BBC BLOGS - Have Your Say
« Previous | Main | Next »

How can we stop drug traffickers?

11:09 UK time, Friday, 26 November 2010

Thirty people have been killed in five days of violence as police in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil crackdown on violent drug gangs. What is the best way to tackle South America's drug problem?

Police in Rio de Janeiro say they now have total control of the Vila Cruzeiro shanty town after drug traffickers had regrouped in the area. Suspected gang members had been blocking roads, burning cars and shooting at police stations.

Rio's governor says the violence is retaliation by drugs gangs who have been driven out of some areas by a police pacification programme. The programme is aimed at improving security and the rule of law in Rio, where favelas have been controlled by drug-trafficking gangs for many years.

Should we wage war on drug traffickers? Will Rio's pacification programme work? Should other countries adopt similar schemes? Can the international community do more to help control drug crime in Brazil?

This debate is now closed. Thank you for your comments.

Comments

Page 1 of 6

  • Comment number 1.

    How can we stop drug traffickers? Death sentences.

  • Comment number 2.

    I hate to say it but legalise and sell, then it can be taxed like alcohol and tobacco. At least that way the costs to the NHS can be recouped whilst at present they cannot.

  • Comment number 3.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 4.

    You don't hear about gangland violence in the Bordeaux region of France or the coffee plantations of Kenya, there haven't been many drive-by shootings related to the Danish brewery industry and I don't recall hearing of any Finnish vodka barons getting stabbed up.

    If only there was a way in which other drugs could be controlled and taxed in the same way. I trust our wise leaders have concluded the safest thing for all of us is to allow the narcotics industry to be controlled by lunatic criminals.

  • Comment number 5.

    We can tackle this in several different ways. Firstly make certain drugs legal, this would take away a large part of the traffickers market, with the added benefit of tax income for the treasury. Secondly make our borders more secure to stop people smuggling drugs in, thirdly come down heavy on traffickers and make the sentence so severe that trafficking would no longer be an option, and finally give drug users all the help and support they need to break the habit ie: methodone. But realistically you will never totally eradicate the drug trade, but you can certainly minimise it`s effect on society.

  • Comment number 6.

    go to the heart of the problem and stop production. am i being too sensible here????????????????????

  • Comment number 7.

    1. At 11:18am on 26 Nov 2010, Kuradi Vitukari wrote:
    How can we stop drug traffickers? Death sentences.

    ------------------
    We have a problem with drug traffickers killing each other and your solution is to kill more drug traffickers?!?!?!?

  • Comment number 8.

    2. At 11:22am on 26 Nov 2010, Tio Terry wrote:
    I hate to say it but legalise and sell, then it can be taxed like alcohol and tobacco. At least that way the costs to the NHS can be recouped whilst at present they cannot.


    Precisely.

  • Comment number 9.

    I must say I pretty much agree with Tio Terry, and have long advocated legalising currently illegal drugs.
    But are we getting a bit short of topics? Should we wage war on drugs traffickers is surely more a question for Tiffany on Page 3.

  • Comment number 10.

    I cannot see that legalising drugs will help stop people becoming addicted, although legalising any crime will obviously reduce criminality. There is clear evidence that long-term use of even cannabis is dangerous to mental health. To give apparent state approval to young people starting on drugs seems to be an appalling moral statement. Furthermore, I resent paying even more money in social security and health costs to support addicts unable to work.

  • Comment number 11.

    Well, death sentences would be too harsh, going back to middle ages and all that nonsense... We could call it culling like we do for all other animals (you wouldn't call some of them human, would you).

    Or better even, why not feed them new drugs (medicine) that need to be tested instead of using poor animals that have done nothing wrong? Of course sterilise them first, just in case...

    (for moderators: may not publish this: no need to publish twice:
    sorry for posting it twice, I had problems first logging in on Firefox, then I tried IE and it worked, posted there, but did not get through, page stuck, then got back to Firefox and I was logged in, so posted this again)

  • Comment number 12.

    The ONLY reason there are drug gangs is that drugs are illegal.

    How many tobacco or alcohol gangs are there? What happened in America during Prohibition? The birth of organised crime, that's what.

    The only reason drugs arent legal is that countries like ours need crimes and criminals to keep the police employed, so that we have significant numbers in the force to do what they are really employed for, quashing protest and strikes.

  • Comment number 13.

    Fo those concerned about a security in Afghanistan - photos from a site of future World Cup and Olympic Games:



    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-11837815

  • Comment number 14.

    You tell all the Big Drug Corporations to go to the farmers of these countries who produce the drugs "Only sell to me". If the farmer doesn't do this then you fine him say £100,000 each time or give him a heavy prison sentence. Then the Big Corporations can sell these drugs legally to the medical profession. You have to get all countries to agree to this, but if they want the benefits of having a healthy health service then they should comply. End of problem.

  • Comment number 15.

    why cant medics and hospitals who need these drugs be registered. then drug production could be limited to their needs. then all the rest can be investigated and banned just like smoking in public places was. if this is against so called civil liberties then why this debate? send the police home as good money will always be thrown after bad.

  • Comment number 16.

    "I trust our wise leaders have concluded the safest thing for all of us is to allow the narcotics industry to be controlled by lunatic criminals."




    There are people and politicans in the US who claim that a solution to the problem would be legalizing narcotics and ca 20 million illegal aliens, including a significant percentage of narcotraficantes.

  • Comment number 17.

    The USA is the world's number 1 consumer of cocaine and CIA involvement in drug trafficking has been well-documented over the years. The war on drugs is a sham. Vice is as old as the earth and the multi-billion dollar coke business (from which elements within the US government profit handsomely) is here to stay. Like alcohol prohibition, drug prohibition has only empowered and enriched violent criminal gangs. The sooner we legalise it, the better.

  • Comment number 18.

    Perhaps drug taking should be presented as a healthy alternative, then with the typical bloody mindedness of Mr and Mrs Average, demand would drop drastically.

  • Comment number 19.

    This problem is actually getting easier and easier to deal with.

    We now have manless spy craft, tiny little plane type thingys which can fly around for hour upon hour at low cost.

    The UK has even invented a solar one which can fly around more or less indefinately. Once this comes into production then finding drug crops will be so EASY and so much CHEAPER in comparison to present and previous methods of finding production locations.

    With this new technology, which has essentially resulted from Iraq war & Afganistan & specifically funding from these 2 wars, the WHOLE outlook on drug production is about to change.

    Thing is, is that though the massive wealth income from drugs side of these criminal gangs will ultimately be seriously destroyed, I think that many of these gangs will divert their attention to OTHER criminal activity, hence as drugs decline, other just as violent criminal activity will greatly increase.

    Lets not be stupid about this, the war on drugs is basically just a part of the war on CRIME.

    Listen to these muppets on HYS. They think there will be an improvement if drugs are simply legalised & taxed.

    What utter non factual ridiculous nonsense.

    MOST of the expense of drugs is NOT suffered by USERS, it is FACTUALLY by the WIDER society, by VICTIMS.

    Are these muppets saying that because of legalising drugs that the ammount of nutters on our streets will decline and the world will turn into Fantasia.

    We already have so many nutters on ALCOHOL, by multiplying drug users to even HALF the number of alcohol users will FACTUALLY MULTIPLY CRIME & VIOLENCE & VICTIMS & COSTS TO SOCIETY.

