M406 – Full Drug Decriminalisation Motion 2016 (Second Reading)

Announcements Posted on
How helpful is our apprenticeship zone? Have your say with our short survey 02-12-2016
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mactotaur)
    Better to regulate them than force addicts to get drugs from shady alleys and open themselves up to far more immediate harm.
    That's what I was saying? Or are you trying to back me up :/
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    That's what I was saying? Or are you trying to back me up :/
    I'm saying that you're right, but decriminalisation is a step towards legalisation and regulation.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mactotaur)
    I'm saying that you're right, but decriminalisation is a step towards legalisation and regulation.
    But decriminalisation without regulation at the same time is still a risk.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    But decriminalisation without regulation at the same time is still a risk.
    A risk that's been proven to pay off with literally no cons IF. YOU. LOOK. AT. THE. EVIDENCE.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    A risk that's been proven to pay off with literally no cons IF. YOU. LOOK. AT. THE. EVIDENCE.
    You are making the claims, its your job to do that.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    You are making the claims, its your job to do that.
    I have literally provided the evidence in the notes of the motion. It is literally right there
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    I meant evidence that proved decriminalisation doesn't work
    I'm saying that zero tolerance policy is significantly better at dissuading people from throwing their lives away. With data from most countries (although from varying years) Japan has the joint fourth lowest cannabis use, at 0.1% of the population each year, only Libya is lower at half that, but Libya is 20 year old figures, and Brunei at 0.02%, and Singapore at 0.004%. Sweden, while still up at 1.2% is the lowest of the western countries, unless you want to extend Western to Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea and Japan.

    Coke, relative to weed Sweden are bad in the rankings here, but still only 0.2%, compared to 1.9% here, 2.3% in the US, and 2.4% in Scotland (doesn't differentiate between crack and the powder forms). Once again, Japan, Hong Kong, Indonesia all have INCREDIBLY low rates.

    Opiates, we get yet again the same story, here Portugal is barely behind the UK, 0.7% plays 0.9, and again, Japan and Sweden and near the bottom of the list at 0.1%, Singapore all the way down at 0.004.

    What's that? Singapore has harsh punishments? No wonder it was the lowest in all three categories, possession can lead to long prison sentences, hard labour, caning, and in certain circumstances execution, and people say harsh punishment is no deterrent.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Nay, not convinced as measures in isolation they will have the desired impact. Nothing tackling drug driving or treatment provision.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Nay, its easy enough to buy drugs online which is the safest option and at little to no risk of being caught.

    When you buy drugs online you know the vender, what they're selling and how much you're getting. There isn't any risk from going to meet dealers in person and dealers are competing for turf so violence and violent crime aren't an issue.

    Drugs are bad m'kay, but there are ways to do them in a safer way and ways to get them which are virtually harmless. If someone wants to do drugs there's little we can do to stop them, however, it must be clear that drug use isn't a good thing.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    I have literally provided the evidence in the notes of the motion. It is literally right there
    Sorry, since starting uni I have less time than normal. Portugal say they have decriminalised but fines are still charged and people can be forced into rehab so they just got rid of jail terms.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    I'm saying that zero tolerance policy is significantly better at dissuading people from throwing their lives away. With data from most countries (although from varying years) Japan has the joint fourth lowest cannabis use, at 0.1% of the population each year, only Libya is lower at half that, but Libya is 20 year old figures, and Brunei at 0.02%, and Singapore at 0.004%. Sweden, while still up at 1.2% is the lowest of the western countries, unless you want to extend Western to Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea and Japan.

    Coke, relative to weed Sweden are bad in the rankings here, but still only 0.2%, compared to 1.9% here, 2.3% in the US, and 2.4% in Scotland (doesn't differentiate between crack and the powder forms). Once again, Japan, Hong Kong, Indonesia all have INCREDIBLY low rates.

    Opiates, we get yet again the same story, here Portugal is barely behind the UK, 0.7% plays 0.9, and again, Japan and Sweden and near the bottom of the list at 0.1%, Singapore all the way down at 0.004.

    What's that? Singapore has harsh punishments? No wonder it was the lowest in all three categories, possession can lead to long prison sentences, hard labour, caning, and in certain circumstances execution, and people say harsh punishment is no deterrent.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    All you've done is prove our current drugs policy doesn't work, which means change is necessary. You still haven't proved that my changes will not work.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    Sorry, since starting uni I have less time than normal. Portugal say they have decriminalised but fines are still charged and people can be forced into rehab so they just got rid of jail terms.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    They don't fine people. They just get you before a panel which is then most of the time suspended. If you're repeatedly put before the panel you receive treatment.

