Letter: Drug experiences from New York
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Is it as unrealistic as you suggest, in your leading article 'The fix that isn't working' (21 September), for our politicians to think about the decriminalisation of hard drugs? Drug-related crime is increasing, but fortunately not yet to the levels that prevail in the US, where there have been vigorous but remarkably unsuccessful attempts to suppress it for many years.
This does not surprise me. When I was working in New York in 1954-55, the late Robert Loeb, a senior and much respected physician of those days, predicted that an increase in police efforts to suppress drug traffic was doomed to failure. The more the police attempted to suppress the illicit trade, the greater became the profit from the trade and the more ruthless the operators who engaged in it. He had seen the same situation arise when the prohibition of alcohol was enforced in the US.
I think that illicit drug taking is a stupid and self-denigrating activity, but I believe it should now be made legal and that those who wish to take hard drugs be able to buy them from pharmacies under appropriate controls. Drug addiction would remain a serious problem, but I doubt that it would increase greatly, because the 'pushers' would no longer be pushing.
There are two advantages in decriminalisation. Drug addiction would be predominantly a problem for an individual and it would damage the community less than it does now. And a law that cannot be enforced would no longer bring our laws into disrepute.
A U-turn by politicians for a rational reason would, I agree, be surprising, but that does not make it less desirable.
Yours sincerely,
O. L. WADE
Stratford-upon-Avon
Warwickshire
19 September
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments