Soft drugs, hard drugs, national policies & programs

J

JBR

Senior Member
Location
Southern Canada mtn. valley, tad west of Rockies
It's well known that a little over five years ago the Canadian government decriminalized limited possession (and cultivation) of marijuana for personal use by adults, and instituted a legally approved system for licensed production, distribution and sales of cannabis products. A short while ago I posted something about local common knowledge & observations in my immediate area, concerning crime. It's here:
Do you feel 100% safe in all parts of your community?
My post is #14.

As to cannabis, since the 1970s I felt cannabis should be given a legal status equivalent to alcohol. So I applauded our federal & provincial governments' line of action. I view our current situation in British Columbia as being transitional, from the old context of cannabis illegality and into the current slightly beleaguered phase.

I'm interested in what people know, from personal experience or from study of reports, about how well the policies of other nations is working out. I've visited Northern Europe, and I felt the Netherlands (for instance) had been doing something right for years. Several others in the north have similar approaches. Some people say Portugal is the current gold standard with respect to drugs in general. Some people say Britain has the wrong approach. I dunno. I admit considerable ignorance about this, and what I've given voice to on SF has mostly represented personal observations in my home region.

Please share your knowledge & experience.
 

The UK has the same old draconian policies we've always had. No progress whatsoever.

Let me say the following:

1) The so called "war on drugs" has been won. Drugs came out on top. Denial of this is ridiculous.
2) The drug trade follows the tried and tested "supply and demand" model.
3) No mind-altering drug is better than the opposite.
4) Complete sobriety from all substances has proven virtually impossible.
5) Some people will die due to addiction, and there's nothing we can do about it.
6) Until we examine the reasons people choose a drug, we won't learn.
7) Being pro-legalization does not mean pro, or acceptance, of crime.
8) The "system" drives some people to despair.
 
Too many issues for one solution. The root cause is the desire for chemical intoxication. Until the junkies don't want to get high and chemical intoxicants aren't accepted everywhere and anywhere the issue will never go away.
 

WhatInThe said:
Too many issues for one solution. The root cause is the desire for chemical intoxication. Until the junkies don't want to get high and chemical intoxicants aren't accepted everywhere and anywhere the issue will never go away.
Click to expand...

I agree, and disagree. The desire for "chemical intoxication" is not the root cause. No-one wakes up completely sober and thinks, "I need drugs". It's deeper than that, and I believe, a cultural issue.
 
VaughanJB said:
I agree, and disagree. The desire for "chemical intoxication" is not the root cause. No-one wakes up completely sober and thinks, "I need drugs". It's deeper than that, and I believe, a cultural issue.
Click to expand...
I'm not just talking solely about getting high or drunk. Alcohol for instance is used and available on a recreational fishing expedition. The ocean, view or thrill of chase isn't good enough? Life is getting like the tv show Madmen where everyone is always drinking and smoking cigarettes along with else their doing. Now a days instead of drink in hand it's a joint or vape pen.

Why is or why must a chemical intoxicant be used with just about everything one does in life.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JBR
JBR said:
It was something like 15 years ago that someone told me opiate addicts in Britain could sign up for daily maintenance. If that was so, then it was better than what was going on in North America at the time.
Click to expand...
yes this is fact... I know very little about the drug culture in the UK, but I do know this to be factual...
 
  • Like
Reactions: JBR
Pepper said:
How do you know?
Click to expand...

To be compelled to "chemical intoxication", one has to choose to be intoxicated chemically. So, I've had alcohol in my life, but never heroin. I can't think of an example where someone said, "I think I'll try a chemical intoxicant just because....." Something always preceded the choice.
 
There exists no consensus on whether or not legalizing soft drugs has reduced or increased addictions, or crime rates. Some countries have no penalties involving possession of marijuana, and yet some countries convict and imprison even small amounts. The range of cultural influence is extreme in many places. IMO it has come down to the $$$. It has always been about the money, but now it is so obvious it can't be missed. States that have legalized and taxed marijuana have made up to a billion dollars. Industrial pot is the way to go. or I should say, the way it has gone. My hope is that all soft drugs ( excluding opioids ) should be regulated and legalized. When you outlaw "x", only outlaws will deal in "x".
 
JBR said:
It was something like 15 years ago that someone told me opiate addicts in Britain could sign up for daily maintenance. If that was so, then it was better than what was going on in North America at the time.
Click to expand...
Our methadone programs seem to be a transitional phase. I don’t know any details about it.
 
We are all drug "addicts", much of human behavior is motivated by pursuit of the feel good endorphins and neural transmitters that the body "rewards" us with . Opiates, Cocaine, Methamphetamine, alcohol, cannibals,caffeine, maple doughnuts and chocolate meringue pie all stimulant the nervous system in similar ways.
 
Last edited:
Interesting to hear the nit-picking of "chemical intoxicants" as compared to various degrees of alcohol intoxication. I have to conclude that having your family wiped out by a drunk driver (alcohol induced) is somehow better than the same situation with someone using chemical intoxicants.

The same old downing a six pack at the family picnic is OK but being horrified if someone is spotted smoking a joint is reasonable.
 
Nathan said:
We are all drug "addicts", much of human behavior is motivated by pursuit of the feel good endorphins and neural transmitters that the body "rewards" us with . Opiates, Cocaine, Methamphetamine, alcohol, cannibals,caffeine, maple doughnuts and chocolate meringue pie all stimulant the nervous system in similar ways.
Click to expand...
Good point, Nathan. But in themselves our endorphins, so far as I know, don't lead to crazy driving & road accidents, nodding off & dying in an alley or against a shabby storefront wall, or even a fist fight in a bar. I'm supposing the way in which people pursue the relief of emotional turmoil or physical pain, or summon feel-good endorphins is more the issue. How & where they go about feeling better seems more the thing, when it comes to social issues & harm to other people.
 
