UK - Drugs prohibition is “unworkable and immoral” says Chief Constable

[Lunar Loops]

This from The Transform website:

Drugs prohibition is “unworkable and immoral” says Chief Constable

The Chief Constable of North Wales Police Richard Brunstorm, recommends in a report published today, that his Police Authority officially support his call for the legalisation and regulation of drugs, as part of their submission to the drug strategy consultation being conducted by the Government. He also recommends that they affiliate to Transform Drug Policy Foundation. The Authority meets on Monday 15 October to discuss the recommendations.

Danny Kushlick, Transform Director said:

"We are absolutely delighted at Mr Brunstrom’s paper. The Chief Constable has displayed great leadership and imagination in very publicly calling for a drug policy that replaces the evident failings of prohibition with a legal system of regulation and control for potentially dangerous drugs”.

“Mr Brunstrom’s call is less surprising when you consider that prohibition, and the illegal markets it creates, is the single largest cause of crime in the UK, generating £100 billion in crime costs alone over the last ten years. As a senior policeman he has witnessed first hand the counter productive effects of abdicating responsibility for this dangerous trade to unregulated and often violent criminals. His call for drug markets to be brought back within the sphere of Government control stands in enlightened contrast to the populist law and order posturing of our Prime Minister, who recently announced that ‘drugs are never going to be decriminalised’.”

“The current Government consultation on the drug strategy has inexplicably ruled out any discussion of alternatives to prohibition, despite the policy’s systematic failure over a number of decades. Mr Brunstrom’s paper puts these pragmatic alternatives firmly back on the table, where they should be, if a meaningful debate about ‘what works’ is to be entertained. It is to be hoped that the Police Authority support the Chief Constable’s recommendations and that other Police Authorities seriously examine the impact of enforcing prohibition. It signals the start of a renewed critique of prohibition, which Mr Brunstrom’s paper describes as ‘both unworkable and immoral’ and should force the Home Office and indeed Government to take the issue far more seriously than it has until now. An enormous amount of respect is due to the Chief Constable for supporting a ‘pragmatic and ethical’ policy, despite its taboo nature in front line party politics. Those that denounce him should be wary of relying on what Mr Brunstrom calls ‘moralistic dogma’.”

Reputation Comments on this post:

	Good news for a change, thanks for sharing!
	Rep for adding articles. Thanks.

[Lunar Loops]

The PDF of the paper has been uploaded to the file archive here:

http://www.drugs-forum.com/forum/loc...tid=105&sort=d

[Bajeda]

Originally Posted by shroomonger

The PDF of the paper has been uploaded to the file archive here:

http://www.drugs-forum.com/forum/loc...tid=105&sort=d

To anyone interested, I suggest looking at the policy paper if you haven't already. It is very succinctly and effectively worded, organized in bullet style, and as a result is very easy to read and understand. I really wonder whether any politicians lambasting this paper have actually read it, or maybe the disparaging references to the manipulation of Drug War and related subjects for political purposes is seen as an attack and the criticism is incited in that way.

Have a read in any case ----> Drugs Policy - A Radical Look Ahead (UK)

[chrisbx]

Great stuff! It is a pity that other people in positons like the police chief who hold these views are not making a stand at this time when the next ten year drug review is about to be decieded.

[stoneinfocus]

moral, statistics, ethics and logic plus 1st hand experience of professionals has no value when it comes to selling newspapers, making a political agenda and winnig seats in the government.

This is how G.W: Bush beacme president, because the energy giants need a pipeline built on tax dollars through Afghanistan and not on the pocket of energy-giants building one around these countries, so they sponsored Bush to make his own profit with the weapon industry and at cost of the taxes and the US economy, plus some collateral death-toll.
Hopefully the english are smarter and more pragmatic, which I always believed that they really are.

[dirk]

Hopefully the english are smarter and more pragmatic, which I always believed that they really are.

Ahem, what's it got to do with the english then boyo?