    My drug consumption rooms however, could provide that without people being stopped. They can provide advice for people and help them, as well as providing medical assistance if every necessary. We'll be decreasing the spread of HIV, we'll be decreasing the amount of people that will overdose and most importantly, we'll be decreasing the number of people taking drugs.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    All you've done is prove our current drugs policy doesn't work, which means change is necessary. You still haven't proved that my changes will not work.
    I think you're having difficulty grasping the very simple concept that your changes are **** and relatively ineffective. A reduction from 5m+ (assuming minimal overlap) to 3m vs to 5000 who I would wager are mostly gangs anyway

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    They don't fine people. They just get you before a panel which is then most of the time suspended. If you're repeatedly put before the panel you receive treatment.

    My drug consumption rooms however, could provide that without people being stopped. They can provide advice for people and help them, as well as providing medical assistance if every necessary. We'll be decreasing the spread of HIV, we'll be decreasing the amount of people that will overdose and most importantly, we'll be decreasing the number of people taking drugs.
    But now getting caught with them meant a small fine and maybe a referral to a treatment program
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-10301780.html

    And you need to fund these rooms and you then need to make using drugs outside of these rooms illegal.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-10301780.html

    And you need to fund these rooms and you then need to make using drugs outside of these rooms illegal.
    The two main sources I looked at didn't mention a fine. In any case, I wouldn't implement a fine.

    How I fund the rooms is irrelevant until the Government acts on it. Whenever anyone submits a bill they cost it, but do not say how it will be funded.

    I wouldn't make using the drugs outside of the room illegal. Here is where you could potentially implement a caution or a small fine (with you not being allowed to use drugs in public).
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    The two main sources I looked at didn't mention a fine. In any case, I wouldn't implement a fine.

    How I fund the rooms is irrelevant until the Government acts on it. Whenever anyone submits a bill they cost it, but do not say how it will be funded.

    I wouldn't make using the drugs outside of the room illegal. Here is where you could potentially implement a caution or a small fine (with you not being allowed to use drugs in public).
    Then Portugal isn't a valid citation because the fine could act as a deterrent.

    Now remember I do support legalisation but this is too halfhearted IMO.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    Then Portugal isn't a valid citation because the fine could act as a deterrent.

    Now remember I do support legalisation but this is too halfhearted IMO.
    The reason it's "halfhearted" is because I too support legalisation but didn't believe it to have a chance of passing. Decriminalisation isn't a cure, but it's an improvement on the current system, and I am content with gradual process.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    The reason it's "halfhearted" is because I too support legalisation but didn't believe it to have a chance of passing. Decriminalisation isn't a cure, but it's an improvement on the current system, and I am content with gradual process.
    That depends on what you mean by improvement. If you believe in legalisation then stating that drug consumption rooms bring down drug use is irrelevant.

    Overall, there are three sides to this debate, those who believe that drug use isn't okay, those who believe it is and those who don't care either way. If you don't believe that drug use is okay then don't vote in favour of this motion. If you believe that it is okay, then vote in favour of this motion. If you don't care either way then the status quo is pretty much fine so don't vote in favour of this motion.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    That depends on what you mean by improvement. If you believe in legalisation then stating that drug consumption rooms bring down drug use is irrelevant.

    Overall, there are three sides to this debate, those who believe that drug use isn't okay, those who believe it is and those who don't care either way. If you don't believe that drug use is okay then don't vote in favour of this motion. If you believe that it is okay, then vote in favour of this motion. If you don't care either way then the status quo is pretty much fine so don't vote in favour of this motion.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I support and proposed this motion BECAUSE I believe drug use isn't okay and we need to bring it down. I also believe every single individual has the right to do what they like as long as it does not harm another person
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    I support and proposed this motion BECAUSE I believe drug use isn't okay and we need to bring it down. I also believe every single individual has the right to do what they like as long as it does not harm another person
    And how do drug consumption rooms not harm others?

    We're talking about clinics in which sad, depraved people can go and insert the worst of poisons into their bodies. You say that you don't believe that drug use isn't okay but rather than try to halt the supply of drugs, or at the very least hinder it, you suggest bringing illegal drug clinics into the UK.

    If you really wanted to bring drug use down you'd listen to JD when he showed you the evidence backing up hard deterrence. I'm quite a liberal on this until it comes to peoples health and lives being seriously at risk, the harm one person causes onto other by them doing especially hard drugs is immense, how would you feel if you saw a family member shooting up on the couch as you came home from college? Or if you saw a close friend stumbling out of one of you drug consumption rooms?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
Updated: October 16, 2016
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Today on TSR
Poll
Would you rather have...?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.