Pubdate: Sun, 29 Sep 2013
Source: Observer, The (UK)
Copyright: 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited
Contact:  http://www.observer.co.uk/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/315
Author: Mike Barton, Chief constable, Durham
Page: 39

WHY ENDING THE WAR ON DRUGS WILL CUT CRIME

A senior police officer says making drugs legal - but controlling
supply - would stop the flow of money to gangs and destroy their power

Have we not learned from history? The Mob's sinister rise in the US
was funded through the supply of a prohibited drug

As a police officer for nearly 34 years, I have witnessed the
worsening problems of drug addiction  whether it's to controlled
substances or legal drugs, such as alcohol. The Misuse of Drugs Act
1971 has prevailed throughout my time of service, but it would appear
not to have had the impact that optimistic legislators planned.

Throughout those 34 years, I have recognised that it is an
indisputable truth that drugs are bad. Occasionally, a retired
colleague advocates a change, but mostly politicians, professionals
and the media collude in the fiction that we are winning the war on
drugs, or if not, that we still have to fight it in the same way.

Their message has been successful in winning support. Indeed, I
recently joined a debating society event at the University of Durham,
during which I argued for the decriminalisation of Class A drugs. I
felt that our team was funnier, as well as better-informed and more
erudite than the opposing team, who were advocating maintaining the
status quo. Imagine my surprise, my chagrin even, when the students
overwhelmingly voted in favour of maintaining outright
prohibition.

So, are we really winning the "war on drugs"?

Well, if the war on drugs means stopping every street corner turning
into an opium den and discouraging the mass consumption of laudanum as 
happened during the 19th century - then it has succeeded. But if
the war on drugs means trying to reduce the illicit supply of drugs,
then it has comprehensively failed.

One of my custody sergeants, who was discussing addiction at an event
recently with Recovery Academy Durham, noticed the absence of a former
addict we worked with called Gary, who is in his 40s and has been on
drugs ever since he was 14. Gary had not been arrested recently, so it
was concluded (wrongly) that "well, he must be dead". That is the
shocking truth - the Garys of this world are either in prison,
regularly arrested or dead. But can we not come up with a better way
of helping people like him?

Not all crime gangs raise income through selling drugs, but in my
experience most of them do. So offering an alternative route of supply
to users cuts off the gang's income stream. If an addict were able to
access drugs via the NHS or some similar organisation, then they would
not have to go out and buy illegal drugs. And buying or being treated
with diamorphine, say, is cheap.

Drugs should be controlled. They should not, of course, be freely
available. I think addiction to anything - be it drugs, alcohol
gambling or anything else - is not a good thing, but outright
prohibition just hands revenue streams to villains. Since 1971,
prohibition has put billions into the hands of villains who sell
adulterated drugs on the streets.

If you started to give a heroin addict the drug therapeutically, we
would not have the scourge of hepatitis C and HIV spreading among
needle users, for instance. I am calling for a controlled environment,
not a free for all. In addition, I am saying that people who encourage
others to take drugs by selling them are criminals, and their actions
should be tackled. But addicts, on the other hand, need to be treated,
cared for and encouraged to break the cycle of addiction. They do not
need to be criminalised.

The approach to banned substances contrasts sharply with our attitude
towards alcohol. I am deeply disappointed that the government has not
followed through on its initial support for a minimum price for
alcohol. In the north-east we suffer immense inequalities in health
and life expectancy due to alcohol addiction. Is it fair that
alcohol-related crime and licensing costs society in my own force area
alone at least UKP65.8m a year?

Is it sensible that in County Durham, you can buy two litres of strong
cider for just UKP1.99? I suspect it has never seen an apple, but is
more akin to industrial ethanol. Social tolerance of excessive
drinking has become far too great.

While having a drink was once only one part of socialising, many
people now believe that the only purpose in going out of an evening is
"to get smashed". The only consequence of their night out is a
horrific hangover and vomit-stained clothing.

Drug addiction costs us a fortune, but it pales in comparison to the
depredations of alcohol problems. All of this fuels the increasingly
distressing problem of mental ill-health. Whatever the causes, the
police are now mostly the first port of call and often the only agency
called on and are then expected to deal with the impact of mental
ill-health on society.

Have we not learned the lessons of prohibition in history? The Mob's
sinister rise to prominence in the US was pretty much funded through
its supply of a prohibited drug - alcohol. That's arguably what we are
doing in the UK.

Britain's police forces all map the activities of organised crime. In
my force area we have 43 organised crime groups on our radar. Most of
them have their primary source of income in illicit drug supply; all
of them are involved in some way.

These criminals are often local heroes and role models for young
people who covet their wealth. Decriminalising their commodity will
immediately cut off their income stream and destroy their power.
Making drugs legal would tackle the supply chain much more effectively
and much more economically than we can currently manage.

My argument for decriminalising drugs may seem paper-thin when one
considers that alcohol is legal and yet extremely damaging. What I am
saying is that we need to have a more honest debate.

But I leave you with the optimistic words of our friend, Gary, who is
now methadone- and drug-free: "The future is rosy."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Matt