“That the global war on drugs is an abject failure is becoming an increasingly common view”

Based on the continued existence of death and injury on Australian roads, one could suggest drink driving and speeding laws are, likewise a failure and likewise there is no point in incarcerating thieves and other criminals because of a high recidivism rate.

The issue of paedophiles preying on children (just like drug dealers prey on children and the young, in a different sense) should not be blindsided simply because those evil perpetrators have got away with it for centuries.

I would further observe such an “attitude” is not what stopped Hitler’s fascist forces, unless anyone wants to argue the overwhelming success of Chamberlains Munich agreement for "peace in our time" - for which a few Poles could make a reasonable counter argument.

The prescribed “too hard so give up” attitude might suit some but it represents the path to greater failure.

Such a policy of “appeasement” will further condemn a significantly larger portion of the population to a state of drug dependent psychotic misfits, incapable of anything.

As Edmund Burke wrote "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

Greg’s proposal and defeatist attitude would make good proof of Edmund Burkes statement. Just as his attitude of “appeasement” in the “drug war” would have assured (in years past) a parallel dominance of the 1000 year Reich.

Sticking your head in the sand achieves nothing. Legalisation of illicit drugs will only exasperate and enlarge, not reduce or eliminate the problems which they presently produce and such a foolish course will only present an even more critical set of social issues than at present.

Van Nyugen got what he deserved. We should be thanking Singapore for intercepting this filth before he got back to Australia and created his own “body count” of Australian victims from his illicit trade.

Van Ngyuen is not a victim of anything except his own stupidity and criminal activity.

There is nothing new about calling for the decriminalising of drugs. There is nothing new in the knowledge that drug peddlers are winning the war. There is nothing new about expressions of belief that capital punishment is no deterrent.

So, let’s decriminalise the drug trade. Regulate it. “A legal market is the best guarantee that drug-taking will be no more dangerous than drinking alcohol or smoking tobacco. And, just as countries rightly tolerate those two vices, so they should tolerate those who sell and take drugs”, rants ‘The Economist’, according to Greg Barns.

Hey, Barnsy! Alcohol kills, maims and affects the health of more people than illicit drugs. It is more dangerous than illicit drugs because it is legal and therefore socially acceptable. People who wouldn’t dream of taking illicit drugs are happy to wipe themselves out regularly with alcohol as a way of ‘escaping’ their problems and ‘enjoying’ themselves. Young women, especially, are boozing more and more, to the extent that they are fatter and are developing so-called beer guts to match their boyfriends’. The girls are being caught driving with staggering levels of alcohol in their blood. Domestic killings (by both sexes) are on the rise. Alcohol related cancers and other health problems are on the up.

Governments make a lot of money from booze. They would probably like to make a lot more from other drugs. Unfortunately, they would have no more control over heroin, weed, and cocaine etc. than they do over alcohol.

Adding more drugs to the legal list is plain crazy.

Absolutely agree with Greg. All that the current "war on drugs" achieves is to enrich the Mr Bigs in crime. Stop treating users as criminals and recognise drug addiction as a medical/health issue. We don't treat alcoholics or gambling addicts as criminals, we offer them support.
By all means regulate supply but remove the incentive for the criminals to profit.

I would have to agree with Greg. All through the ages various commodities and behaviour have been the subject of prohibition. There was a time when you couldn't by stick books or porn videos. Prostitution and brothels were outlawed. Even alcohol was banned in the USA during the twenties and early thirties. Whenever there is a percieved benefit to both parties in a transaction, prohibition will not stop it. Drugs will ultimately go down this path just all other prohibition agendas have before it.

What a pity Col Rouge did not address the main issues raised in the article.

The introduction of “pedophiles”, the use of the word “filth” to describe the late Van Nguyen and other emotive arguments and statements don’t recommend Col’s views for serious consideration.

Governments decide that they know what is best for individuals to do to themselves and impose sentences on those who are caught actively disagreeing with them, including state sanctioned murder. We cannot compare this with crimes such as murder as these are offences against other people.
The effect of making drugs illegal is to create opportunities for those who distribute them to make huge profits. Remove the illegality and the profits and the incentive to continue disappears.

We are then left with a medical problem which although it would be expensive to deal with, would be far less costly than the punitive approach which is so obviously unsuccessful.

Controls on the substances and information on their users would be available to fight the problems arising with the opportunity for success which the current approach does not have.

Legalise under two conditions:

1. People who choose drugs as a lifestyle, as opposed to working and contributing to the community, will be exempt from the safety net that we provide i.e. no welfare for no hopers. This still applies even it means they rot in their own filth. This also means we don't pay for their drugs (medicare or otherwise).

2. Drugs are not an excuse for criminal activity. I don't care that you were on "the drugs" when you robbed my house, mugged my grandmother, involved yourself in gangland warefare etc you will be dealt harshly and swiftly by the law. You will be made to understand that criminal activity is not tolerated by the upstanding citizens. We may allow you to plead insanity, which is what you are if you claim you are not responsible for your actions, in which case we lock you up and rehabilite for as long as is neccessary. That might mean you never get out.

Druggies cannot have it both ways. They cannot be given the responsibility of access to hard drugs and also be cradled like babies when they abuse it, at least not on my teat.