Besides, I find CP absurd; sellers of legal drugs are contributing no less to ill health and total damage to families and society than sellers of illegal drugs.
Illicit drug use is responsible for about 2% of the total burden of disease in Australia, while 3% is attributable to alcohol consumption and 8% to tobacco use.

And the burden of illicit drugs would decline if only we had an effective harm reduction program including clean needles, because Hepatitis C and B are major conditions responsible for deaths attributable to illicit drug use. http://www.aihw.gov.au/publications/phe/soduia06/soduia06.pdf

Executing drug dealers of illicit drugs who do less damage to society than sellers of legal drugs is unjustified especially since much damage is preventable.

As my negotiation, I offer decriminalisation combined with effective harm reduction programs. Harm reduction programs don’t only help drug users and abusers, they also help to make communities safer and reduce costs in the long term.

As Fractelle said, people will not stop experimenting with drugs and a proportion of the population will, as a result, become addicted. It’s inevitable.

But we can aim to minimise drug abuse by involving different directions and sectors- not just leave it up to the police and the judicial system to cope with drug problems.
Reduce harm, educate about drugs, in the mean time go after the big criminals, not users and little dealers- but no death penalty!

What would your offer be if you agree to negotiate?

"Backyard labs blamed for drug death spike"

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/queensland/backyard-labs-blamed-for-drug-death-spike/2008/08/27/1219516554865.html

Good riddance, eh Col?

Great article, CJ, it shows that the ‘war on drugs’ is not about saving lives at all.

Probably no need to spell it out but I will anyway: even when drugs are illegal, if they were decriminalised, and there had been a comprehensive harm-reduction program in operation, these users would’ve had access to a service that checks out the purity/strength of their drugs before they took them and the users could have pointed the police in the direction of the dealers who sold these dirty drugs without having to be afraid of being arrested themselves.

Where have I heard a similar story before, ah I remember: http://www.irinnews.org/report.aspx?reportid=2636

I did it again- cut off the last number, here's the complete one:
http://www.irinnews.org/report.aspx?reportid=26367

Nicky “Col Rouge, I take your comments on board, but as I asked before, where do we draw the "line in the sand"?”

The “line in the sand” was drawn for us by our forefathers.

I have no problem in moving the line, except when it is moved, I want it to move to produce a ‘better outcome’.

Pretending the general sale of addictive drugs (decriminalization, as being promoted by some and argued against by me) is going to produce a ‘better outcome’ is like believing in fairies.

Regarding alcohol, if you think the destructive influences of alcohol, that influence is a comparative small one.

If you legalize other drugs (heroin, cocaine, amphetamines cannabis etc) you will see a far higher incidence of use than now with downsides affecting a more significant percentage of users, leading to an explosion in the “massive social dislocation, often manifested in serious violence” which you talk of.

Celivia “sellers of legal drugs are contributing no less to ill health and total damage to families and society than sellers of illegal drugs.”

And the point you repeatedly ignore is the “legality” issue and the relative negative impacts of alcohol compared to the illegal substances.

You cannot excuse the actions of someone who cynically exploits illegal drugs to make profit by comparison with the actions of someone who behaves within the law.

“Harm reduction programs don’t only help drug users and abusers, they also help to make communities safer and reduce costs in the long term.”

Describe some… not simple buzz words but what actually happens and how they make communities safer and reduce costs in the long term

As to CJ Morgans article, “volenti non fit injuria”

Of course, a better thing would be if the ‘kitchen’ where these drugs are being cooked were to explode, killing the chef.

“users would’ve had access to a service that checks out the purity/strength of their drugs …. pointed the police in the direction of the dealers who sold these dirty drugs . . .”

Just like the buyers of cheap illegal alcohol …. garbage

Unsurprisingly, it seems that Col's not only out of step with most OLOers on this subject, but he's also out of step with most Australians:

"Australians back medical marijuana, heroin injecting rooms.

MOST Australians would support clinical trials of cannabis for medical use, a new survey of more than 23,000 people has found.

People were quizzed about their personal use and attitudes to drugs for the 2007 National Drug Strategy Household Survey by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.

Almost half the respondents said they would support regulated heroin-injecting rooms.

The nationwide survey found overwhelming support for legalising cannabis for medical reasons, backed by nearly 70 per cent, while approval of clinical trials for cannabis approached 75 per cent.

Most people also looked favourably on needle and syringe programs, supported by more than 65 per cent."

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24258577-952,00.html

Interestingly, their online poll on the issue is currently showing these results:

"Do you support the legalisation of marijuana?"

Yes - 60% (115 votes)
No - 16% (32 votes)
For medical purposes only - 23% (44 votes)