This is what drug policy looks like when you vote for legalization. Yeah, fuck that i prefer DNM's.

The state should take the control of drugs away from gangs and street dealers -- manufacturing them and distributing them to addicts instead of locking up users and letting the black market thrive, according to the King County Bar Association.

Proponents of the controversial idea, outlined in a report released yesterday, say continuing to deal with drug addiction as a crime instead of a medical problem is not only expensive, it simply doesn't work.

They say letting the state regulate now-illegal drugs would curb all kinds of problems in society that the so-called war on drugs has failed to address, including gang violence, petty crime and drug use by kids.

"It's time for us to take a fresh look at how we are dealing with the use and abuse of drugs in our society," said the Rev. Sandy Brown, executive director of the Church Council of Greater Seattle, which also stands behind the proposal.

"Our solutions aren't working. ... They've actually created injustices that need to be fixed."

Supporters acknowledge the idea is too new and controversial to get off the ground this year, despite a state Senate bill that proposed a first step. Bar association President John Cary said the idea, for now, is to get a discussion going about a sweeping drug-policy overhaul.

Under the bar association's proposal, drugs -- particularly hard drugs such as heroin -- would be produced in state facilities, offering better guarantees of purity.

The state could then regulate who gets them in various ways, including requiring people to prove they are addicted, limiting drug use to a restricted place, or even having users undergo training programs to learn more about drug-related health issues, such as blood-borne illness and sexually transmitted disease.

The idea of providing drugs to addicts makes little sense to some, but the strategy has shown great promise in European countries including Switzerland and the Netherlands, said Roger Goodman, director of the bar association's drug-policy project.

Goodman said "bringing addicts indoors" has made them less likely to commit crimes to support their habits, and regulated doses have allowed many people to decrease their drug use or, in some cases, quit.

In Vancouver, B.C., health officials are giving free doses of heroin to a small group of addicts with hopes of stemming drug-related crimes and eventually treating their addictions.

Different drugs should be regulated in different ways, giving the state more control over drugs that have more potential for harm, according to Goodman. Cocaine and heroin, for example, might need ultra-strict regulation; lawmakers might need to consider different methods to regulate marijuana because nearly anyone can grow it, according to the report.

The proposal shuns the politically explosive term of drug "legalization," pushing a concept of "strict regulation and control." Supporters hope to dispel images of heroin being sold over the counter, or street dealers doing the same thing they've always done without worrying about police.

The whole idea has drawn skepticism -- even from those who have been supportive of focusing on treating instead of incarcerating drug users and low-level dealers


Comments


[4 Points] 367T:

why not both? If drugs went totally legal, it's not like you wouldn't be able to buy them online. They'd either be 100% legal and purchasable from clearnet websites, or still completely exist on the darknet.

Still, I commend the people pushing this agenda. It's pretty brave politically to go against the grain of bullshit outdated morals to try to actually solve a problem. I'd support these politicians if I lived in their region.