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 Lime-man)
    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

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    1. I've provided evidence in the notes of the motion which everyone seems to be overlooking for some reason.

    2. The clinics wouldn't be illegal, so I literally have no idea the point you're making

    3. The clinics have worked brilliantly in several countries including Switzerland and Germany. Again, and im sick of saying it, LOOK AT THE EVIDENCE
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    1. I've provided evidence in the notes of the motion which everyone seems to be overlooking for some reason.

    2. The clinics wouldn't be illegal, so I literally have no idea the point you're making

    3. The clinics have worked brilliantly in several countries including Switzerland and Germany. Again, and im sick of saying it, LOOK AT THE EVIDENCE
    1. The evidence shows that Portugal now has similar drug use levels to the UK at the moment, it doesn't show that by having them in the UK that our drug use will drop any further.

    2. The drugs would be illegal

    3. See point 1

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    1. The evidence shows that Portugal now has similar drug use levels to the UK at the moment, it doesn't show that by having them in the UK that our drug use will drop any further.

    2. The drugs would be illegal

    3. See point 1

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    1. Portugal had a much higher level before they decriminalised drugs. That has to be taken into account

    2. No they wouldn't, they'd be decriminalised. That's literally the point of this motion
    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
    Oh come on, this is far too simple. The main reason why people who argue in favour of regulation of drugs do so isn't because they think 'drug use is okay' - clearly, drugs destroy lives, and while some get some enjoyment out of them, the world would be a much better place if none of them existed. Rather, it's because they don't believe that it will significantly increase consumption, and the state can adopt paternalistic controls e.g. on dealers encouraging purchase of harder drugs with higher profit margins (of course, a drug dealer really wants to encourage addiction as well), and on the admixture of relatively (key word) safe drugs with other, more dangerous substances.
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    1. Portugal had a much higher level before they decriminalised drugs. That has to be taken into account

    2. No they wouldn't, they'd be decriminalised. That's literally the point of this motion
    1. Why?

    2. They'd still be illegal, unless you misunderstand the difference between decriminalisation and legalisation.

    3. You also missed the point that is If you actually believe that drugs aren't okay, and that use should be as low as can be then hard deterrence is the best way to go about that.

    4. You said that people should do as they like as long as it doesn't harm others, well as I said before, drug use does harm others. The drug trade is largely run by militia and cartels and gangs and results in countless amounts of deaths worldwide, so why don't you show any consistency in your beliefs?



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Oh come on, this is far too simple. The main reason why people who argue in favour of regulation of drugs do so isn't because they think 'drug use is okay' - clearly, drugs destroy lives, and while some get some enjoyment out of them, the world would be a much better place if none of them existed. Rather, it's because they don't believe that it will significantly increase consumption, and the state can adopt paternalistic controls e.g. on dealers encouraging purchase of harder drugs with higher profit margins (of course, a drug dealer really wants to encourage addiction as well), and on the admixture of relatively (key word) safe drugs with other, more dangerous substances.
    But I was under the impression that Petros put forward this motion to curb drug use, unless he was lying.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    1. Why?

    2. They'd still be illegal, unless you misunderstand the difference between decriminalisation and legalisation.

    3. You also missed the point that is If you actually believe that drugs aren't okay, and that use should be as low as can be then hard deterrence is the best way to go about that.

    4. You said that people should do as they like as long as it doesn't harm others, well as I said before, drug use does harm others. The drug trade is largely run by militia and cartels and gangs and results in countless amounts of deaths worldwide, so why don't you show any consistency in your beliefs?



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    1. Because it's proven to decrease the use of drugs

    2. You wouldn't be arrested for possessing a personal amount of drugs. Hardly illegal.

    3. We've tried hard deterrence before in this country and it hasn't worked. It is too easy to get hold of drugs.

    4. If I could have it my way, I'd completely legalise all drugs and have the Government distribute drugs themselves to cut out the drugs trade. You and I both know that won't pass in this house though
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    But I was under the impression that Petros put forward this motion to curb drug use, unless he was lying.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Arguably this could curb drug use, and it would certainly curb drug deaths. I know Petros and I have fairly similar ideas about drug regulation, so I think (and hope) I'm right.
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    1. Because it's proven to decrease the use of drugs

    2. You wouldn't be arrested for possessing a personal amount of drugs. Hardly illegal.

    3. We've tried hard deterrence before in this country and it hasn't worked. It is too easy to get hold of drugs.

    4. If I could have it my way, I'd completely legalise all drugs and have the Government distribute drugs themselves to cut out the drugs trade. You and I both know that won't pass in this house though
    1. They've only decreased drug use to a similar level to our own, there's no proof that they'd lower drug use in the UK substantially.

    2. But you're not legalising the drugs, you're decriminalising them. The drugs would still be illegal.

    3. We haven't tried hard deterrence, we've tried deterrence.

    4. Nationalising the drugs market wouldn't pass? Beggars belief.


    I'm not going to agree with this, I'm of the belief that whatever goes on beyond closed doors is between those behind them. There are also many ways to purchase drugs safely and in safe quantities from the internet with little to no chance of being caught. If you want. I can give you a crash course (for reference purposes... Obviously )

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    1
    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.
    What's wrong with drug use? The purpose of The Misuse of Drugs Act is to prevent the misuse of certain drugs not any use of them.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    I'm not going to agree with this, I'm of the belief that whatever goes on beyond closed doors is between those behind them.
    Yet cases like R v Brown exist.

    Also, what happened to your emotive language a few posts back? Unless I'm misreading, you've switched from 'think of your family' to 'whatever happens behind closed doors' rather quickly.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fgn)
    What's wrong with drug use? The purpose of The Misuse of Drugs Act is to prevent the misuse of certain drugs not any use of them.
    I should have said Drug Abuse rather than Drug use
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mactotaur)
    Yet cases like R v Brown exist.

    Also, what happened to your emotive language a few posts back? Unless I'm misreading, you've switched from 'think of your family' to 'whatever happens behind closed doors' rather quickly.
    Well I could be shooting up heroin myself, but no one knows whether or not I am. Drug consumption rooms bring quite horrible habits into the public, let's be clear that these aren't going to be places for people to have a quick spliff and then shoot off, these are for people who will be taking heroin. If someone is shooting up in a way that actually isn't affecting anyone then that's fine by me, they probably won't get caught and if they're doing it with some ounce of reason they'll probably be relatively healthy too. In the same way that when I enjoy a few tokes now and then, I'm not causing a disturbance, I'm not bothering anyone and nobody really knows when or where I do it.

    The issue with particularly hard drugs, you can't do that. So with heroin you can't have the same level of reason that you'd have with cannabis because they are of a completely different nature.

    The same even applies to some class As like cocaine and MDMA whereby you can easily get away with doing them as long as you're discrete and not disturbing or harming anyone else around you.

    I am both of the belief that you should think of the family and that what happens behind closed doors is between those behind them, where what's happening behind those closed doors doesn't reach outside of them.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    Drug consumption rooms bring quite horrible habits into the public, let's be clear that these aren't going to be places for people to have a quick spliff and then shoot off, these are for people who will be taking heroin.
    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Surely drug consumption rooms would give medical professionals an excellent chance to persuade people to stop taking drugs?
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quamquam123)
    Surely drug consumption rooms would give medical professionals an excellent chance to persuade people to stop taking drugs?
    Whilst putting drugs inside them? I'm sure that's a great way to make some kind of point in a really unobvious way

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    Whilst putting drugs inside them? I'm sure that's a great way to make some kind of point in a really unobvious way

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Well it's a choice between allowing people to consume drugs wherever they want and making people consume drugs in specialist rooms with a medical professional present.
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quamquam123)
    Well it's a choice between allowing people to consume drugs wherever they want and making people consume drugs in specialist rooms with a medical professional present.
    No it isn't.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    And would you look at that, even France are beginning to implement drug consumption rooms.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37617360


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    1. Because it's proven to decrease the use of drugs

    2. You wouldn't be arrested for possessing a personal amount of drugs. Hardly illegal.

    3. We've tried hard deterrence before in this country and it hasn't worked. It is too easy to get hold of drugs.

    4. If I could have it my way, I'd completely legalise all drugs and have the Government distribute drugs themselves to cut out the drugs trade. You and I both know that won't pass in this house though
    Ummm, when did we try hard deterrence, exactly? I'm pretty sure back in the day of awful prisons, capital punishment, and hard Labour we didn't have a drug problem

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I'd be fine with decriminalising the use of certain drugs, but heroine is a different kettle of fish
 
 
 
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.

Poll
Wake up and smell the...

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.