BETTER WORLD: LEGALISE DRUGS

Far from protecting us and our children, the war on drugs is making
the world a much more dangerous place.

SO FAR this year, about 4000 people have died in Mexico's drugs war -
a horrifying toll. If only a good fairy could wave a magic wand and
make all illegal drugs disappear, the world would be a better place.

Dream on. Recreational drug use is as old as humanity, and has not
been stopped by the most draconian laws. Given that drugs are here to
stay, how do we limit the harm they do?

The evidence suggests most of the problems stem not from drugs
themselves, but from the fact that they are illegal. The obvious
answer, then, is to make them legal.

The argument most often deployed in support of the status quo is that
keeping drugs illegal curbs drug use among the law-abiding majority,
thereby reducing harm overall. But a closer look reveals that this
really doesn't stand up. In the UK, as in many countries, the real
clampdown on drugs started in the late 1960s, yet government
statistics show that the number of heroin or cocaine addicts seen by
the health service has grown ever since - from around 1000 people per
year then, to 100,000 today. It is a pattern that has been repeated
the world over.

A second approach to the question is to look at whether fewer people
use drugs in countries with stricter drug laws. In 2008, the World
Health Organization looked at 17 countries and found no such
correlation. The US, despite its punitive drug policies, has one of
the highest levels of drug use in the world (PLoS Medicine, vol 5, p
e141).

A third strand of evidence comes from what happens when a country
softens its drug laws, as Portugal did in 2001. While dealing remains
illegal in Portugal, personal use of all drugs has been
decriminalised. The result? Drug use has stayed roughly constant, but
ill health and deaths from drug taking have fallen. "Judged by
virtually every metric, the Portuguese decriminalisation framework has
been a resounding success," states a recent report by the Cato
Institute, a libertarian think tank based in Washington DC.

By any measure, making drugs illegal fails to achieve one of its
primary objectives. But it is the unintended consequences of
prohibition that make the most compelling case against it. Prohibition
fuels crime in many ways: without state aid, addicts may be forced to
fund their habit through robbery, for instance, while youngsters can
be drawn into the drugs trade as a way to earn money and status. In
countries such as Colombia and Mexico, the profits from illegal drugs
have spawned armed criminal organisations whose resources rival those
of the state. Murder, kidnapping and corruption are rife.

Making drugs illegal also makes them more dangerous. The lack of
access to clean needles for drug users who inject is a major factor in
the spread of lethal viruses such as HIV and hepatitis C.

So what's the alternative? There are several models for the legal
provision of recreational drugs. They include prescription by doctors,
consumption at licensed premises or even sale on a similar basis to
alcohol and tobacco, with health warnings and age limits. If this
prospect appals you, consider the fact that in the US today, many
teenagers say they find it easier to buy cannabis than beer.

Taking any drug - including alcohol and nicotine - does have health
risks, but a legal market would at least ensure that the substances
people ingest or inject are available unadulterated and at known
dosages. Much of the estimated $300 billion earned from illegal drugs
worldwide, which now funds crime, corruption and environmental
destruction, could support legitimate jobs. And instead of spending
tens of billions enforcing prohibition, governments would gain income
from taxes that could be spent on medical treatment for the small
proportion of users who become addicted or whose health is otherwise
harmed.

Unfortunately, the idea that banning drugs is the best way to protect
vulnerable people - especially children - has acquired a strong
emotional grip, one that politicians are happy to exploit. For many
decades, laws and public policy have flown in the face of the
evidence. Far from protecting us, this approach has made the world a
much more dangerous place than it need be.