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. Beenthere2Hippie
    Ever wondered why the UK was still so strict on drug laws? Well, it turns out there may be a good reason. According to explosive new claims from the former deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, the government may be lying to us to prevent drug decriminalisation: with Home Secretary Theresa May reportedly altering a 2014 report that called for global law reform.

    The Liberal Democrat MP told The Guardian that May “didn’t like the conclusions” of the report, which apparently found no link between illegal drug use and harsh drug laws. Titled ‘Drugs: International Comparators’, it claimed that there wasn’t “any obvious relationship between the toughness of a country’s enforcement against drug possession and levels of drug use”.

    These conclusions were drawn after looking at data from Portugal, where drugs have been legal since 2001. The report revealed that there have apparently been “considerable” health improvements in the country, and hinted that there may be benefits in treating drug possession as a health issue, rather than a criminal issue.

    Despite this, Clegg claims that the Home Secretary attempted to delete sentences from the original paper, in a bid to stop any further conversation about potential drug legalisation. He revealed that the original draft had been subject to an “endless wrangle between Lib Dem ministers and Theresa May about the fullness of what would be published”. May allegedly went on to stress that there would be no drug reform whatsoever as long as she led the Home Office.

    “I think part of the problem is that for some of (the Conservatives) when you say drugs to them, they think of Notting Hill dinner parties,” Clegg told The Guardian. “They think it is all a slightly naughty recreational secret. They don’t think of whole countries, like Colombia that has been brought to its knees. They don’t think of some very unscrupulous criminal gangs who are preying on people who we should be protecting rather than chucking in jail.”

    This news comes just months after Ireland announced their plans to decriminalise all drugs; making personal use of heroin, cannabis and cocaine completely legal. The UK, however, is refusing to be swayed on the subject.

    “The UK's approach on drugs remains clear: we must prevent drug use in our communities and help dependent individuals to recover, while ensuring our drugs laws are enforced,” revealed the Home Office in a statement. “Decriminalising drugs would not eliminate the crime committed by their illicit trade, nor would it address the harms and destruction associated with drug dependence.”

    “The International Comparators Study does not say there is no link or impact between tough penalties and drug use,” they added. “It makes clear that approaches to drugs legislation and enforcement of drugs possession are only one element of a complex set of factors that affect drugs use, including prevention, treatment and wider social and cultural factors.”

    By Dominique Sisley - Dazed/april 19, 2016
    Newshawk Crew

    Author Bio

    BT2H is a retired news editor and writer from the NYC area who, for health reasons, retired to a southern US state early, and where BT2H continues to write and to post drug-related news to DF.


  1. Beautiful Loser
    It's hardly surprising that Theresa would like to suppress a report that contains two very inconvenient findings; two basic truths which expose the idiocy and ignorance of her Psychoactive Substances Bill.

    Firstly the report exposes the failure of prohibition - legislation is an ineffective way to reduce illegal drug use, no matter how harsh the laws governments enact.

    Secondly, the report points out the success of decriminalisation - health benefits have been shown to occur when governments shift their approach to illegal drug use from a criminal to a health matter.

    Theresa's bill is possibly one of the most draconian, all-consuming acts of prohibition ever made in the western world, and this report effectively predicts that by ignoring the facts it is doomed to fail.

    I wish the report had expanded more on the failure of prohibition and presented evidence to show how, even worse than being ineffective, it is positively harmful to health in a number of ways.

    There is a vast amount of evidence, old and new, that supports this claim.
  2. Alfa
    Isn't this fraud & withholding information from parliament?
    In my country any politician caught altering official documents to suit their purpose will be removed from their function and shamed.

    Is this the end of Theresa May or can a fraud stay in office?
  3. Phenoxide
    There will be no repercussions. The oddsmakers have her as 4th favorite to be the next leader of the Conservative party. At most her actions will be explained away, if not hushed up completely. Most of the rhetoric that comes out of Westminster is outright lies, so this comes as no great shock. Honesty, integrity, and a rational evidence-based approach to policy making won't be found in the juvenile psyche of British politics, regardless of who is in power.

    Just look at how irrelevant the ACMD has become since the Nutt fiasco.

    Plus Nick Clegg isn't exactly Mr. Popular - if it concerned him so much, he probably should've spoken up about this publicly sometime during his 5 years as Deputy Prime Minister.
  4. Alfa
    Is a member of parliament and home secretary immune to criminal prosecution? Is it possible for someone to file charges when a politician commits fraud?
  5. Docta
  6. Beautiful Loser
    It's frightening to see ignorance triumph over scientific fact in the 21st Century.

    This kind of shit belongs in the Dark Ages.