Last edited:
If we are going to use impairment as a yardstick for deciding policy then prescription drugs are included and just as serious. All of these drugs can be misused/overused, etc.... I like that criteria, and think it should be considered as one of the most important reasons for regulation. Starting with alcohol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JBR
Marijuana is decriminalised in personal use amounts where I live.

I think that is reasonable.

As with alcohol and cigarette smoking- as long as you are not affecting others.

Thus driving stoned is an offence same as driving alcohol intoxicated, passive smoking laws re cigarettes apply to dope as well
 
Oregon tried decriminalizing drugs and things got out of control especially with fentanyl on the scene. They are about to recriminalize them.

Oregon lawmakers voted to recriminalize drugs. The bill's future is now in the governor's hands

After decriminalization Portland fentanyl ODs increase over 1,000%.

MSN

Some may have been using other drugs laced or spiked with fentanyl but decriminalization led to a more casual and/or aggressive/experimental nature in drug use. Also even when decriminalized the druggies still buy the street stuff probably because it's stronger.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JBR
Well, I do wonder about what's going on in Europe. I have some fairly brief experience in Amsterdam. I'd heard for decades about the Netherlands legalizing and regulating possession and the recreational use of marijuana. When I walked into the neighborhood of the cannabis cafés, I thought I'd probably see locals toking up, walking around with squinted smiley eyes, and alternating between coughs & jokes. I didn't.

I observed. And I learned that people either enjoy their choice of marijuana variety in the café or purchase a small amount and take it home to use with their S.O., or with friends. It was low-key there and no big deal at all. In the late afternoon I saw three guys in their 20s in that neighborhood, standing around & jiving... but they spoke English with obvious British accents.

I'm not current on what sort of harder-drug problems, if any, the Netherlands may have. Maybe someone reading this thread can tell me.
 
JBR said:
It's well known that a little over five years ago the Canadian government decriminalized limited possession (and cultivation) of marijuana for personal use by adults, and instituted a legally approved system for licensed production, distribution and sales of cannabis products. A short while ago I posted something about local common knowledge & observations in my immediate area, concerning crime. It's here:
Do you feel 100% safe in all parts of your community?
My post is #14.

As to cannabis, since the 1970s I felt cannabis should be given a legal status equivalent to alcohol. So I applauded our federal & provincial governments' line of action. I view our current situation in British Columbia as being transitional, from the old context of cannabis illegality and into the current slightly beleaguered phase.

I'm interested in what people know, from personal experience or from study of reports, about how well the policies of other nations is working out. I've visited Northern Europe, and I felt the Netherlands (for instance) had been doing something right for years. Several others in the north have similar approaches. Some people say Portugal is the current gold standard with respect to drugs in general. Some people say Britain has the wrong approach. I dunno. I admit considerable ignorance about this, and what I've given voice to on SF has mostly represented personal observations in my home region.

Please share your knowledge & experience.
Click to expand...
In Blue States in the U.S. the legalization of weed has produced mixed results, at best.

Cartels are ruthless businesses. Like any other business, once one product is taken from them by legalization (pot), they have diversified.

How? They switched over to making and selling fentanyl. I also read that they have turned avocado production in Mexico into basically slave labor. They increase their profit margins on legal avocados by not paying farm workers.

They also diversified with human traffiking. All the immigration seekers coming from the south, with valid claims for asylum or not, usually pay someone thousands of dollars for passage. That is a cartel business.

In CA, the legal pot sellers now complete with the illegal growers. The legal sellers have complained loudly about this since they pay big taxes to run their businesses while the illegal growers do not. Officers try to destroy the illegal crops, but the state doesn't have enough officers to be very effective.

So, situation normal around cannabis, all screwed up. SNAFU: Situation normal, all fouled up.
 
Paco Dennis said:
If we are going to use impairment as a yardstick for deciding policy then prescription drugs are included and just as serious. All of these drugs can be misused/overused, etc.... I like that criteria, and think it should be considered as one of the most important reasons for regulation. Starting with alcohol.
Click to expand...
My understanding is that the U.S. prohibition of alcohol sales & production ended in the early 30s, after about a dozen years. And that since that time alcohol has been regulated by law.
 
When the sale of cannabis first became legal in 2019, the lineups were long! Basically, your average citizen wanting the products. For the many it meant no more dealing with back alley dealers and no confidence with your purchase. For the heavy experienced users, they continued on as usual. Stores on Indian Reserves sell for lower prices but the product isn’t controlled. Lots more cannabis stores were gradually opened and they are still in business. There’s a demand.

BC began their trial period of decriminalizing some hard drugs starting in Jan. 2023.
“allowing adults to possess small amounts of certain drugs — opioids, crack, cocaine, methamphetamine and MDMA — for personal use.”

Police weren’t interested in arresting people with small amounts prior to this, so this solved nothing. It had been a tool to deal with suspicious events. Users now openly carry and consume.

Another law was passed so drug consumption couldn’t happen in places like parks or near schools, etc. A judge overruled this. In theory, this was so users wouldn’t be stigmatized. The number of overdoses has gone up continually.
 
January said:
Marijuana is decriminalised in personal use amounts where I live.

I think that is reasonable.

As with alcohol and cigarette smoking- as long as you are not affecting others.

Thus driving stoned is an offence same as driving alcohol intoxicated, passive smoking laws re cigarettes apply to dope as well
Click to expand...
So are bars outlawed where you live because people collect in groups and drink/smoke??? That's pretty strict.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top