THINK ABOUT IT

WHEN a body with the status of the National Crime Forum comes down in
favour of discussing the de-criminalisation of so-called soft drugs we
should take heed.

Drugs are a huge issue for society, yet one which is rarely if ever debated
in a non-hysterical or unemotional way. The Forum is correct, if science
has a case it should be heard.

For instance, is it not anomalous that doctors may prescribe opiates or
heroine substitutes but not cannabis, although it has been recognised by
medical associations around the world as being extremely effective in the
treatment of pain in a number of illnesses?

The matter is also worth examining from the law and order perspective.
Those in favour of legalising drugs claim that a ban is meaningless as it
can never be completely enforced.

It is simplistic to argue that decriminalising drugs would put an end to
pushers or organised crime. There will always be groups who would need to
be protected and therefore open to be exploited by pushers.

Those in favour of lifting the ban will also raise the question of social
hypocrisy. Why should it be perfectly legal for an individual to abuse
alcohol, which is arguably as harmful and addictive as cannabis?

In an ideal world such a debate would not be necessary, but as the growing
number of addicts will attest we are a long way from that, and therefore at
the very least have an obligation to hear both sides of the debate.