    The recent scientific argument put in UK is outrageously PATHETIC and an insult to anyone with half a braincell.

    If these scientists put ALL their brains into the Hadron Collider and fired it I doubt it would result in a singular spark or reactive outcome.

    Drugs may NOT be as dangerous to users, they MIGHT be LESS dangerous to USERS than even alcohol.

    The FACT IS, is that drug users are of GREATER danger to OTHERS.

    WHY so MUPPETISHLY be so concerned about USERS when the FACTS 100% PROVE that VICTIMS of drug & alcohol use are the GREATEST COST TO SOCIETY. Yes it may cost thousands to imprison these MUPPET people, but the GREATER cost is in RUINED VICTIMS lives and stolen/destroyed wealth and goods of victims.

    One simple THING.

    Why dont we just allow everyone to walk around carrying GUNS.

    Guns can be 100% BE FACTUALLY PROVEN TO BE LESS LETHAL AND DANGEROUS TO USERS THAN DRIVING A CAR.
    The WHOLE POINT is that GUNS ARE BANNED BECAUSE THEY ARE DANGEROUS TO OTHERS.

    The SAME argument of DANGER TO OTHERS is 1001% FACTUALLY relvent to the PATHETIC legalise drug argument.

    Hence ANYONE who maintains that drugs are LESS lethal and LESS costly to society as a whole, is basically and very easily proven in a court of law, a complete and utter stupid idiot.

  • Comment number 20.

    Drugs are linked to terrorism. The majority of drugs are controlled by those who are linked to Islamic and left wing terrorism.

    Be it Taliban, Mexican gangs (now trained by Islamists), Farc, Hezbollah, Moroccan groups, Iranian groups etc.

    Next time you snort something in a club toilet or do a line off of a lap dancer's bum cheek, think about what you could be financing.

    Oh, and life sentences for all traffickers. Proper life sentences though, not the mickey mouse 7 years after a confession and good behaviour that we have in this joke of a country.

  • Comment number 21.

    "
    7. At 11:35am on 26 Nov 2010, Billy wrote:

    1. At 11:18am on 26 Nov 2010, Kuradi Vitukari wrote:
    How can we stop drug traffickers? Death sentences.

    ------------------
    We have a problem with drug traffickers killing each other and your solution is to kill more drug traffickers?!?!?!?
    "

    Yep.

  • Comment number 22.

    They aren't killing each other over drugs, they are doing so because of money. This is where the 'legalise drugs' argument falls down. If you legalise, these people aren't just going to wave goodbye to their gangster lifestyles, and go and stack boxes for a living, they are going to find something else that gets them quick bucks. This could be supply of the same drugs to people excluded from obtaining drugs by whatever legal route exists (such as children), or extortion, or slavery or anything else you can imagine. Legalising drugs won't stop these people shooting each other - they will find something else to fight over. Only effective policing and a fairer distribution of Brazil's wealth will have any effect on this situation.

  • Comment number 23.

    Legalising certain drugs would certainly help.

    I have yet to see a genuine reason against legalising cannabis (annecdotal "my friend smoked it and is now shcizophrenic" doesn't count- no proof of cause & effect).

    Cocaine is similarly not as harmful as it's Class A status implies.

    Legalising these, as MANY have pointed out would mean:

    1) control of supply
    2) control of quality
    3) free up police time from "drug busts"
    4) reduce the impact of drug gangs
    5) tax them heavily (or even not heavily!)

  • Comment number 24.

    Bring back the death sentence.

  • Comment number 25.

    19. At 11:56am on 26 Nov 2010, MrWonderfulReality wrote:
    This problem is actually getting easier and easier to deal with.

    We now have manless spy craft, tiny little plane type thingys which can fly around for hour upon hour at low cost.

    The UK has even invented a solar one which can fly around more or less indefinately. Once this comes into production then finding drug crops will be so EASY and so much CHEAPER in comparison to present and previous methods of finding production locations.

    With this new technology, which has essentially resulted from Iraq war & Afganistan & specifically funding from these 2 wars, the WHOLE outlook on drug production is about to change.

    Thing is, is that though the massive wealth income from drugs side of these criminal gangs will ultimately be seriously destroyed, I think that many of these gangs will divert their attention to OTHER criminal activity, hence as drugs decline, other just as violent criminal activity will greatly increase.

    Lets not be stupid about this, the war on drugs is basically just a part of the war on CRIME.

    Listen to these muppets on HYS. They think there will be an improvement if drugs are simply legalised & taxed.

    What utter non factual ridiculous nonsense.

    MOST of the expense of drugs is NOT suffered by USERS, it is FACTUALLY by the WIDER society, by VICTIMS.

    Are these muppets saying that because of legalising drugs that the ammount of nutters on our streets will decline and the world will turn into Fantasia.

    We already have so many nutters on ALCOHOL, by multiplying drug users to even HALF the number of alcohol users will FACTUALLY MULTIPLY CRIME & VIOLENCE & VICTIMS & COSTS TO SOCIETY.

    The recent scientific argument put in UK is outrageously PATHETIC and an insult to anyone with half a braincell.

    If these scientists put ALL their brains into the Hadron Collider and fired it I doubt it would result in a singular spark or reactive outcome.

    Drugs may NOT be as dangerous to users, they MIGHT be LESS dangerous to USERS than even alcohol.

    The FACT IS, is that drug users are of GREATER danger to OTHERS.

    WHY so MUPPETISHLY be so concerned about USERS when the FACTS 100% PROVE that VICTIMS of drug & alcohol use are the GREATEST COST TO SOCIETY. Yes it may cost thousands to imprison these MUPPET people, but the GREATER cost is in RUINED VICTIMS lives and stolen/destroyed wealth and goods of victims.

    One simple THING.

    Why dont we just allow everyone to walk around carrying GUNS.

    Guns can be 100% BE FACTUALLY PROVEN TO BE LESS LETHAL AND DANGEROUS TO USERS THAN DRIVING A CAR.
    The WHOLE POINT is that GUNS ARE BANNED BECAUSE THEY ARE DANGEROUS TO OTHERS.

    The SAME argument of DANGER TO OTHERS is 1001% FACTUALLY relvent to the PATHETIC legalise drug argument.

    Hence ANYONE who maintains that drugs are LESS lethal and LESS costly to society as a whole, is basically and very easily proven in a court of law, a complete and utter stupid idiot.

    ----------------------

    Are YOU on drugs??? You certainly sound like

    a) you are
    b) if you're not, you should be!

    Your rant about legalising drugs putting nutters on the street is counter intuitive - if you legalise drugs, then people will not need to be 'on the streets' because theyll be at home or in a club ENJOYING the drug.

    You seem to be confusing the effects of alcohol with the effects of other drugs.... very few other drugs induce anything like the kind of violent and disturbed behavior that alcohol does.

    If all drugs were legal the streets would be much emptier on a Friday and Saturday night and the people who were out would probably be fairly passive.

    That isnt to say that drugs are good, theyre not, theyre horrible and do damage. But they would do less damage if they were clean, and bought from the reputable shops as opposed to contaminated and bought off criminals.

    You really shouldnt be commenting on something you dont understand.

  • Comment number 26.

    Simple, legalise and tax all drugs, that way we all win.

    The police will be able to spend time tackling real crimes and the taxes will be spent by (Labour) government improving public services.

  • Comment number 27.

