Drug decriminalization a success in Portugal

[kertejud2]

I'm sure millions will still be spent trying to convince us its a bad idea.


Ten years ago, Portugal became the first Western nation to pass full-scale, nationwide decriminalization. That law, passed Oct. 1, 2000, abolished criminal sanctions for all narcotics — not just marijuana but also “hard drugs” like heroin and cocaine.

...

By any metric, Portugal’s drug-decriminalization scheme has been a resounding success. Drug usage in many categories has decreased in absolute terms, including for key demographic groups, like 15-to-19-year-olds. Where usage rates have increased, the increases have been modest — far less than in most other European Union nations, which continue to use a criminalization approach.


http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/43544.html#ixzz12iyDFx7r

[Xtrema]

A lot of businesses profit off prohibition of any kind.

It may be easy for a small country like Portugal to untangle themselves to implement this. It will be tough for NA to follow thru.

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by Xtrema
A lot of businesses profit off prohibition of any kind.

Criminals profited off of alcohol prohibition. Criminals profit off of drug criminalization. The only taxpaying people who make money are the government employees who's job it is to stop it, whether its the police or the penal system.

Under Portgual's system most of those costs are transferred to treatment. I'd rather see my tax dollars going to helping people than just locking them up (a revolving door treatment system is more desirable than a revolving door prison system). And I'd much rather see my government collect taxes from various drug producers rather than see it funnelled across borders and sold underground like alcohol was in the 20s.

And tobacco companies may benefit from criminalization of other drugs, but tobacco producers aren't Canadian, so fuck 'em.

[Mibz]

I imagine the tax increase required to provide those rehabilitation services and the associated court tie-up would be insane.

[ZenOps]

It creates a big problem.

Drug dealers and growers all of a sudden no longer make as much money.

If California legalizes, its estimated anywhere between 400,000 and 600,000 homes will take the government up on the 25 square feet of grow-op for personal use. That is in addition to the approximate tripled amount from actual large farming operations.

Its great for the pothead consumer, as it may force the price of marijuanna closer to that of brocolli or lettuce, but it also does create a lot of anger with the current drug lords who are all of a sudden drastically not making as much money.

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by Mibz
I imagine the tax increase required to provide those rehabilitation services and the associated court tie-up would be insane.

Where would the court tie-up come from? And the rehabilitation costs can be taken from the savings in enforcement cost.

[se7en]

i wanna go to Portugal now.

[Mibz]

Originally posted by kertejud2
Where would the court tie-up come from? And the rehabilitation costs can be taken from the savings in enforcement cost.
Individuals caught with drugs in Portugal are no longer arrested or treated as criminals. Instead, they are sent to a tribunal of health professionals, where they are offered the opportunity, but are not compelled, to seek government-provided treatment.Tribunals don't grow on trees, and they certainly don't work for free.

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by Mibz
Tribunals don't grow on trees, and they certainly don't work for free.

There's no tie-ups in these tribunals, and the health professionals are already on our payroll.

[Mibz]

Originally posted by kertejud2


There's no tie-ups in these tribunals, and the health professionals are already on our payroll. We're both assuming regarding these points, but I don't have any confidence that the system would be efficient.

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by Mibz
We're both assuming regarding these points, but I don't have any confidence that the system would be efficient.

I can assure you that a tribunal of health professionals pushing somebody to treatment will be considerably less costly than a criminal trial for the same person.

[Mibz]

Originally posted by kertejud2


I can assure you that a tribunal of health professionals pushing somebody to treatment will be considerably less costly than a criminal trial for the same person. I won't argue with you there, it just seemed like you were making it sound like suddenly all this money used to fight drugs would be freed up, and I don't see it happening.

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by Mibz
We're both assuming regarding these points, but I don't have any confidence that the system would be efficient.

Or as it states in the quote, actually able to enforce anything.

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by Mibz
I won't argue with you there, it just seemed like you were making it sound like suddenly all this money used to fight drugs would be freed up, and I don't see it happening.

Well, a large chunk would be, and the court system as a result would be freed up as well, as would the costs to the penal system (a system that already has treatment built into it, but this time it would ignore the mandatory detainment costs that currently go along with it).

