Home Affairs Committee - Drugs: Breaking the CycleWritten evidence submitted by Nik Morris (DP182)

The Home Affairs Select Committee requested written submissions for a new Inquiry into Drugs. This submission has been written up into six sections, in line with the Committee’s desire to example the Government’s drug strategy in terms of fiscal responsibility, science, health, security and human rights. There is also a section on possible alternatives to the current strategy.

Science

1. The current approach is a failure. There is nothing scientific about the prohibitionist regime. Cannabis is safer that alcohol for example, and science tells us this. So why are cannabis users treated with such disdain, whilst alcohol is so readily available to its users? The only answer can be, is that scientific evidence is looked over in regards to alcohol. Let’s be honest. On all scientific studies, alcohol is more dangerous than cannabis, why isn’t it in the Misuse of Drugs Act?

Health

2. Locking people up can in no way be seen as good for public health.

Security

3. Drug users are discriminated against by the government. Police smash down peoples doors in the belief that they’re doing some good. They forget about a person’s right to security and privacy at home.

Fiscal Responsibility

4. The cost of prohibition is scandalous. Money would be better spent through the health service.

Human Rights

5. I lost my human rights a long time ago. The government has ignored my right to a private life for far to long. The present law is a mess. The government should be ashamed of its actions. If you support the present drug laws, you support stupidity. More fool you.

Alternatives

6. Drug User Charter. If drug users harm themselves or others offer them help. If drug users do no harm to themselves or others, leave them alone. Just like with alcohol. Let’s have fairness for all.

February 2012

Prepared 8th December 2012