    This is a milti billion pound industry!
    All the kings horses and all the kings men couldn't stop it.
    Lets not forget people use this stuff by choice NOT force.
    So i think its about time global polititions stopped trying to FORCE people and legalise it.
    Every country that stands against it would gain billions in revenue if the made it the legitimate business it should be and in the same move you would destroy the drug traffickers with open competition.
    Plus you would prevent thousands of deaths caused by the people who mix it with other chemicals for more profit.
    Its a no-brainer to any rational thinking person.

  • Comment number 28.

    By destroying their product at source!

    Whatever happened to all of Saddamms biological and chemical weapons?

  • Comment number 29.

    Legalisation.

    I will help us out of deficit and create jobs (and tourism), too.

  • Comment number 30.

    Either make it all legal and taxed or give the death penalty to traffickers and heavy penalties (including labour and 'cold turkey') to users. It may also help to purchase entire harvests direct from the growers to reduce availability to the traffickers.

  • Comment number 31.

    The sensible money has to be on legalising, controlling and taxing.

    It give us our police back. It gives us freedom of choice. It treats people like grown up human beings instead of items with easily changed labels. It stops 'drug' money passing into 'unknown' hands.

    It may also free up research into the many 'legal' substances introduced into our bodies via intensive farming, production and processing of food stuffs. It may also reveal what really causes premature deaths rather than blaming everything on the top health topics of the decade. Not long ago stress was revealed as the biggest killer for people on low incomes; has anything changed?

  • Comment number 32.

    How can we stop drug traffickers? Legalize all drugs The criminal element profits by drugs being illegal. People are dieing and their lives are destroyed because of nations laws against drugs.

    I don't need any Big Brother making choices for me. I don't need any mind control, governor.' Neither do I need someone else's religion too. Let the people's minds alone. Their mind doesn't belong to you. I am not you and your not me. I can't think for you and you can't think for me.

  • Comment number 33.

    7. At 11:35am on 26 Nov 2010, Billy wrote:
    1. At 11:18am on 26 Nov 2010, Kuradi Vitukari wrote:
    How can we stop drug traffickers? Death sentences.

    ------------------
    We have a problem with drug traffickers killing each other and your solution is to kill more drug traffickers?!?!?!?

    Yep, kill them all, or let them kill each other! Can't sell drugs from 6ft under!

  • Comment number 34.

    Legalise & tax it. I'm getting REALLY fed up of the 'drugs are bad, if you do drugs you're bad' idiots. Scientists have shown the likes of cannabis & ecstasy are 'safer' than alcohol yet alcohol remains legal (& highly taxed). Come on government you want more money in your coffers, legalise cannabis & actually research it's benefits for long term conditions such as MS, perthes disease & any other painful debilitating disease...I have a willing guinea pig sitting next to me.

  • Comment number 35.

    It may at first seem irrelevant, follow the money as they say

    “Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take it away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But, if you wish to remain the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create money.” – Sir Josiah Stamp, Director of the Bank of England (appointed 1928). Reputed to be the 2nd wealthiest man in England at that time.

    "I am afraid the ordinary citizen will not like to be told that the banks can and do create money. And they who control the credit of the nation direct the policy of Governments and hold in the hollow of their hand the destiny of the people."

    Reginald McKenna, as Chairman of the Midland Bank, addressing stockholders in 1924.

    Check out the economy of of the drug cartels in USA from the 80's, banking operated and grew exponentially because of these drug cartels, only they actually had a real industry, the cartels supplied the product in demand, banking itself is the illusion and crime.
    All world governments required this drug funding for a majority of enterprise of the 80's

    http://monetary-intelligence.com/goodbye-ireland-%E2%80%93-it-was-nice-knowing-you/

  • Comment number 36.

    Should we wage war on drug traffickers?

    I thought we had - it is just a shame they enjoy humane treatment in the UK under the banner of "human rights" and "justice".

  • Comment number 37.

    To anyone who is against legalisation i challenge you to go to any large music festival (where drug use is widespread)and see what the atmosphere is like.
    I can assure you, you will never see a more harmonious gathering of people in your life.
    The people who condone it that have never used it make me laugh with their knuckle dragging attitude.
    If you knew the main use of cocaine in the UK you would legalise it in a second.
    Imagine your in a nightclub and your so drunk you can hardly see.
    You stick a small bit of powder up your nose and your sober as judge within a matter of seconds.
    Whatever you do for the rest of the night you will not be drunk again.
    Personally after a night out i would go for a suna and a bite to eat.
    Now there's as good an argument.
    Look at the mess of your drunks when they come out of a club!

  • Comment number 38.

    By listening to the experts and not cherry picking the parts that prop up political agendas. That is decriminalise all drugs now! If somebody wants to take drugs (and they do anyway despite the law!) let them, only arrest them if they are committing crime or making a nuisance of themselves, like with alcohol. What a waste of tax payers' money having police arrest and lock up people for smoking weed while in almost every town and city in the UK Saturday night means a tolerated alcohol fueled war zone. When was the last time a group of "stoners" were arrested for affray?

  • Comment number 39.

    Firstly, differentiate between recreational drugs like cannabis which are less harmful and addictive than tobacco and alcohol, and drugs like heroin which are highly addictive killers.

    Legalise and regulate the first category, or at least decriminalise and benefit from the massive reductions in crime and social problems experienced in Portugal.

    20 years hard labour for dealers in the second category and medical help for addicts. Again - look and learn from Portugal where addicts have significantly reduced in numbers!

  • Comment number 40.

    19. At 11:56am on 26 Nov 2010, MrWonderfulReality wrote:

    One simple THING.

    Why dont we just allow everyone to walk around carrying GUNS.

    Guns can be 100% BE FACTUALLY PROVEN TO BE LESS LETHAL AND DANGEROUS TO USERS THAN DRIVING A CAR.
    The WHOLE POINT is that GUNS ARE BANNED BECAUSE THEY ARE DANGEROUS TO OTHERS.

    The SAME argument of DANGER TO OTHERS is 1001% FACTUALLY relvent to the PATHETIC legalise drug argument.

    Hence ANYONE who maintains that drugs are LESS lethal and LESS costly to society as a whole, is basically and very easily proven in a court of law, a complete and utter stupid idiot.
    ------------
    You seem a tad confused. If I fire a gun at you, you will die. If I take too many drugs I will die. Therefore the same argument does not apply.

    Of course drugs are very harmful and if we had a chance of shutting down the drugs trade then I would support it. We need to look at the best way of minimising the harm caused to society by drugs, and clearly having criminals control the drugs trade is not going to yeild good results is it?


  • Comment number 41.

    Death penalty.

  • Comment number 42.

    1. Give people a hope and a worthwhile lifestyle that does not include drugs.

    2. Closely inspect all goods and persons entering the country instead of the perfunctory paper scanning that goes on at present. It might slow down things and increase costs to do this but the problems that drugs create cost us as a nation tens of billions of pounds annually not to mention the lives destroyed and unhappiness caused.

    3. Sadly I do not believe in the death penalty but for crimes such as drug trafficking I am not averse to sentencing that involves transportation to one of the worlds uninhabited islands with provision of tools, seeds and livestock and an instruction book on how to grow your own food - for the rest of their natural lives. Prison guards not necessary, just a couple of ships patrolling around equipped to deal with any attempt to escape by sea or air, it would be much more effective as a deterrent to scum such as these.