But seriously, the chap is a decent bloke by in my book anyway. He's been going "mental" about speeding (i.e.motorists going too fast) for a few years now. The mainstream press and opinion was against him all the time, but now the statistics are showing less people being killed on the road.

A victory for common sense

[Lunar Loops]

And so on it goes, lone voices crying out whilst establishment dons their ear defenders. This article appeared on icwales.co.uk:

Police chief's drugs remedy 'a counsel of despair'

A police chief who called for the legalisation of all drugs has been criticised by the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO).
An ACPO spokeswoman said Chief Constable Richard Brunstrom’s view were “a counsel of despair”.
Writing on his weblog, Mr Brunstrom, the Chief Constable of North Wales, said the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 was “not fit for purpose” and “immoral” and urged its repeal.
He also described the current UK drugs strategy as “unwinnable” in a report to the North Wales Police Authority.
A spokeswoman for ACPO said the organisation, which represents 44 police authorities across the UK, would be meeting the government shortly to discuss drugs strategy.
She said: “On October 9 CC Brunstrom, through his blog, launched a campaign to legalise drugs and abolish the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. These are his personal views, to which he is entitled.
“ACPO does not agree with the repeal of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 or the legalisation of drugs – this is arguably a counsel of despair.”
She added: “Moving to total legalisation would, in our view, greatly exacerbate the harm to people in this country, not reduce it. It simply does not make sense to legitimise dangerous narcotic substances which would then have the potential to ruin even more lives and our neighbourhoods.”
In his report to the North Wales Police Authority, Mr Brunstrom said: “The Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 should be repealed and replaced by a new Substance Misuse Act based upon the legalisation and careful regulation of all substances of abuse in one consistent manner.”
Mr Brunstrom’s call was also criticised by shadow Home Secretary David Davis who said he did not agree the fight against drugs was unwinnable.
But Danny Kushlick, a director of the charity Transform Drug Policy Foundation, praised Mr Brunstrom for showing “great leadership and imagination”.
The chief constable, who was appointed in 2001, has attracted criticism for his support of speed cameras and his tough stance against speeding motorists.
Earlier this year he authorised a road safety campaign which included a picture of a dying father of three, Mark Gibney.
It later emerged he had not obtained permission from Mr Gibney’s relatives to use the images.
The Independent Police Complaints Commission’s investigation into the use of the pictures is due to conclude this month.
A Downing Street website petition urging the Prime Minister to sack Mr Brunstrom has gained more than 3,500 signatures.

[FuBai]

Originally Posted by shroomonger

And so on it goes, lone voices crying out whilst establishment dons their ear defenders. This article appeared on icwales.co.uk:

Police chief's drugs remedy 'a counsel of despair'

A police chief who called for the legalisation of all drugs has been criticised by the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO).
An ACPO spokeswoman said Chief Constable Richard Brunstrom’s view were “a counsel of despair”.
Writing on his weblog, Mr Brunstrom, the Chief Constable of North Wales, said the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 was “not fit for purpose” and “immoral” and urged its repeal.
He also described the current UK drugs strategy as “unwinnable” in a report to the North Wales Police Authority.
A spokeswoman for ACPO said the organisation, which represents 44 police authorities across the UK, would be meeting the government shortly to discuss drugs strategy.
She said: “On October 9 CC Brunstrom, through his blog, launched a campaign to legalise drugs and abolish the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. These are his personal views, to which he is entitled.
“ACPO does not agree with the repeal of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 or the legalisation of drugs – this is arguably a counsel of despair.”
She added: “Moving to total legalisation would, in our view, greatly exacerbate the harm to people in this country, not reduce it. It simply does not make sense to legitimise dangerous narcotic substances which would then have the potential to ruin even more lives and our neighbourhoods.”
In his report to the North Wales Police Authority, Mr Brunstrom said: “The Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 should be repealed and replaced by a new Substance Misuse Act based upon the legalisation and careful regulation of all substances of abuse in one consistent manner.”
Mr Brunstrom’s call was also criticised by shadow Home Secretary David Davis who said he did not agree the fight against drugs was unwinnable.
But Danny Kushlick, a director of the charity Transform Drug Policy Foundation, praised Mr Brunstrom for showing “great leadership and imagination”.
The chief constable, who was appointed in 2001, has attracted criticism for his support of speed cameras and his tough stance against speeding motorists.
Earlier this year he authorised a road safety campaign which included a picture of a dying father of three, Mark Gibney.
It later emerged he had not obtained permission from Mr Gibney’s relatives to use the images.
The Independent Police Complaints Commission’s investigation into the use of the pictures is due to conclude this month.
A Downing Street website petition urging the Prime Minister to sack Mr Brunstrom has gained more than 3,500 signatures.

