the scheduling of controlled substances. Addictive drugs such as alcohol, tobacco and caffeine have been a traditional part of Western culture for centuries and are legal, when in fact the first two are more harmful than some subtances scheduled under Schedule I.^[1]^[2]^[3] The U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, a branch of the U.S. Center for Disease Control, rated the hallucinogen psilocybin (Schedule I) less toxic than Aspirin.^[2] The Dutch government found this also to be true.^[3] The addictive properties of the drug nicotine in tobacco are often compared with heroin or cocaine,^[4] but tobacco is legal, even though the World Health Organization (WHO) in the 2002 World Health Report estimates that in developed countries, 26% of male deaths and 9% of female deaths can be attributed to tobacco smoking.^[1] According to the American Heart Association, "Nicotine addiction has historically been one of the hardest addictions to break." The pharmacologic and behavioral characteristics that determine tobacco addiction are similar to those that determine addiction to drugs such as heroin and cocaine.^[5]

Cannabis and psilocybin mushrooms, have been ranked by the scientific community as being less addictive and overall less harmful to human health than tobacco and alcohol.^[3] This is why the government of The Netherlands in Europe concentrates on enforcement of "hard" drugs such as heroin and cocaine rather than "soft" drugs such as cannabis or psilocybin mushrooms.^[3]

1 Groups advocating change
2 War on drugs
3 References
4 See also
5 External links

[edit] Groups advocating change

The Senlis Council, a European development and policy thinktank, has, since it conception in 2002, advocated that drug addiction should be viewed as a public health issue rather than a purely criminal matter. The group does not support the decriminalisation of illegal drugs. Since 2003, the Council has called for the licensing of poppy cultivation in Afghanistan in order to manufacture poppy-based medicines, such as morphine and codeine, and to combat poverty in rural communities, breaking ties with the illicit drugs trade. In a technical blueprint, "Poppy for Medicine" (June 2007) Poppy for Medicine Licensing Poppy for the production of essential medicines: an integrated counter-narcotics, development and counter insurgency model for Afghanistan , the Senlis Council outlined proposals for the implementation of a village based poppy for medicine project and calls for a pilot project for Afghan morphine at the next planting season.

NORML (National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws)^[6] and LEAP (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition)^[7] both advocate the legalization of marijuana.

[edit] War on drugs

Main article: War on drugs

The war on drugs, focusing on using law enforcement to prohibit use of drugs has been ineffectual. The Taliban briefly prohibited poppy production in Afganistan, but production has resumed and increased. The drug lords prefer prohibition of drugs because it drives prices up. A more lenient climate would permit the use of soft drugs such as LSD and marijuana, and prohibit the sale and production of hard drugs such as cocaine, methamphetamine, and heroin, but instead of punishing use, would help users overcome their addiction, for example by providing addicts with free heroin in a clinical setting, as was done in England.^[8]