1. Dear Drugs-Forum readers: We are a small non-profit that runs one of the most read drug information & addiction help websites in the world. We serve over 4 million readers per month, and have costs like all popular websites: servers, hosting, licenses and software. To protect our independence we do not run ads. We take no government funds. We run on donations which average $25. If everyone reading this would donate $5 then this fund raiser would be done in an hour. If Drugs-Forum is useful to you, take one minute to keep it online another year by donating whatever you can today. Donations are currently not sufficient to pay our bills and keep the site up. Your help is most welcome. Thank you.
  1. Guttz
    An ID scheme for cannabis sales in Dutch coffeeshops will only create more problems, says Marije Wouters of Amsterdam University’s Bonger Institute for Criminology.

    On Thursday the European Court of Justice will decide whether the Dutch government’s plans specifically to deter foreign ‘drug tourists’ will clash with European Union free trade rules. The minority rightwing coalition is proposing to require coffeeshop customers to register for a special pass before they can buy cannabis.

    If the pass scheme is introduced, users will simply purchase cannabis through friends and family, says Marije Wouters. What’s more, illegal dealers will cash in by taking orders by mobile phone and delivering directly to customers. Underage cannabis users and ‘drug tourists’ from neighbouring countries will turn to the illicit mobile dealers.

    Harm reduction
    A further government proposal to ban coffeeshops within 350 metres of schools will cause chaos in Amsterdam, says Ms Wouters. Under the new rule, only 36 of the capital’s more than 200 coffeeshops would be allowed to remain open, thus skewing the balance between supply and demand.

    Yet it is the large coffeeshops in border towns like Roosendaal that draw in day-tripping tourists from Belgium, Germany and France and create nuisance, the researcher points out. Amsterdam’s small-scale cannabis retailers don’t cause any such problems.

    Marije Wouters says she favours an extension of the Dutch public health-based approach of harm reduction, by regulating the wholesale cannabis trade to coffeeshops. At present only retail cannabis sales are decriminalised.

    Published on 15 December 2010 - 10:48pm


  1. Alfa
    The Dutch governnent doest care about any of this. The coffeeshop pass is one step closer to the end of lib drug policy and thats what they want. No matter the consequence. Its not about rationality and not even about foreign pressure.
  2. Killa Weigha
    Who's fault is that? Now the right wants to forbid Morrocans dual citizenship and stop coffee shops? Big fuckin deal! But if you let this happen, what's next? If Nederlanders don't protest then they get what they deserve. Next they will put drug users in concentration camps. Have you forgotten Nazi era history - it was right next door? History might not repeat but it damn sure rhymes. Wake the fuck up, Holland -AUB!
  3. Alfa
    To put this into perspective of where Dutch politics currently is: The Fascist anti-Islamic party is has a major share of seats in parliament and they give the Christian and Right wing government the needed majority. If they want they can let the government fall whenever they like.

    Their election TV spots showed *very* strong resemblances with Nazi propaganda, and they widely proclaim that Islamic people conspire to take over The Netherlands. This may sound familiar to you.

    Today they made the serious proposal that The Netherlands should attack Iran. Mind that the Anti-Islamic party seems to be getting millions in funds from Israel.

    Their ideas about drug policy are as hardline as their anti-Islam policy.
  4. Killa Weigha
    If you read the Qur'an you see it is written that Islam should dominate the world. Mathematics should tell you that Islam will take the majority in Europe completely non-violently (First Belgium, then France, NL, DE, DK etc. Simply with birth/death model. It is obvious to anyone with simple arithmetic skills that this is the case. This should not come as a surprise to any European - if it does I am sorry.

    That guy, Pim Fortuin, had it right. Balance is the key. If they don't assimilate to the culture you so graciously accepted them into then Fuck em!

    Back to the thread, if you give a centimeter expect the Fascists to take a kilometer. History shows that's how it starts. In the name of "whatever" you need to give up "this right". The Dutch should be furious and it is up to someone to point that out to them. They will get support if they just show some resistance. The world loves Holland but there will be no support if none is requested.
  5. C.D.rose
    Whoa, let's slow down here for a minute. First of all, linear previsions of what will be in 50 years time usually have one thing in common: they never come true. If we manage to support moderates and entertain development in the Muslim world, immigration will not be going on forever the way it does now. Then, I don't know what exactly the Quran says, and how it compares to what the Bible says in terms of extending Christian hegemony (we did try that, albeit with actual weapons causing bloody massacres), but here, too, the solution lies in development and education. Currently, in the Top 500 list of universities worldwide, there is not one university in the Muslim world. We've had a period of ignorance and politics dominated by religious fanatics in Europe too, and had I lived back then, I surely would have never believed that, a couple centuries down the road, Europe could look the way it does now. Few people know that the very idea of religious tolerance originates was born in the Muslim world, and they practiced it at a time where we considered them dirty infidels. In short, I don't think that cultural determinism works.