    People are killed by prohibition, it protects nobody but the dubious righteousness of the politicians who uphold it.
  7. prescriptionperil
    Drugs were decriminalized, not legalized, for personal use in Portugal. The astonishing results speak for themselves. The influx of drugs had halfed over a decade, along with a huge decrease in blood borne diseases from IV drug use. Allegedly, the country was upset with a portion of their population being sick and marginalized. Portugal should be the microcosm of decriminalization for the world, because of it's success. When the stigma of treating addiction as a criminal problem is removed addicts are more apt to seek treatment.

    The U.K. ban is obviously the work of a conservative government.:rolleyes:
  8. Smeg
    And the fiasco has continued and persevered with a toxic momentum.

    The Conservative government we have is perceived by a substantial number of people here as the most cold eyed and avaricious pack of fuckers to ever draw breath in Parliament. They have persisted to wade through evidence and proven facts as though they were raw sewage.
    It feels (and appears) like the arrogant swagger of the self serving devout luddite, ably assisted by the gutter press. Hopefully the (not too distant) history will view these times as a period when blatantly destructive and dishonest tactics are deployed to deliberately obscure truth.
  9. AKA_freckles
    This stuff almost makes me hate Bush a little less. At least he didn't pull this shit. .

    Wait.... nope.

    Seriously I'm sorry you guys. Americans definitely know what it feels like to be lied to and manipulated by their government.
  10. Baba Blacksheep
    The way I look at this these days is entirely different from what I think should be done and what would be correct based on evidence.

    Simply established elements within society control the lion's share of illegal sales in drugs by means that few comprehend or even question.
    When other parties involve themselves by getting in on the trade they upset this balance meaning someone will go down on a wrap with the associated seizure of assets etc..

    Government, insurance, law and policing are all profoundly linked in with the illegal element of which they all thrive upon one another, i.e. without one the other would have nothing to do and little revenue to go after.

    Basically this balance keeps the books ticking over nicely whilst the public are duped into thinking that criminalisation and biased made up 'moral' is the sensible approach and most effective way forward in protecting them, their property and their young from such as the ravages of drugs and their effect on society.

    These days a good number within public are not stupid and don't fall for the bullshit spooned to them, but whilst the crooks are in charge of the whole shebang, there is little that will change until outrage grips the populous.

    However most folk are happy eating ready meals, watching shit on telly and haven't the inclination to even think why things are the way they are.

    They say policy isn't policy unless you find it directly effects you.
  11. Beautiful Loser
    I think the UK government's policy will end up affecting a great many people for generations to come. By enacting such a massive all-inclusive Bill that prohibits even substances that have not yet been invented, they are driving the whole Research Chemical scene underground and handing it over to organised crime gangs.

    At least when stuff could be legally obtained over the internet, online retailers were forced to sell pure, high quality material or risk poor reputation, which could drive them out of business. There was a thriving social network in which users could freely share information that would assist with harm reduction and provide detailed feedback on the various substances, appropriate dosages and the vendors who sold them.

    There will be no more easily obtained harm reduction advice once all these substances are criminalized. This new law will lead to a much more dangerous and unregulated scene that will most definitely lead to more health problems and loss of life among those who use these substances.
    Dealers are often unscrupulous and less accountable than online vendors, they will sell heavily cut and less pure substances, in fact users will never be able to be sure they are getting the drug they want and not some dangerous mixture loaded with adulterants. Online vendors can't get away with this as word spreads rapidly on the net, and most vendors uphold very high standards to keep a loyal customer base.

    I do agree that some of the Research chemicals needed to be controlled. For example, artificial cannabinoids have had a devastating effect on many communities, causing death and terrible physical and mental problems resulting in many hospital admissions. They also cause crippling addictions with hellish withdrawal symptoms. They are far more potent than real weed, which is much safer, and the two cannot be compared. The irony of the massive problem of artificial cannabinoids is that they were themselves created as a direct result of prohibition. If marijuana was legal they would never have existed, and this is a perfect example of the seriously harmful effects of prohibition.

    As the report made clear, prohibition does not work, but the truth is that it is terribly harmful to society and to pretend that banning drugs makes people safer is utter lies.

    I predict a huge rise in drug-related deaths, increased hospitalisations and a massive rise in drug-related crime as result of the governments disgusting refusal to listen to facts and evidence about drug policies. They clearly do not care one jot about protecting people's health, they care more about occupying some fictitious moral highground, looking "tough" and serving their masters in the big business worlds of alcohol, tobacco and pharmaceuticals. This will have far reaching effects that will adversely affect the lives millions of people for generations to come.

    It seems like many people have forgotten that democracy means those we elect serve us and act in our best interests.

    We are being betrayed, at great cost.
To make a comment simply sign up and become a member!