The prime minster doesn't have the ability to do so without an act of parliament. He is fully entitled to his views in these areas and misuse of a photograph cannot hope to end his career - certainly not after Ian Blair managed to shot an innocent dead and keep his job. In other terms there is no grounds upon which to sack him.

[enquirewithin]

The UK government is morally bankrupt. They have embroiled themselves in a illegal war of aggression and Brown has said he is willing to attack another country, Iran, if his masters in Washington tell him to do so. Of course, Brunstrom is talking sense.

[FuBai]

The greatest problem isn't moral bankruptcy in my view, the main problem is that there is no serious choice - Labour and the Conservatives are both stealing policies from each other and there is basically no important difference between the two main parties. Because each party has something like a 20% solid opinion base who will vote for anyone in a party sweater all the politicians do is appeal to middle ground opinion - no wonder so many people are turning to parties like the BNP.

[Evil GIR]

I think if the BNP got into power then all Pot smokers would be probably hung.

[Heretic.Ape.]

Legalise all drugs: chief constable demands end to 'immoral laws'

By Jonathan Brown and David Langton

[top] Published: 15 October 2007

One of Britain's most senior police officers is to call for all drugs – including heroin and cocaine – to be legalised and urges the Government to declare an end to the "failed" war on illegal narcotics.
Richard Brunstrom, the Chief Constable of North Wales, advocates an end to UK drug policy based on "prohibition". His comments come as the Home Office this week ends the process of gathering expert advice looking at the next 10 years of strategy.
In his radical analysis, which he will present to the North Wales Police Authority today, Mr Brunstrom points out that illegal drugs are now cheaper and more plentiful than ever before.
The number of users has soared while drug-related crime is rising with narcotics now supporting a worldwide business empire second only in value to oil. "If policy on drugs is in future to be pragmatic not moralistic, driven by ethics not dogma, then the current prohibitionist stance will have to be swept away as both unworkable and immoral, to be replaced with an evidence-based unified system (specifically including tobacco and alcohol) aimed at minimisation of harms to society," he will say.
The demand will not find favour in Downing Street. In his conference speech this year, Gordon Brown signalled an intensification of the existing battle. "We will send out a clear message that drugs are never going to be decriminalised," the Prime Minister told the party.
The Tories also rejected the proposals. David Davis, the shadow Home Secretary, said a more effective move would be the creation of a UK border police force to stop drugs getting into the country as well as expanding rehabilitation centres. He added: "We would put police on the streets to catch and deter drug dealers and we would ensure sufficient prison capacity so they could actually be punished."
Mr Brunstrom, whose championing of speed cameras has made him a hate figure among some motoring groups, also found his suggestion that the war on drugs was unwinnable dismissed as a "counsel of despair" by the Association of Chief Police Officers. "Moving to total legalisation would, in our view, greatly exacerbate the harm to people in this country, not reduce it," an Acpo spokeswoman said.
But the 30-page report, entitled Drugs Policy – a radical look ahead, includes a number of persuasive voices. Today Mr Brunstrom will urge his colleagues to submit the paper to Westminster and the Welsh Assembly. In it, he quotes the findings in March this year of a Royal Society for the Encouragement of Arts commission, which stated that "the law as it stands is not fit for purpose" and argues for the replacement of the 1971 Misuse of Drugs Act with a new Misuse of Substances Act.
That would mean scrapping the ABC system introduced by the home secretary James Callaghan with a new scale that assesses substances, including alcohol and tobacco, in relation to the harm they cause – although he admits banning booze and cigarettes is not likely.
