Stop the War (On Drugs)

New research shows that cannabis has further medicinal properties. It's time to rethink its criminalisation.
| Categories:

Via Samizdata comes the story that researches have found that cannabis can be effective in treating Alzheimers. This follows other studies which have shown that cannabis can be used in the treatment of glaucoma and to relieve side effects from treatment of cancer and AIDS.

Despite the downgrading of cannabis from Class B to Class C, it remains a prohibited substance in Britain and, indeed, in much of the world. But this policy has done nothing to stop a thriving criminal trade in the drug, with both smuggling and home-grown production continuing to evade the law. More worryingly, this policy does little to ameliorate the harmful effects of over-use and abuse, as users are obliged to keep their use private and secret. Meanwhile, those who simply enjoy an occasional use of the drug are at risk of being criminalised despite doing no obvious harm to anyone, even themselves. Few would argue that occasional use of cannabis represents a threat to society or to the individuals in question.

Where some individuals may be susceptible to a bad reaction to the drug, they are extremely unlikely to receive any support or assistance. By putting cannabis sale into the hands of drug dealers, the law cannot place any requirement on them to consider the welfare of their customers; controlled sale by licensed outlets would, on the other hand, ensure that people are fully informed of any risks and side-effects, and given the best possible opportunity to receive help.

The view that something must change is growing. The absurdity of maintaining prohibition of cannabis whilst completely failing to enforce it cannot last, and if the best efforts of the last 30 years at enforcement have failed then they are not likely to succeed in the next 30 years. In fact, no greater blow could be dealt to crime than to remove the easy source of profit made by selling illegal drugs at inflated prices. Legalise it, and we might just have a chance at a more sensible approach.


Comments

On 7 October 2006 - 7:09am, Jock Coats (not verified) wrote:

Ah! But they're only just about to step up the persecution it would seem.

On the other hand a few weeks ago I read a rebuttal of that New Zealand research about cannabis and mental illness that they claim makes better sense from the same data the NZ study compiled.


On 7 October 2006 - 3:15pm, Joe Otten (not verified) wrote:

I don't see why, in principle, there should be much connection between legality as a recreational drug, and legality as a prescription drug. Plenty of prescription drugs are not legally available for recreational use.

If cannabis has clinical uses, which it has, it should be available for those uses, but what does that have to do with its availability for recrational use?

And if cannabis also has adverse clinical effects (eg on mental health) as do many prescribable drugs, then prescribers should be careful. So what is new?

Refusal to allow medicinal use is doubtless a symptom of moral panic. Criminalisation is a little more rational.


On 7 October 2006 - 9:36pm, Jock Coats (not verified) wrote:

Whilst I agree with Joe's statement that it ought not to matter whether something is legal if prescribed but illegal if used outside that medical regimen, I still think he needs to address the simple freedom issue. There are all sorts of things that we know are potentially harmful - even going to the funfair. But we don't ban them. We ensure the suppliers are regulated so that they proviude a good or service that is as safe as possible.

Humanity appears to have used cannabis both for medecine, recreation and religion for millennia. Why should any of these three uses be penalised more than the other?