  • Comment number 43.

    22. At 12:02pm on 26 Nov 2010, LippyLippo wrote:
    They aren't killing each other over drugs, they are doing so because of money. This is where the 'legalise drugs' argument falls down. If you legalise, these people aren't just going to wave goodbye to their gangster lifestyles, and go and stack boxes for a living, they are going to find something else that gets them quick bucks. This could be supply of the same drugs to people excluded from obtaining drugs by whatever legal route exists (such as children), or extortion, or slavery or anything else you can imagine. Legalising drugs won't stop these people shooting each other - they will find something else to fight over. Only effective policing and a fairer distribution of Brazil's wealth will have any effect on this situation.
    -------------------
    So if the drugs trade was say, state controlled, allowing a fairer distribution of the wealth it generates then you would support this?

  • Comment number 44.

    @19: MrWonderfulReality:

    My POINTS are MORE VALID because I CAPITALISE random WORDS!

  • Comment number 45.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 46.

    How can we stop drug traffickers?
    Who is that "we"?

  • Comment number 47.

    Give everyone loads of free drugs.

  • Comment number 48.

    To the "legalise all drugs" brigade: I have NEVER heard such a dumb, ill-informed argument.

    By the same dumb rgument, should we legalise speeding and paedophilia as we're never going to be able to stop those crimes?

    Drugs are for sad losers who obviously have no happiness in their lives so need to bend their tiny, little minds to create artificial happiness. You'll be the same, sad pathetic people the next day when the drugs wear off.

  • Comment number 49.

    We cannot stop them, The war against the world -wide illegal drug trade has been lost for years, The only way is to let governments take over the evil trade, this would put the drug -lords and the big time crooks out of business in a few short months.

  • Comment number 50.

    We need to come down on drugs and gangstas like a ton of bricks. Stop showing all this negative music about people professing to be gangstas (rap, hip hop etc) it's a bad influence on stupid young people.

    Bring back the mandatory death sentance for murderers and drugs dealers.

  • Comment number 51.

    It doesn't matter what commodity the gangsters are fighting over, be it drugs, prostitution, or daffodils: that's what gangsters do: they fight each other for control and market share of anything they feel they can make a profit out of. As long as there is demand, there will be supply. By making drugs illegal, all you're doing is guaranteeing gangster's high profits. Legalising drugs would destroy the gangster's profits from that particular commodity, but it won't destroy the gangsters: they'll just move on to some other commodity where there's a bigger profit.

  • Comment number 52.

    Legalize drugs.

  • Comment number 53.

    South America's drug problem? Oh come on BBC, it's OUR drug problem. The drugs trade will continue whilst there is demand for it. If you take out a few dealers, the price goes up as supply goes down, so it becomes more attractive to people to take the risk and go into the trade, unless punishments for trafficking are very heavy indeed, ie the death penalty is probably the only deterrent while the rewards are so huge.
    We have to stop demand. That way there won't be money in it and the trade will die.
    The main users of cocaine/ crack are not the poor cannabis- smoking ordinary (usually young) person but well paid middle class and execs/ city traders etc. Do those people know that their fun results in death for thousands and misery for millions in South America? First we need education to show them just how much pain is caused by their behaviour. Then, really stiff penalties, including prison, and fining them enough so they can't afford any more, for people caught in posession of cocaine or its derivatives.
    And just shoot the sellers.
    I suspect we've gone way too far down the road of personal gratification at the expense of others in every aspect of life for any kind of altruism to kick in, people simply won't 'do the right thing' so there would have to be real political will to make demand reduction through punishment work as it would be painful to many.
    I'm not sure we can maintain that stupendous effort.
    It then becomes a choice: do we do we effect change as above, or else invent a legalised, taxed trade removing the criminal element altogether? we have to consider that the war on drugs has been going on for a very long time now, and the law enforcement agencies have utterly failed to stop it. All that our efforts have achieved is to create a huge criminal underworld and gang subculture so big it threatens the security of whole nations and their poor long- suffering people.
    There needs to be a whole new approach, whatever it turns out to be.

  • Comment number 54.

    Before all the 'legalise it' brigade start - don't bother.
    Alcohol and cigarettes are legal - but there is a huge market out there for under the counter and counterfeit goods.
    Do you really think this wouldnt be the same for drugs.

    Keep on locking them away, and leave them there. Eventually there would be none left to lock up.

  • Comment number 55.

    We need clear message regarding drugs.

    1. Legalise and regulate cannabis.
    2. Prosecute the celebrities that promote drug culture.
    3. Stop allowing drugs in prison. (Yes we know wardens turna blind eye)
    4. Fully fund rehabilitation programme for drug users both in prison and outside.
    5. Implement a zero tollerance policy with the onus of the defendant to justify why they had the drug on them.

    6. Find a decent isolated island, with good farming and send the drug users there for a long dose of cold turkey. They can work the farm and eat of the land. Only when they can prove they are clean for a reasonable time, they can rejoin society.


  • Comment number 56.

    Ah yes, the bi-monthly debate on legalization of drugs.

    Clearly, legalization may resolve some issues....and bring about many others. If you don't like the current policy, excercise your right to vote and change it. Complaining about it on HYS won't change a thing.

  • Comment number 57.

    19. At 11:56am on 26 Nov 2010, MrWonderfulReality wrote:
    This problem is actually getting easier and easier to deal with.

    We now have manless spy craft, tiny little plane type thingys which can fly around for hour upon hour at low cost.

    The UK has even invented a solar one which can fly around more or less indefinately. Once this comes into production then finding drug crops will be so EASY and so much CHEAPER in comparison to present and previous methods of finding production locations.

    With this new technology, which has essentially resulted from Iraq war & Afganistan & specifically funding from these 2 wars, the WHOLE outlook on drug production is about to change.

    Thing is, is that though the massive wealth income from drugs side of these criminal gangs will ultimately be seriously destroyed, I think that many of these gangs will divert their attention to OTHER criminal activity, hence as drugs decline, other just as violent criminal activity will greatly increase.

    Lets not be stupid about this, the war on drugs is basically just a part of the war on CRIME.

    Listen to these muppets on HYS. They think there will be an improvement if drugs are simply legalised & taxed.

    What utter non factual ridiculous nonsense.

    MOST of the expense of drugs is NOT suffered by USERS, it is FACTUALLY by the WIDER society, by VICTIMS.

    Are these muppets saying that because of legalising drugs that the ammount of nutters on our streets will decline and the world will turn into Fantasia.

    We already have so many nutters on ALCOHOL, by multiplying drug users to even HALF the number of alcohol users will FACTUALLY MULTIPLY CRIME & VIOLENCE & VICTIMS & COSTS TO SOCIETY.

    The recent scientific argument put in UK is outrageously PATHETIC and an insult to anyone with half a braincell.

    If these scientists put ALL their brains into the Hadron Collider and fired it I doubt it would result in a singular spark or reactive outcome.

    Drugs may NOT be as dangerous to users, they MIGHT be LESS dangerous to USERS than even alcohol.

    The FACT IS, is that drug users are of GREATER danger to OTHERS.

    WHY so MUPPETISHLY be so concerned about USERS when the FACTS 100% PROVE that VICTIMS of drug & alcohol use are the GREATEST COST TO SOCIETY. Yes it may cost thousands to imprison these MUPPET people, but the GREATER cost is in RUINED VICTIMS lives and stolen/destroyed wealth and goods of victims.