    More on topic: again, if I am not mistaken, the current government + the PVV have a majority of exactly one seat in the Tweede Kamer, and I know that there are some representatives of the CDA who are not happy with the course their party has taken lately. The PVV, on the other hand, actually does not even deserve the title "party". It's basically a one-man-show where Geert Wilders decides which way to go, and his followers, well, they follow. I just recently read an opinion piece entitled "Too much freedom for the Freedom Party?" that hypothesized that the PVV will eventually tear itself up, when other senior members will demand some autonomy for themselves. Let's see what happens with that. Finally, the coffeeshop ID passes are, in my opinion, not so much a case for the European Court in Luxemburg as for the European Human Rights Court in Strasbourg. Discrimination based on nationality, and presumably also discrimination based on residency, is not permitted. Now, obviously that doesn't apply to everything - EU citizens cannot go into another country and vote in legislative elections for example - but I would be baffled if it doesn't apply to frequenting public places like bars, restaurants, or coffeeshops.

    I admit I am being somewhat naive, but I just can't see the Dutch ruining for themselves what has made them great, namely the pronounced implementation of pluralism and tolerance.
  6. Killa Weigha
    They just got the green light to ruin their reputation.

    Dutch can ban foreigners from coffeeshops, says EU top court

    16.07.2010 @ 09:24 CET
    The town of Maastricht near the Belgian border is within its rights to ban foreigners from its marijuana coffeeshops, Europe's top court has said.
    While the very foundation of the European Union is the free movement of people, meaning a country cannot forbid citizens of another EU state from doing something its own citizens are allowed to do, this does not apply to getting off your face on White Widow, according to the finding of an advocate-general with the European Court of Justice.

    In response to what it terms an influx of hordes of weed-seeking tourists, mainly from Belgium and France, the town of Maastricht decided to limit admission to coffeeshops to Dutch residents only.

    Around 4000 tourists a day in search of weed enter Maastricht, according to the major of the town, with 70 percent of the town's coffeeshop business coming from non-Dutch residents.
    In 2006, the Easy Going Coffeeshop in the town was subject to two police raids where citizens of the EU but not the Netherlands were caught imbibing the decriminalised substance. Shortly after, the major of Maastricht closed down the establishment.

    In response, Marc Josemans, the owner and chair of the Association of Official Maastricht Coffeeshops, brought a legal challenge before the Dutch Council of State, arguing that the bylaw goes against European legislation on free movement and free trade in goods and services within the EU.

    The Council asked the ECJ for its interpretation of EU law, which the court will then take into consideration in its ruling in the case expected at the end of this year. Although the judges are now beginning their deliberations, in a majority of cases, the court has ruled in line with the findings of its advocates general.

    In his finding, the EU court's Advocate General Yve Bot said that narcotics do not count as regular goods because they are against the law.

    "Narcotics, including cannabis, are not goods like others and their sale does not benefit from the freedoms of movement guaranteed by European Union law, inasmuch as their sale is unlawful," he said in his finding.

    Nevertheless, he did say that in cases of their medical or scientific use, dope does indeed "come under internal market rules."

    The court's finding argued that Maastricht was was right to view drug tourism as "a genuine and sufficiently serious threat to public order," and so the restriction of foreigners from coffeeshops "constitutes a measure necessary to protect the residents of the municipality from trouble."

    The finding also warned that backpackers heading to the Netherlands for a weekend of spliffs and Heineken endangered the European Union's security.

    "Drug tourism, in so far as it conceals, in actual fact, international trade in narcotics and fuels organised criminal activities, threatens even the European Union's internal security."

    BTW, Muslim -origin population growth in Europe is not linear it is exponential. I'm not even trying to say that has to be a bad thing unless the culture becomes supplanted (that would be a shame)- merely pointing out the trend. Turkish, for example, cannot wear the hijab (by law) in Turkey but are very vocal in insisting on the "right" to wear it in Holland, France, Germany and other "European" states:s. To bring this full circle and stay on topic, I point this out as it is being countered, somewhat successfully, by the same right-wingers who want to ban the coffeeshops.
  7. C.D.rose
    Nonsense, the hijab isn't outlawed in Turkey. And of course it's a woman's right to wear the hijab, like it's a woman's right to not wear the hijab. It's ridiculous that this piece of tissue is such a big problem for people who consider themselves tolerant. There are issues both in the Muslim world and in Muslim integration in host societies, but the veil surely isn't one of them.

    What you posted is not the court's decision though. It's the Advocate General's opinion, and that has already been out for some time. The Court will probably agree, but I haven't found confirmation of that yet.
  8. Killa Weigha
    I had more faith in you CDR.
    Just as in Nederland where they do not "enforce" the laws on drug use that does not mean they are not on the books. In Turkey, the ruling party is grounded in Islam and has enough intimidation to impose "selective enforcement". They did NOT have the juice to get the ban over-turned and most public places abide by it.

    Internet Search Engines work rather well but if you'd like the source...
  9. C.D.rose
    Right, you are talking about universities, that's something wholly different than a complete ban. In France, too, headscarfs (and other signs of religious nature) are banned in schools and public institutions, that doesn't mean that they can't be worn everywhere else, including in public. Both of these cases have less to do with an anti-Islam stance but with a strong secularism that demands that, in public institutions, noone be subjected to religious influences.

    Really, I don't understand how you can demand tolerance for drug users, but oppose it for practicing Muslims. That's a "selective enforcement" of tolerance, just the way the people do who you criticize because they tolerate[noparse] alcohol but prohibit cannabis[/noparse] or other substances. Tolerance is tolerance, and partial tolerance is intolerance.
To make a comment simply sign up and become a member!