28Apr/122
One doubt
In the not-too-distant future, when drugs are regulated and it's harder for minors to get hold of cannabis, what do they do then?
They're not going to suddenly no longer want to get intoxicated. There will be no miraculous transformation, like Harry Enfield's 'Kevin the Teenager' metamorphosing from an obnoxious adolescent into an upstanding young man the instant he gets laid.
So what will they do instead? And will it be more harmful or less?
Elsewhere
By AHRALLS payday loans
Pages
Categories
@chriswhite_twit
- And now a stroll to Waterstones to buy the debut novel of my all-time favourite ginger, @matthewhill. 4 days ago
- Listening back to interviews I've done always makes me wish voice transplants were possible. Outside of 'The Little Mermaid', I mean. 2 weeks ago
- I mean *really*. Haven't the people at Google seen Star Trek: Generations? bit.ly/15blpeZ 2 weeks ago
- A lie can be halfway round the world and it's made off with the truth's boots. 1 month ago
- Oh, Twitter's repeating unsubstantiated claims as fact again. Shock. (Murdoch/Ding Dong.) 1 month ago
- (Perhaps I should've googled the answer to that question. If it weren't rhetorical.) 1 month ago
- The people tweeting they don't know who Thatcher was... why broadcast that you don't know, instead of just googling to find out? Baffling. 1 month ago
Worthy adversaries
You may also like:
- Cannabis Law Reform UK
- David Simon
- Ewan Hoyle, founder of Liberal Democrats for Drug Policy Reform
- Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
- Mark Thompson
- Pete Guither's Drug WarRant
- Sanho Tree, Institute for Policy Studies
- Students for a Sensible Drug Policy UK
- Sylvia Longmire on Mexico's drug war
- Tim Worstall
- Toby Seddon
- Transform Drug Policy Foundation
Recent posts
- Argument and evidence and everything in between
- The deterrence precondition
- Right and honourable
- The Lister offence
- The healthcare paradox
- Up in smoke
- The comedian remonstration
- The justice addendum
- Bad language
- What has Ken Clarke been smoking?
- Bong on the fourth of July
- The drug war’s bystanders take flight
- The disease paradigm
- An audience with Prof. Nutt
- One doubt
- The Hitchens prebuttal
- Should cats be banned?
- Counterfictional Trainspotting
- Drugs and unwanted pregnancy
- Thinking of the children
- Diamonds in and out of the rough
- The substance tautology
- Cocaine Unwrapped
- Who are they trying to kid?
- Cartel hitman offers confessions – but little remorse
- Recessions spur yet more black-market harm
- The genius of Peter Hitchens
- Natural drives and the limits of deterrence
- A decade on from decriminalisation…
- Stimulating conversation
- No joy
- What drugs haven’t destroyed, the war on them has
- Blackstoned
- Danger!
- What can you do? Just say no(t guilty)
- Time to legalise?
- A lucrative illegal trade is an incentive to waste potential
- Days of the dead
- The road to Amsterdamascus
- A spanner in the works: the limits on intervention
- Drug users are the new gays
- How the world’s view of the drug war is changing
- Breaking the taboo
- Deserve got nuthin’ to do with it
- A misleading statement…
I would like to think that that world is less harmful to teenagers/minors. Minors will still be able to get hold of intoxicating substances but it will be harder – maybe age of first use will increase as you have to look close to 18 to get served. Maybe parents will take pragmatic approach and introduce their kids to safer ways of using without stigma such as a glass of wine with dinner rather than binging (or at least.. that is the attitude that should be adopted to Alcohol by parents). Of course when kids do get hold of substances they will be infinitely safer, any Cannabis they get won’t be the equivalent of ‘bathtub moonshine’ and Cocaine won’t be cut with carcinogens. Who knows, with adults i.e. parents, not going to jail for prohibition crimes, families will be better positioned to deal with their children if they are caught using under-age. Maybe the lack of a ‘street-dealer’ jobs there will be a higher incentive for school? Perhaps, even, with all the money saved in the CJS, EFFECTIVE prevention campaigns can be funded to reduce both adult and minor use in the same way as Tobacco.
Getting intoxicated is part of being human – nearly every person will do it at some point (even if its only a cup of coffee to wake up). The whole reason prohibition of consensual ‘crimes’ has failed is that there isn’t really a good substitute for getting intoxicated, be it to wake up, go to sleep, expand your mind or just de-stress.
Sure, exercise, sex, meditation, study, religion can all demonstrably alter our state of mind… but drugs, for most people, are fun – thinking kids won’t want to get intoxicated or be able to get hold of them is as naive as the “drug-free world” that was meant to be achieved 4 years ago. Minors will still get hold of drugs, but it will be harder (so use may be less frequent), they are likely to get hold of them for the first time at an older age and the drugs they do get hold of will be safer. Society will overall be better off for it.
I agree with Jake. Most teenagers who were really determined to get hold of drugs, I suspect, would just do what they do now with alcohol and cigarettes: get someone older to buy them, or take them from their parents or something along those lines. At any rate, the drugs they used would almost certainly be safer.
I can’t see that a black market catering solely to minors would make enough profit to justify its existence. I’d probably have to look into it more, but I get the impression that the black markets in alcohol and cigarettes are caused mainly by excessive taxation, not by demand from fourteen-year-olds.
My main concern with regard to legalisation is rather the widespread abuse of prescription drugs. Perhaps this shows that more people than we might think would abuse currently illegal drugs. That isn’t necessarily a justification for government interference in their behaviour, of course, but it does worry me.