    One simple THING.

    Why dont we just allow everyone to walk around carrying GUNS.

    Guns can be 100% BE FACTUALLY PROVEN TO BE LESS LETHAL AND DANGEROUS TO USERS THAN DRIVING A CAR.
    The WHOLE POINT is that GUNS ARE BANNED BECAUSE THEY ARE DANGEROUS TO OTHERS.

    The SAME argument of DANGER TO OTHERS is 1001% FACTUALLY relvent to the PATHETIC legalise drug argument.

    Hence ANYONE who maintains that drugs are LESS lethal and LESS costly to society as a whole, is basically and very easily proven in a court of law, a complete and utter stupid idiot.


    ----------------------------------


    haha you managed to sum up what i thought of your post with your last 2 words


    what a stupid suggestion

    do you not think that the police have had better technology than criminals for 100's years?

    how is this solar plane going to stop people renting houses out and growing 100's of cannabis plants in this house?


    and these "muppets" saying leaglize it clearly understand the real world alot better than you.

    smokers pay there own NHS bill and an extra 5 Bn
    the exact same can be said for cannabis.


    and just to put this in perspective for you

    anually the police seize less than 5% of the drugs in the uk to think all of a sudden there going to catch the other 95% is silly.

    thats is why your the muppet not them.

    try not throwing insults around so much and you wont get them back.

  • Comment number 58.

    We have had a War on Drugs for at least four decades now. We have won the odd battle but consistently lost the war and the market has grown and refined itself beyond any expectations. Drug Lords have resources beyond most small countries and have at times been able to control the politics of medium sized countries.

    Some of the actions carried out especially by the USA have nearly always impacted on the peasant growers and seldom on the money men. This has involved the use of defoliants which cause birth defects and a host of other diseases. The peasants are caught between all sides in a fake war where only they suffer. What price a war that claims the lives of children and starves the campesinos into the arms of the revolutionaries.

    Hypocrisy has riddled this war with the CIA oft accused of trafficking in drugs themselves. There is no doubt that the drug war has been absorbed and corrupted by their more pressing paranoia about communism in South America to the point where the moral compass is entirely lost. Even now we burn poppy in Afghanistan whilst also growing it in the UK because there is a shortage of medical heroin. You can only conclude that Drug War is used to justify actions motivated by other less palatable concerns.

    SO the war on drugs is morally corrupt, it is largely a fake cover for any number of other political actions, it is also a war we lose and lose and lose but it is also not really required. So much noise about drugs and yet so much of the pain from drugs is associated with the crime that surrounds it and the lack of any controls on what is sold and how it is sold.

    In reality large proportions of humanity only pretend to support the so called war and then go home and use drugs themselves, legal and illegal. You can only nominally police something if you don't really have the support of the people. In America the moral majority voice is loud but perhaps not a majority in the private mind of the nation.

    It is time to grow up and stop fighting this ridiculous pseudo war. The only way to gain any positive control of drugs is legalise and licence as with alcohol. Everything else has been tried and so much evil done in the name of this moral crusade.

  • Comment number 59.

    Solving the drug 'problem' is quite easy and it has already been stated in this HYS. However I think there should be a few further caveats.

    1. Legalise drug use.
    2. Licence reputable manufacturers for drug manufacture & make regular inspections of their premesis.
    3. Legislate the maximum strength of each product.
    4. Cap the amount that can be bought in any single transaction.
    5. Licence customers so that ID must be produced for each purchase of the most potent products.
    6. Sales from licenced premesis only.
    7. Consumption in licenced or private premesis only.
    8. Ensure that the law against drug driving is as readily enforced as that with drink driving.
    9. Super rate VAT for these 'luxuries' at maybe 25%.
    10. Fee generating licence renewals every 3 years.

    I think that about covers it.

  • Comment number 60.

    19. At 11:56am on 26 Nov 2010, MrWonderfulReality wrote a load of rubbish.

    Do you actually have a clue what you're talking about? No. Thought not. Like so many other people who have been infected by vicious dogma by the Government and other bodies, you'll happily buy into the fact that ALL drugs are addictive and dangerous. Not so.

    Ecstasy is widely used every weekend by up to half a million people. How many die a year? Only a few with adverse reactions, a few more go down as ecstasy related - because they forget to drink a bit of water each hour for example. Long term health damange is neglible. Such a substance could actually be used to help so many people who struggle with self-esteem, it's such a shame there is so much rhetoric spewed out against it.

    Heroin. Horrible right? Worse thing in the world right? Used in Hospitals as an anaesthestic. It's proper name is Diamorphine - I bet you'd have shrugged your shoulders if a doctor had said he was going to dose you up on that prior to an op in the past.

    Legalisation is not a silver bullet, not by a long shot. Many people will still fall foul of addictive chemicals, but with legalisation, they can be treated as health patients rather than criminals and actually be given a chance to get off their crux and lead a proper life again. Many do so already in underfunded and substandard rehad centres currently, with legalisation we could do so much more.

    Legalisation would also guarantee a pure product. No more dodgy street dealers shoving cutting agents of their choice in which are likely to be more dangerous than the chosen drug itself. Just watch the amount of hospitalisation rates drop massively if current illicit drugs are of a guaranteed standard with clear markings on content and amount.

    Finally, crime and economics. Stop the dealers at source by allowing pharmacies to undercut the prices. Stick a large tax levy on the drugs. Stop criminalising people who's only crime is that they prefer a different recreational activity to you. Create jobs, give a boost to the economy, stop the reliance on young people to get 'wasted' on alcohol - a drug which is known to incite violence. When was the last time a person on Ecstasy beat someone up?

    Legalisation is the only way forward. Any disagreement is simply burying your head in the sand and refusing to believe our current handling of drugs is nothing more than a self-inflicted problem.

  • Comment number 61.

    We will not win the war on drugs. Legalise drugs and bring the troops home.

  • Comment number 62.

    48. At 1:07pm on 26 Nov 2010, Wu Shu wrote:
    To the "legalise all drugs" brigade: I have NEVER heard such a dumb, ill-informed argument.

    By the same dumb rgument, should we legalise speeding and paedophilia as we're never going to be able to stop those crimes?

    Drugs are for sad losers who obviously have no happiness in their lives so need to bend their tiny, little minds to create artificial happiness. You'll be the same, sad pathetic people the next day when the drugs wear off.
    ----------

    so you never drink?
    you have never smoked?
    you have never taken anything for pain? (some perscription drugs actually contain parts of cannabis)
    you have never had an adrenaline rush?

    drugs are everywere
    to say ones less harmful than tobbaco and cannabis should be illegal is stupid.

    did you also know doctors are one of the most common drug takers?
    because they know so logn as you dont act stupid your pretty safe on them
    the same goes for scientists to they research it and realise its actually not that dangerous.

    but idiots like you who probably have never broke a law in your life, who are afraid of there own shadow belive the hysteria and follow the others like a mindless zombie.

    please stop saying they shouldnt be legal your opinion is useless come back with some evidence then we will talk

  • Comment number 63.

