UNDERSTANDING DRUGS

In Britain there is an entire community who choose to take dangerous drugs
for recreational purposes. Each weekend most of them buy their ecstasy
speed, cocaine and other drugs and go out dancing for as long as it is
possible. Society is aware that they exist but is apathetic to their plight.
Drugs let their weekend users build a large repertoire of excuses for taking
drugs which eventually go without saying. The user then becomes defenceless
as they do not know why they may take drugs but can assume affirmatively,
unaware of their increasing dependency

There are two main criteria for a dependency to escalate. The user must have
the audacity to take drugs and it must not occur to them that they are in
danger of becoming dependant, the latter of which may be a conscious
decision due to their excuses for taking drugs or due to them having a
routine of usually having excuses. With there not being a set of guidelines
whereby a user can chart their sanity or addiction, people use their
judgement.

But a user's judgement will be further compromised each time they take their
drugs as each time they will affirm their belief that they recover to
normality - with the degree of normality attained over a long period of
abuse gradually deteriorating unbeknownst to the user. Eventually the user
forgets who they were and is unsure who they are, not having enough time to
fully recover or feel fresh before the next dose.

Ironically the drugs are providing unremitting sanctuary from the
insecurities, anxieties, paranoia and daily trauma from the comedowns and
withdrawals that occur due to regular drug abuse. The weekly drug user
becomes dependant. Every thought, notion, belief, value, sentiment, hope and
retrospection conceived by any dependant user eventually becomes tainted by
their drugs and every aspect of their life is ruined somewhat. If one is
robbed of one's mind one has nothing.

It cannot be refuted that drugs are dangerous so why do these people gamble
with their mental and physical health? This drug taking community does not
consist of people who are all ignorant and ill-informed. Most know all the
facts about drugs that are reported by organisations such as the National
Drugs Helpline and by schools so what is the justification with which they
excuse themselves? It is callous to believe that they do not have reasons to
believe that drugs can be safe.

To explain their mentality I must explain some issues that may or may not be
justifiable but are commonly believed: cannabis can be assumed safe but it
is illegal; successful people have taken drugs recreationally; it is
possible to take drugs and subsequently be fine; ecstasy has been reported
to be safe and yet it is illegal; there does not seem to be any logic in the
classification of illegality of drugs (ecstasy and heroin being of the
same); one can not look into one's soul with rose coloured glasses on
without drugs (obviously); ecstasy kills one or two Britons per month (and
it is not at all clear that overdose or stupidity is not responsible for
some or all of these deaths) whereas alcohol and cigarettes are
statistically responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Britons
per year; it is reported that people have been sentenced to two years'
imprisonment when being found with ten tablets of ecstasy (ten pills are
viewed as harmless as a crate of lager by their users and such a sentence
will never be seen as just): and the legal implications for when a user is
found in possession of drugs differs vastly according to where in the
country they are arrested.

These things are paradoxical and are the basis for the belief that the
government and society do not act fairly when it comes to drugs, hence they
area basis to ignore the law. Illogic and irregularities in laws and
attitudes about drugs do give the impression that neither can be valued for
guidance, especially when people want to believe that drugs are safe. If you
ask any regular drug user they will be able to tell you reams of parodies
like those above because they are their personal excuses.

The anti-drugs leaflets list possible ailments that no sane person would
ever consider themselves wholly vulnerable to and do not explain a
progression of dangers at all. They therefore seem inappropriate for each
individual from when they first start. And so there is not a respected
source of anti drug information. As it is people can justify to themselves
and in many cases to their parents why drugs are safe.

If people understood drugs and the damage they will cause if given a chance
then nobody sane would take them regularly. People should know what
quantities of regular abuse are realistically dangerous and why, even if
this implies that lesser quantities are relatively safe. This would
substantiate most drug laws but is not done as it might be seen as
encouraging occasional drug use which currently has no detectable effects on
long term health. Omitting such guidelines is purely counterproductive as it
leads to false assumptions as drugs policy is then open for
misinterpretation.

Guidelines for taking drugs are as important an education as any other to
provide all young people with a chance of prosperity. They would both advise
people and qualify most laws in unquestionable terms. Society needs a
logical and irrefutable drugs policy whereby people can not deem drugs as
safe with policy unfair. If certain drugs are not proven to be dangerous
then the law should reflect this. This does not make it necessary to
legalise nor decriminalise these drugs but a sense of compromise must be
perceived if the law is to be worthy of the respect needed for it to be an
influence in people's decision about taking any drug.

Drug laws and policies which seem inconsistent, over-zealous and unfair do
more damage than good. They are therefore ignored by those who need guidance
most. The laws ought to be changed so that they protect all of our
compatriots.