But he notes that figures from the Chief Medical Officer have found that, in Scotland, 13,000 people died from tobacco-related use in 2004 while 2,052 died as a result of alcohol. Illegal drugs, meanwhile, accounted for 356 deaths. The maximum penalty for possessing a class A drug is 14 years in prison while supplying it carries a life term.
Mr Brunstrom indicates that there is a growing mood for change. He cites the House of Commons Select Committee on Science and Technology, which criticised the Government for failing to switch to an evidence-based policy approach. The report also includes quotes from former home secretary John Reid, admitting "prohibition" doesn't work, and the Olympics minister, Tessa Jowell, conceding "it drives the activity underground" . There is also supportive evidence from former Chief Inspector of Prisons Lord Ramsbotham, a retired High Court judge, and Scotland's Drug Tsar, Tom Wood.
As well as hitting the country hard in economic terms – class A drug use in England and Wales costs the country up to £17bn a year, 90 per cent of which is due to crime – there are also a series of socially damaging knock-on effects, he says.
He argues that prohibition has created a crisis in the criminal justice system, destabilised producer countries and undermined human rights worldwide. By pursuing a policy of legalisation and regulation, he concludes, the Government will "dramatically reduce drug-related criminality and will enable significant funds to be transferred from law enforcement to harm reduction and treatment procedures that are known to work."
There was a mixed response from groups that work with users. Danny Kushlick, a director of the charity Transform Drug Policy Foundation, praised Mr Brunstrom for his "great leadership and imagination". But Clare McNeil, a policy officer for Addaction, said talk of legalisation distracted attention from the more important issue of rehabilitation. "We have some sympathy with his views and the reasons and why he believes this but we are not in favour of legalisation," she said.
Nick Clegg, the Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, said it was " significant" that a senior police officer had spoken out although he too thought the police chief's views went too far. "Where he is absolutely right is that the Government's drugs policy is failing and failing spectacularly. The refusal of the Government to think radically means we are letting thousands of young boys and girls down.
"I am not persuaded that full legalisation is the way forward but what is necessary is that a more logical and evidence-based approach is needed which is less susceptible to whims of individual home secretaries ... The system does not work as it is."
The Chief Constable's verdict
* British drugs policy has been based upon prohibition for the last several decades – but this system has not worked well. Illegal drugs are in plentiful supply and have become consistently cheaper in real terms over the years.
* The number of drug users has increased dramatically. Drug-related crime has soared equally sharply as a direct consequence of the illegality of some drugs. The vast profits from illegal trading have supported a massive rise in organised crime.
* The ABC classification of drugs is said by the RSA Commission to be indefensible and is described as "crude, ineffective, riddled with anomalies and open to political manipulation". Most importantly, the current ABC system illogically excludes both alcohol and tobacco.
* Mr Brunstrom says: "If policy on drugs is in the future to be pragmatic not moralistic, driven by ethics not dogma, then the current prohibitionist stance will have to be swept away as both unworkable and immoral. Such a strategy leads inevitably to the legalisation and regulation of all drugs."
* The chief constable asserts that current British drugs policy is based upon an unwinnable "war on drugs" enshrined in a flawed understanding of the underlying United Nations conventions, and arising from a wholly outdated and thoroughly repugnant moralistic stance.
* He concludes: "The law is the law. In the meantime, I will continue to enforce it to the best of my ability despite my misgivings about its moral and practical worth."

[FuBai]

Great, a page 1 in a national news paper should help spark a little more debate in any case. It is becoming increasingly obvious to the majority that drug policy is a failure, and we offer the only tenable alternative.