    Most of these drugs are used in our hospitals so i don't know what the problem is.
    Cannibis dates back as far as the Egyptians who used it to repair poor eyesight.
    90% of the worlds heroin comes from Afghanistan.
    It was illegal to grow it under the rule of the Taliban.
    The US invade and the first buisiness to restart was the poppy fields.
    Thats a lot of untraceable cash.
    If you really want to stop it you could start by making military movement go through civilian customs.
    Someone is making a lot of money out of this and it isn't just drug barrons.

  • Comment number 64.

    4. At 11:25am on 26 Nov 2010, Billy wrote:

    You don't hear about gangland violence in the Bordeaux region of France or the coffee plantations of Kenya, there haven't been many drive-by shootings related to the Danish brewery industry and I don't recall hearing of any Finnish vodka barons getting stabbed up.

    No, because those are legal. Recall when alcohol was illegal in the United States and look at the crime then. Can you see the coincidence?

  • Comment number 65.

    12. At 11:43am on 26 Nov 2010, Ben Skinner wrote:
    **********************************************************************
    The ONLY reason there are drug gangs is that drugs are illegal.

    How many tobacco or alcohol gangs are there? What happened in America during Prohibition? The birth of organised crime, that's what."
    **********************************************************************

    Tobacco and alcohol has a huge smuggling problem multi £billion per year run by gangs, so the option here is to make it cheap enough so everyone can buy it regular, or let people go to France and bring back any qty, but then the tax would not fund the health care. Likewise with drugs legalise them then you will have the same problem as alcohol, or worse. Don't forget if you take drugs and drive it is illegal, and it stays in your body for days, weeks or even months after taking it depending on the substance, so have an accident and prove positive it becomes your fault.

    And as for the drug traffickers same rule as any other offence, make sure it does not pay.


  • Comment number 66.

    yes netherlands portugal decriminalized and some drugs ok

    there economy is in ruins, there major social disorder theres chaos everywere

    oh wait sounds more like the uk where cannabis is illegal

    how can that be possible drugs are bad they will kill you and stop you from being immortal.


    what aload of tosh

    legalize it tax it control it.

    just because its legal all your whiners saying its bad dont have to take any you know?

  • Comment number 67.

    "48. At 1:07pm on 26 Nov 2010, Wu Shu wrote:
    To the "legalise all drugs" brigade: I have NEVER heard such a dumb, ill-informed argument.

    By the same dumb rgument, should we legalise speeding and paedophilia as we're never going to be able to stop those crimes?"

    Wow. Nice hyperbole. You have really thought this through.

    Drug use - even if you hate it as much as you clearly do - only harms the user. If drugs are legally obtained, where is the harm to anyone else? It's the same as smoking, drinking alcohol or eating fatty foods - personal choice and no harm to anyone else.

    Your argument equating drug use to speeding or paedophilia is false because these crimes harm others.

    Rather surprisingly the exact same argument is made by certain right wing politicians in the USA and UK in direct opposition to legalising drugs (even for medical purposes).

    Could that be because there really aren't any good arguments against legalising drugs and controlling the trade as we already do with so many other products?

  • Comment number 68.

    Yes we must and because it is a must to save our brothers and sisters human beings. But the person who is incharge of tackingling with the persons involved in and act are very serious never comes in hands of the police.

  • Comment number 69.

    Can we stop drug traffickers by decriminalizing all drugs.

  • Comment number 70.

    54. At 1:21pm on 26 Nov 2010, LancashireLass wrote:

    Before all the 'legalise it' brigade start - don't bother.
    Alcohol and cigarettes are legal - but there is a huge market out there for under the counter and counterfeit goods.
    Do you really think this wouldnt be the same for drugs.

    Keep on locking them away, and leave them there. Eventually there would be none left to lock up.

    Thats only because UK polititions have taxed it to death.
    You don't see many black market Fags and booze in Europe
    UK duty is illegal under European law.
    If i pay tax in Europe my tax is paid but the UK don't see it like that.

  • Comment number 71.

    48. At 1:07pm on 26 Nov 2010, Wu Shu wrote:
    To the "legalise all drugs" brigade: I have NEVER heard such a dumb, ill-informed argument.

    By the same dumb rgument, should we legalise speeding and paedophilia as we're never going to be able to stop those crimes?"

    --------------

    It's not the same argument. Legalising drugs is nothing to do with stopping drug-taking, it's about:
    - cheaper drugs, so less theft to pay for one's habit
    - cleaner, safer drugs for users (recreational or otherwise)
    - stopping vast amounts of money going to criminals
    - having money going to the government to be used for reducing drug-taking, or for medical treatments

  • Comment number 72.

    48. At 1:07pm on 26 Nov 2010, Wu Shu wrote:

    To the "legalise all drugs" brigade: I have NEVER heard such a dumb, ill-informed argument.

    By the same dumb rgument, should we legalise speeding and paedophilia as we're never going to be able to stop those crimes?

    Drugs are for sad losers who obviously have no happiness in their lives so need to bend their tiny, little minds to create artificial happiness. You'll be the same, sad pathetic people the next day when the drugs wear off.

    -----------------------

    Paedophillia has a victim. Speeding has the potential to have a victim. Drugs only have a victim because of it's current illegal status. Please try telling all the wonderful artists, musicians, poets and the like who have 'tiny little minds.'

    =================================================================

    52. At 1:17pm on 26 Nov 2010, MellorSJ wrote:

    Legalize drugs.

    ---------------

    What's happening?! We've agreed on something!

  • Comment number 73.

    I agree with the first post, and if the person making the seventh post has "a problem with drug traffickers killing themselves" then that's their problem. Explain to me why someone who knowingly profits from causing harm and death to other people deserves the same rights as a law abiding citizen (or even to have a life).
    On the subject of sanctions, the penalty for possession is clearly no deterrent, and the penalty for driving with illegal drugs in your system is also woefully inadequate. We need heavy fines, significant community service terms and lengthy driving bans.
    As for those who call upon legalising something we know is wrong, I like driving my car fast (but I can only do so on a track) so perhaps as so many do break the 70mph limit, we should do away with that?

  • Comment number 74.

    56. At 1:23pm on 26 Nov 2010, Robert Gomez wrote:
    Ah yes, the bi-monthly debate on legalization of drugs.

    Clearly, legalization may resolve some issues....and bring about many others. If you don't like the current policy, excercise your right to vote and change it. Complaining about it on HYS won't change a thing.

    ----------------

    Sadly nor will voting change it, as none of the main parties will do it.
    Having a "Legalise Drugs" party won't work, as people vote on other policies besides drugs. It needs a referendum, so that the government can specifically carry out a publicly-voted policy; if it backfires, then it's the public's fault, so it really shouldn't be an issue.

  • Comment number 75.

    1. At 11:18am on 26 Nov 2010, Kuradi Vitukari wrote:

    How can we stop drug traffickers? Death sentences.

    Spot on, and whilst we are on the subject, people traffickers the same.

  • Comment number 76.

    "64. At 1:30pm on 26 Nov 2010, BrownsBankruptedBritain wrote:
    4. At 11:25am on 26 Nov 2010, Billy wrote:

    You don't hear about gangland violence in the Bordeaux region of France or the coffee plantations of Kenya, there haven't been many drive-by shootings related to the Danish brewery industry and I don't recall hearing of any Finnish vodka barons getting stabbed up.

    No, because those are legal. Recall when alcohol was illegal in the United States and look at the crime then. Can you see the coincidence?

    -------------
    That's the point he was making.
    (You'd better be less subtle next time Billy!)

