DRUGS:
DRUGS AND CRIME
Many people are sick of property crime and assault and there is a perception by some that the courts are not tough enough on this (not necessarily true). But is the solution to build more prisons and employ more prison guards to house them (at a cost of about \\$60, 000 per year per prisoner)? The US has gone down that path and now has over 2 million people in prison.
Why not do something to cut crime in half or more? Wouldnt it be better to stop crime from happening in the first place, and not have to put so many people in prison? How? Legalize drugs! Most property crime (some estimate up to 80%) is drug-related, i.e. people are stealing to get the money to buy drugs that they are addicted to. If drugs were legal they would cost next to nothing (as the price is inflated by their illegality) and people would not need to resort to crime.
Drug addiction may not excuse people from committing property crimes, it is simply a reason why people commit crime. Increasing penalties for property crime does not actually stop crime. What is the point of putting more and more people in prison when property crime is still going to continue as long as highly addictive drugs remain illegal? Most of the problems surrounding drug addiction arise BECAUSE they are illegal, not the other way around (that making drugs illegal stops the problems).
The programme carried out in Switzerland where heroin addicts are given heroin in controlled doses has largely been a success, and we should do the same here. The issue of addicts being given freeEheroin is a misnomer because if it were illegal it would be almost free to buy because it is so cheap to produce.
The policy of targeting drug-dealers rather than users does not solve the problems surrounding drug abuse, because it is the targeting of the drugs-dealers itself which drives up the street price of drugs, and that in turn is what leads to so much crime through drug-addictsEneed to obtain the money to pay for their habit. (This includes assault, theft, burglary, armed robbery, etc.).
Many parent would not like the idea that hardEdrugs like heroin should be legalized. What some people advocate is that drugs like heroin should be made legally available only to registered addicts, but not to anyone. This approach has been successfully operating in Switzerland for several years, and approved by a popular referendum there. This would protect children and adults better than the current system. Presently, if a child became addicted to heroin life could be very tough for them and they would be likely to end up committing crime and ending up in prison. However, if they could obtain heroin legally then they are not likely to end up in prison. Addicts would also be safer because legally administered heroin would be given in controlled doses, whereas drugs bought on the street could be of unknown quality.
If the drug laws were reformed and crime fell by a large proportion, this would leave more police, legal and social resources to prevent non drug-related crime, e.g. assaults, vandalism and traffic offenses. It would also save money on prisons - isnt the Tasmanian government considering a plan to build a new \\$50 million plus prison?
Drug law reform would save money on insurance premiums, save the government and taxpayers money, save lives and significantly reduce crime. So why not? LINKS
TOP OF THE PAGE
"SENDING THE WRONG SIGNAL"
Drug law reform would not send a signal that taking drugs isnt that bad a thing to do, as John Howard and likeminded conservatives say. It would actually make taking drugs LESS of a bad thing to do. If taking drugs is such a bad thing, wouldnt be better to have laws that make what happens to people when they take drugs LESS bad rather than WORSE (the harm minimization approach)?
In fact, to NOT reform the drugs laws is sending the wrong signal. It demonstrates that society is happy to let people suffer unnecessarily and if a drug addict dies in a gutter so what?
If drugs are such a bad thing why do people who take drugs need to be punished? They must be already being punished themselves by taking drugs!
Why not ban people from playing rugby or football, because there is a high risk of injury? Not to mention skydiving, rockclimbing, bushwalking, skiing, etc.
TOP OF THE PAGE
Australian Political Internet News Review
|
|