[Mibz]

Originally posted by kertejud2


Well, a large chunk would be, and the court system as a result would be freed up as well, as would the costs to the penal system (a system that already has treatment built into it, but this time it would ignore the mandatory detainment costs that currently go along with it). But then the costs get put into setting up and regulating the tribunal and treatment programs, as well as monitoring and studying to make sure it's working.

Again, I'm not saying it's a bad idea, but I think that all the money saved by decriminalizing (and more) will just go right back into the treatment system. I think the latter is a much better way to spend the money, but I still think taxes would go up, and you'd be hard pressed to convince many taxpayers to pay more to decriminalize drugs.

[5hift]

Current North American drug laws are a farce. Society picks up all the social/medical costs, organized crime gets the revenue. Couldn't be dumber if we sat down and planned for it.

[5hift]

Pretty accurate generalization of the situation:


The Cato Institute, a respected U.S. think tank, has released a report on alternative drug policies. Several years ago, Portugal parted ways with the U.S. and decriminalized all drugs so that resources could focus on prevention and treatment of drug use. The report shows Portugal's policies have dramatically reduced HIV rates as drug addiction has been viewed as a health, rather than criminal justice, problem. In addition, Portugal now has the lowest rates of marijuana use in the European Union, with experts suggesting that the health focus has taken some of the glamor out of illegal drugs.

Similarly, the de facto regulation of marijuana in the Netherlands and distribution through licensed coffee shops generates tax revenue for the country rather than profits for organized crime. Interestingly, rates of marijuana use in the Netherlands remain far lower than those in the U.S. Consider this against the backdrop of the mayhem in Mexico, much of which is driven by fighting to control the marijuana export industry.

The American "get tough" approach, although politically popular in certain circles, has failed to achieve its intended objectives: The supply of illicit drugs has increased, the costs of illicit drugs have dropped, and drug purity has risen. The mounting bloodshed in Mexico and the recent mayhem in Jamaica clearly demonstrate that the U.S. is exporting violence, breaking up families and increasing the taxpayer burden to help fight these fruitless battles.

Americans themselves are suffering deeply from these misguided policies. It's time to just say no to the war on drugs and to implement science-based alternative policy models that are proving effective in other parts of the world.

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by Mibz
But then the costs get put into setting up and regulating the tribunal and treatment programs, as well as monitoring and studying to make sure it's working.

Again, I'm not saying it's a bad idea, but I think that all the money saved by decriminalizing (and more) will just go right back into the treatment system. I think the latter is a much better way to spend the money, but I still think taxes would go up, and you'd be hard pressed to convince many taxpayers to pay more to decriminalize drugs.

Do you think taxpayers of the U.S. are benefiting more from corporate taxes for Miller and Anheuser-Busch and Jack Daniels as well as tobacco and liquor taxes than they were benefiting by paying the Treasury and Chicago PD to hunt down and prosecute Capone? Why would it be significantly different from drugs like marijuana (in the other thread I posted the story about the helicopters and dozens of armed officers storming a school tomato grow op on the taxpayer's dime)?

Universal treatment already exists in Canada, those costs wont change, only with a criminal drug system you're also paying for detainment (guards, walls, bars and necessities aren't free either). But in Portugal the amount of drug related illness and death went down, which means the health system is saving money that was already being spent on drug users to begin with. Less drug users in hospitals is good, as well as cheaper. Drug users in hospitals that are attached to prisons, not so much.

But transferring costs from enforcement to treatment, and having the number of required treatment cases going down is bad, because your taxes might somehow go up?

And just for the hell of it, so what if your taxes go up? Would the increase in taxes to make your country a better place to live in because of less drug related problems going down not be worth it? Wouldn't spending a bit more for a government actually helping people be better than the government spending a bit less to punish people? Or should the motto of citizens everywhere be "Keep your hands out of our pockets!...unless those pockets have drugs in them"?

[calgary403]

I highly doubt this would ever happen in North America. Think of all the people who make money off of prohibition. Imagine how many Judges, Police officers, Lawyers, Prison guards, etc. etc. etc. would be out of work. Not to mention how many businesses profit from the money drug dealers spend. It's sad to say but keeping drugs illegal is making alot of people money.