  • Comment number 77.

    Kill all the existing traffickers and then legalise it.

  • Comment number 78.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 79.

    We should wage war on drug traffickers. They know they are doing wrong and their actions do lead to people directly or indirectly dying. So full all out war on the traffickers and suppliers is what is needed. They are nothing better then dog excrement anyway and are a waste of air, so they may as well be eradicated.

  • Comment number 80.

    Wonder why no progress?
    The drug profit and the anti drug funds enrich the same circle.
    Lunatic?
    Possibly so.
    Society anonyme...

  • Comment number 81.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 82.

    "How can we stop drug traffickers"? is the HYS question.

    Yes, the news report is on the issue of drug gangs in Rio. Well, criminal gangs everywhere, deal in suffering and exploitation of the vulnerable. If you are not already vulnerable - criminals will find a way to make you so and steal from you in one way or another.

    For those calling for legalisation and taxation of illegal drugs? Legal tobacco and alcohol - taxed. Bootleg alcohol and tobacco anyone? Kills you faster, but no tax to pay for your treatment, your friends and your relatives.

    Yet, drug traffikers and smugglers of unregulated alcohol and tobacco don't have to worry. They don't use it and have very good private health insurance at your expense - oh yes, they don't pay taxes either - except of course on their 'legitimate' companies.

    Just a few thoughts.

  • Comment number 83.

    35. At 12:56pm on 26 Nov 2010, WheneverTheWhether wrote:
    It may at first seem irrelevant, follow the money as they say
    “Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take it away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But, if you wish to remain the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create money.” – Sir Josiah Stamp, Director of the Bank of England (appointed 1928). Reputed to be the 2nd wealthiest man in England at that time.
    "I am afraid the ordinary citizen will not like to be told that the banks can and do create money. And they who control the credit of the nation direct the policy of Governments and hold in the hollow of their hand the destiny of the people."
    Reginald McKenna, as Chairman of the Midland Bank, addressing stockholders in 1924.
    Check out the economy of of the drug cartels in USA from the 80's, banking operated and grew exponentially because of these drug cartels, only they actually had a real industry, the cartels supplied the product in demand, banking itself is the illusion and crime.
    All world governments required this drug funding for a majority of enterprise of the 80's
    http://monetary-intelligence.com/goodbye-ireland-%E2%80%93-it-was-nice-knowing-you/
    __________________________________________________________
    I agree, banking and the lust for profit are at the bottom of all mankind's troubles. Have you read Major General Smedly Butler's "War is a Racket"? http://www.lexrex.com/enlightened/articles/warisaracket.htm It explains how war, for the most part, is manufactured for the massive profits gained by the few at the expense of the lives of the many.
    Also the "Zeitgeist Addendum" video also explains in more detail what you outlined above. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7065205277695921912
    I'm glad you posted as it proves more people are discovering the truth for themselves. Keep up the good work!

  • Comment number 84.

    We've been fighting the War on Drugs long before Richard Nixon first used the term on June 17, 1971.
    Most days, we will get hit with a headline similar to the following: "Today police launched one of the biggest anti-drugs operations the country has ever seen."
    But there is one fact that every person involved seems to want to ignore: The War on Drugs is a war that is not being won.
    The prohibition of drugs, like the prohibition of alcohol, cannot and will not succeed, except
    1. to make criminal organisations throughout the world filthy rich;
    2. to "make" employment for the millions of law-enforcement personnel who get paid to create "snitches", arrest people, backlog the justice system and incarcerate criminals at public expense.
    Enough already!
    I support decriminalising drugs - all drugs - and the regulation of the supply & sale (like with LCBOs).
    The cost of drugs would drop. The focus on adicts would change from prosecution to treatment; suddenly space would be avaialble in our prisons; War Lords would have to come up with a new way to make big money.
    Allow the addicts to obtain their fixes from legal sources, the same as we do for alcoholics. Are we so far removed from Prohibition that we cannot remember the consequences?
    I believe legalizing drugs will result in less death, less crime, less addict-related disease (e.g. aids, hepatitis), and less waste of taxpayer money.
    You will never create a drug free society, anymore than you can create an alcohol free society. The key qestion: "How do we keep these drugs under control, off the street?"
    Mexico:
    President Calderón said: "Okay we need a debate on legalisation." Yes, Mr. President, we do.

  • Comment number 85.

    81. At 1:53pm on 26 Nov 2010, SystemF wrote:

    Oh here we go. It didn't take long. The left wing student loons have invaded HYS to protest that 'legalising drugs' is the best way forward.

    Look you lot, your section of society is about the most unproductive and generates the least revenue for our country. The last thing we need is more of you unwashed hippies being permanently doped up.

    -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_

    Haha!! Love it!

  • Comment number 86.

    "Should we wage war on drug traffickers?"
    * Nope.

    "Will Rio's pacification programme work?"
    * Nope.

    "Should other countries adopt similar schemes?"
    *Nope.

    "Can the international community do more to help control drug crime in Brazil?"

    * I suppose it could, but I ask why it is that the buying and selling of drugs is deemed to be a crime, please?

    The only reason I can see is to protect the interest of the pharmaceutical and other companies.

    It's obvious. The pharmacorps take natural herbs, synthesise 'em, combine 'em with goodness knows what and sell 'em at a massive profit. All this stuff has always negative side effects. At the same time, laws are made to criminalise everyone else who even use the natural resources let alone deal in them. Even though they rarely carry negative side effects.

    Hemp especially. By outlawing hemp, the cotton, timber, paper and pharmaceutical companies businesses are protected.

    A lotta noise is heard about decimating rains forests and other tree areas. Hemp, which makes the most exellent paper would negate the alleged need for this wholesale destruction.

    Hemp makes the best rope and linen also. And many other uses. Remember, our navy's sails and ropes used to be made out of hemp. Remember the original Levi jeans? A pair would last for several years even when used in daily hard labour. Today, you'll be lucky if they last a year in similar conditions. And also, there is no longer the guarrantee that they will be replaced free of charge should they tear. Thus outlawing hemp protects the cotton industry and the silly, yet profitable, fashion industry.

    The body work of Henry Ford's first car was also made out of hemp.

    Then, of course, there is the benefit of marijuana. The health industry canna have folks using home remedies, can it? No profit for them in that. The health industry has no interest in having a healthy population.

    Hemp is a very versatile plant, easy to grow and to harvest. By its use, the destruction of trees will be radically reduced, animals dying and field workers becoming ill due to genetically modified cotton will cease, clothes will last longer, people would be healthier, and could live at lower financial cost.

    Considering the laws which are in place and the thuggish brute force with which these laws are enforced, it would seem our government(s) and their police, military and other 'enforcers' have no interest in our health and well-being.

    Put simple - our countries are being run by a bunch of psychopaths.

  • Comment number 87.

    40. At 1:02pm on 26 Nov 2010, Billy wrote:
    19. At 11:56am on 26 Nov 2010, MrWonderfulReality wrote:

    One simple THING.

    Why dont we just allow everyone to walk around carrying GUNS.

    Guns can be 100% BE FACTUALLY PROVEN TO BE LESS LETHAL AND DANGEROUS TO USERS THAN DRIVING A CAR.
    The WHOLE POINT is that GUNS ARE BANNED BECAUSE THEY ARE DANGEROUS TO OTHERS.

