Prisoner drug use can provide a fix

[Lunar Loops]

Oh dear god and this guy writes on prisons and ciminal justice. So the term 'smackhead' is now an acceptable term is it? ALL class A drugs are a menace and a threat to society. Lock up your children, it's an evil world out there. This article from The Guardian (UK):
Prisoner drug use can provide a fix
Eric Allison
Wednesday November 15, 2006
The Guardian



Even by civil service standards, Prison Service Order (PSO) 3601 is a lengthy document. Running to several hundred words it covers every aspect of the mandatory drug testing system (MDT) now firmly installed in every jail. First introduced in 1994, the system aims to test between 10% and 15% of the prison population - on a mostly random basis - each month.
The reasons for the testing are included in the mission statement of the operation: "To increase significantly the detection of those misusing drugs and to send a clear message to all prisoners that if they misuse drugs they have a greater risk of being caught and punished."
And: "To provide, by means of random testing programme, more accurate and objective information on the scale, trend and patterns of drug misuse, allowing prisons to manage and target more effectively their resources for tackling drug problems."
Few would argue that drugs, particularly class A drugs, create serious problems in any society. It is expected, therefore, that the prison service takes the issue seriously. But, in practice, the system fails spectacularly in achieving its aims. It does not detect the full extent of drug use and, far from providing accurate information, it in fact masks, or distorts, the actual numbers of prisoners who choose to do their time with a "little help from their friends".
First, the rules of the game. There are five areas in which MDTs can be applied. The two main ones are random testing (where prisoners are chosen by computer to give a urine sample) and reasonable suspicion (where there is reason to believe that a prisoner has misused drugs).
The former is operated on a basis similar to that used to select Premium Bonds winners. The prison numbers of all inmates are fed into a computer which then spills out the required amount needed for testing that month. The latter does - or is supposed to do - exactly what it says on the tin.
Many prisoners are convinced that random testing is anything but. They believe that inmates who are known not to take drugs are far more likely to be asked to give a sample. This theory is almost impossible to prove and PSO 3601 makes the point that "the system makes no reference to previous runs of the programme and it is therefore possible to generate the same prisoner on a number of subsequent occasions." Whatever the truth, there is a mass of anecdotal evidence from prisoners who abstain from taking drugs yet say they are tested more often than the average inmate. Which would certainly be useful in backing up any decline in prisoner drug use.
As for reasonable suspicion, put me - or any experienced ex-prisoner - in a jail and I would soon be able identify every heroin user on the wing: smackheads behave in a manner that makes them easy to spot. In a 2005 comprehensive survey on drug testing, the Home Office indicated that during three months in 2001 an estimated 21% of the prison population used opiates, yet just 2% were tested on suspicion.
Since 1997, the numbers of prisoners testing positive for drugs has declined. At the same time, drug use in the general population has remained constant, except the use of opiates, which has increased. There is abundant evidence that drugs are easily available inside jails, yet the prison service would like us to believe that they are winning the fight against illegal substances.
It is true that prisoners are using less cannabis: they know it stays in their system for 28 days and that traces of opiates are gone in three days. According to the Home Office survey, a "considerable number" of prisoners said they had started using opiates in prison. There are enough smackheads in society without the prison system producing more. In short, it is time to stop taking the piss.

[Alfa]

It seems that purpose and goal are completely left out of the picture here. Justice is not going after drug users in society, so why should they go after drug users in jail? The writer says that drugs create serious problems in any society. Thus in jail as well. Then why not test all problem cases and leave the rest alone? There are a mass of overly agressive people, who use cannabis or downers as a remedy against that. What is the logic in taking that away? I can see where use of certain stimulants or steroids can increase agressive behaviour. And that serious addiction needs to be broken. But other than this, it seems like the prison policy makers are very contra productive.

If the government can not keep drugs out of highly protected jails, how do they expect to succesfully fight the drug trade???