|
Cannabis Campaigners' Guide News Database result:
|
|
Ireland: Only criminals gain from drugs ban
Pat Leahy Irish Examiner
Monday 13 Feb 2006 A DISTURBING trend has emerged in relation to recreational drug use in Ireland and the State’s response to it. It appears that a new hard-line approach has been adopted towards this issue. The U-turn on caution rather than prosecution for cannabis possession and the prohibition of magic mushrooms represent a step backwards in that it will do little apart from criminalise otherwise law-abiding citizens. Both of these substances are natural; they are plants that grow in the ground. From a philosophical point of view, there is an element of King Canute in the idea that humankind can ban a plant. Will the State prosecute landowners if this nefarious fungus is found growing on their property? The furore surrounding Trinity College’s research on ecstasy-users defies logic. How can we understand the long-term effects of this synthetic substance if we do not investigate these effects? Surely a study that may yield valuable data on the physiological, neurological and psychological effects of this substance is to be welcomed, not condemned. Debate continues within the scientific community as to the possible harmful effects of cannabis and mushrooms. For instance, the argument that cannabis use can lead to psychosis may have a degree of validity, but this is not a proven fact. What is beyond dispute is that humans have been using these and other drugs ritually and recreationally for thousands of years and the vast majority of recreational drug users do not suffer adverse consequences. Conversely, the prohibition of certain drugs results in a situation whereby supply is in the hands of criminals who will bulk up the substances with all manner of fillers, so greatly increasing the risk to the health of users. I am not so naive as to believe that recreational drug use is a risk-free and harmless activity, yet the matter of personal liberty and freedom over one’s own body must be taken into account. Does the State have the right to tell citizens what they can and cannot put into their own bodies? The patent failure of prohibitionist policies to reduce, let alone eliminate, illicit recreational drug use suggests that State interference in citizens’ personal lifestyles is a fruitless and costly activity. Resources wasted in this moralistic crusade might be better employed in assisting people through educational and public health programmes targeted at reducing the harm associated with drug use. Due to the potentially harmful effects of psychoactive substance (used until death), debate on this matter can be fuelled more by emotive reactions than rational analysis. One would not wish to cause distress to the families and friends of people who have died from drug-related causes, yet the argument that the prohibition of certain drugs might save lives is spurious given the availability of illegal drugs and the near impossibility of cutting off supplies. The issue can also be exploited politically because to be seen as tough on drugs is a potential vote-harvesting strategy. Neither of these reasons, however, forms a valid basis for the formulation of policy in this area. It seems now that the various organs of the State are implementing a ‘mammy knows best’ approach to this area of social policy and, in so doing, are driving drug-related problems further underground, wasting garda time and resources, criminalising drug users, and maintaining an Orwellian interest in the personal habits of citizens. Pat Leahy Department of Applied Social Studies University College Cork.
After you have finished reading this article you can click here to go back.
|
This page was created by the Cannabis Campaigners' Guide.
Feel free to link to this page!