    The SAME argument of DANGER TO OTHERS is 1001% FACTUALLY relvent to the PATHETIC legalise drug argument.

    Hence ANYONE who maintains that drugs are LESS lethal and LESS costly to society as a whole, is basically and very easily proven in a court of law, a complete and utter stupid idiot.
    ------------
    You seem a tad confused. If I fire a gun at you, you will die. If I take too many drugs I will die. Therefore the same argument does not apply.

    Of course drugs are very harmful and if we had a chance of shutting down the drugs trade then I would support it. We need to look at the best way of minimising the harm caused to society by drugs, and clearly having criminals control the drugs trade is not going to yeild good results is it?
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Criminals / politicians. What's the difference?

  • Comment number 88.

    Coca and Cannabis Farmers view shipping interdiction as a restraint of trade. Pharmaceutical Corporations avidly buy their harvests. They argue that the DEA and other anti-drug agencies represent corrupt governments dedicated to special interests.

  • Comment number 89.

    Why is it that most of the people advocating the decriminalization of most recreational points are able to articulate their arguments so well, they make very valid points on how to cripple and undermine the drug barons and traffickers, (something which I think we can all agree on would be a good thing).

    Yet all the people who want to keep the war going and basically kill everyone come across as, well, a few sit ups short of a six pack shall we say. Including one absolutely hilarious post stating that "The majority of drugs are controlled by those who are linked to Islamic and left wing terrorism", which gave me a good laugh on a Friday afternoon, cheers SystemF :).

    Seems like maybe the drugs DO work.

    Oh and I'm not a drug user, not counting a few pints of nice ale on a Friday night :)

  • Comment number 90.

    81. At 1:53pm on 26 Nov 2010, SystemF wrote:

    Oh here we go. It didn't take long. The left wing student loons have invaded HYS to protest that 'legalising drugs' is the best way forward.

    Look you lot, your section of society is about the most unproductive and generates the least revenue for our country. The last thing we need is more of you unwashed hippies being permanently doped up.

    -------------------------------

    Do you personally know all the people who are pro-legalisation then?

    Not everyone in our camp is a student. I'm not (although I once was - it's a good thing to be educated you know) and I firmly believe legalisation is the only way forward.

    Do you think prohibition in America was successful?

  • Comment number 91.

    prescribe the fix to the junkie for free along with a rheabilitation programe. it will be short term,with long term gain.the only other alternative is all out global war onthe drug barons.you will not succeed as there is too much coruption along with backhanders to people in high places. there is no other alternitives,the rest is just pie in the sky ideas..

  • Comment number 92.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 93.

    65. At 1:31pm on 26 Nov 2010, chrisk50 wrote:
    12. At 11:43am on 26 Nov 2010, Ben Skinner wrote:
    **********************************************************************
    The ONLY reason there are drug gangs is that drugs are illegal.

    How many tobacco or alcohol gangs are there? What happened in America during Prohibition? The birth of organised crime, that's what."
    **********************************************************************

    Tobacco and alcohol has a huge smuggling problem multi £billion per year run by gangs, so the option here is to make it cheap enough so everyone can buy it regular, or let people go to France and bring back any qty, but then the tax would not fund the health care. Likewise with drugs legalise them then you will have the same problem as alcohol, or worse. Don't forget if you take drugs and drive it is illegal, and it stays in your body for days, weeks or even months after taking it depending on the substance, so have an accident and prove positive it becomes your fault.

    --------------------------

    Oh yeah... there's many a drive-by shooting on the booze cruises isnt there. Whilst people may smuggle cigs and booze from abroad, and there are gangs who do it yes... its more of a customs/tax issue than a criminal/violent gang issue.

  • Comment number 94.

    62. At 1:28pm on 26 Nov 2010, scotty1694 wrote:
    48. At 1:07pm on 26 Nov 2010, Wu Shu wrote:
    To the "legalise all drugs" brigade: I have NEVER heard such a dumb, ill-informed argument.
    By the same dumb rgument, should we legalise speeding and paedophilia as we're never going to be able to stop those crimes?
    Drugs are for sad losers who obviously have no happiness in their lives so need to bend their tiny, little minds to create artificial happiness. You'll be the same, sad pathetic people the next day when the drugs wear off.
    ----------
    so you never drink?
    you have never smoked?
    you have never taken anything for pain? (some perscription drugs actually contain parts of cannabis)
    you have never had an adrenaline rush?
    drugs are everywere
    to say ones less harmful than tobbaco and cannabis should be illegal is stupid.
    did you also know doctors are one of the most common drug takers?
    because they know so logn as you dont act stupid your pretty safe on them
    the same goes for scientists to they research it and realise its actually not that dangerous.
    but idiots like you who probably have never broke a law in your life, who are afraid of there own shadow belive the hysteria and follow the others like a mindless zombie.
    please stop saying they shouldnt be legal your opinion is useless come back with some evidence then we will talk
    ___________________________________________________
    Dear Scotty1694, why bother? A dead horse is a dead horse! :)

  • Comment number 95.

    1. At 11:18am on 26 Nov 2010, Kuradi Vitukari wrote:

    How can we stop drug traffickers? Death sentences.

    ---------------------------

    Absolutely right.

    But there will always be the faint hearted who live in ivory towers who will say " & what about their human rights?"


    Drug traffickers are sellers of death & misery & should be exterminated like the vermin they are.

    Worrying about their human rights means that one day they will rule - only because they don't give a jot about ours.

  • Comment number 96.

    "81. At 1:53pm on 26 Nov 2010, SystemF wrote:
    ...The left wing student loons have invaded HYS to protest that 'legalising drugs' is the best way forward...The last thing we need is more of you unwashed hippies being permanently doped up.'

    You mean the Swiss and Dutch?
    Very funny...

  • Comment number 97.

    "81. At 1:53pm on 26 Nov 2010, SystemF wrote:
    Oh here we go. It didn't take long. The left wing student loons have invaded HYS to protest that 'legalising drugs' is the best way forward.

    Look you lot, your section of society is about the most unproductive and generates the least revenue for our country. The last thing we need is more of you unwashed hippies being permanently doped up."

    I take it as a man of clearly great intellect, you'd understand what an Ad Hominum argument is, and why posing one as you have just done here, suggests that you do not possess any reposte to the actual points made.

  • Comment number 98.

    Killing drug traffickers will never solve the root of the problem, viz. unequal wealth and poverty, moral education, lenient laws, lack of control on wild guns and drug plantation, lax borders, corruption etc.

  • Comment number 99.

    On one hand it is a law enforcment problem which should be handled by the police but when these drug traffickers become so powerful and ruthless they threaten the stability of whole nations yes I do believe it becomes a military problem which carries it's own dangers of genuine democracies slipping into military dictatorships. Mexico is the primary danger to me here in America and yes it is appaling the level and type of violence going on there but do not accept the arguement that guns from America are causing the violence anymore than matches are causing forest fires.

  • Comment number 100.

    Without all the negative media bias, garnering support for "waging war on drugs", we would have found a better solution than trying to make criminals out of them.

    With brainwashed people like Kuradi Vitukari, who believe killing them is our only solution. We're never going any improvement.

    Legalised drugs will vapourise the black market for them.

    The current "drugs war" has exactly the same logic as "DRM promotion to tackle internet piracy". It does not work, it only encourages further defiance.

 

Page 1 of 6

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.