[Lunar Loops]

And this from The Independent (UK):

Former prisons inspector backs call to legalise drugs
By Nigel Morris, Home Affairs Correspondent

Published: 16 October 2007



A senior police officer's call for the legalisation of all drugs, including heroin, has been backed by a former chief inspector of prisons.
Lord Ramsbotham argued that the huge number of people in jail with a drug problem proved that current policy, based on "prohibition", was not working.
Richard Brunstrom, the Chief Constable of North Wales, provoked controversy after he said the "war on drugs" could not be won and should be replaced with a radical new approach.
Lord Ramsbotham said: "The present regime has failed in every way. If you look at prohibition of alcohol in the US, it failed. The Chief Constable's suggestions must be considered seriously. We've got to stop the dealers who cause so much misery for society."
He added: "I used to reckon that 80 per cent of those people received into prison were misusing a substance of some kind when they came in. The amount of acquisitive crime connected to drug abuse is immense. That is why there needs to be a new approach."
The North Wales Police Authority gave Mr Brunstrom the go-ahead yesterday to submit a report to Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, calling for a review of the 1971 Misuse of Drugs Act, which is the basis for the current "ABC" classification system, for legalisation and for hard drugs to be available on prescription.
John Anderson, an authority member, backed Mr Brunstrom's recommendations but warned they had little chance of being implemented. He said: "We are up against politicians with knee-jerk reactions and who are unburdened by the facts. The other thing we are up against is, there are no votes in it."
Leanne Wood, a Plaid Cymru member of the Welsh Assembly and a former probation officer, said the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 was "not fit for purpose" and Mr Brunstrom was right to raise the issue. She said: "I've seen how people are just recycled through the system. They go to prison, they come out of prison, they end up continuing using drugs and continuing breaking the law, and that has to change."
Mr Brunstrom denied yesterday that he was proposing an "anarchic free-for-all". He said his report was not a "crusade or proactive" but a response based on a degree of radicalism". Current policy was "irrational, illogical, hypocritical and doesn't work".
The Home Office made clear that it had no intention of implementing Mr Brunstrom's proposals.

[FuBai]

Well, we have to capitalise as much as possible on these events. The problem is which paper the report is in - the Independent probably has the highest number of anti-prohibitionist readers in the first place, I would like to have seen this sort of thing in the Times and the Guardian which are read by a slightly broader range of readers. Obviously a pro-legalisation article in the Telegraph would be like finding a snowball in a furnace.

[Heretic.Ape.]

[top]It’s time to fix drugs – legalise them!

Oct 17 2007 by Dan O'Neill, South Wales Echo
AT last, at last – a Welsh top-cop showing common sense rather than political correctness.
North Wales Chief Constable Richard Brunstrom has been derided at times for his refreshing approach to today’s problems – in some Neanderthal quarters he’s known as the Mad Mullah.
But can anyone disagree with his call for all, yes ALL drugs to be legalised?
I’ve argued for years that, as a certain lady frequently observed, There Is No Alternative.
And during those years I’ve heard claim after claim that we are winning “the drug war.” Which is palpable nonsense.
Drug use, as Brunstrom points out, is soaring.
But at the same time, and this should be of blindingly-obvious significance, drug-related crime rises even faster with (and again who can argue?) narcotics now supporting a global empire “second only in value to oil,” worth about £2,000bn a year.
That’s just the financial cost. The cost in human misery is beyond calculation.
Prohibition will not work.
It has never worked – America proved that between the wars when the ban on booze spawned a criminal empire that still infiltrates every section of society.
And now another failing attempt at prohibiting another kind of drug has brought Chicago-style gun warfare to our own cities while most street crime is down to addicts looking to finance the next fix.
Every politician and every police officer knows that the crime rate would drop dramatically if drugs were legalised and made available through controlled distribution, freeing our police to do what they’re paid to do – protect the public instead of fighting a war as unwinnable and as idiotic as that in Iraq.
When will those politicians have the guts to say what one brave cop is saying?
Over to you, Rhodri. You know it makes sense.

http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/news/...1466-19959932/

[Joe Duffy]

Don’t know if this has been posted already, but here is Chief Constable Richard Brunstrom talking to Sky News’s Kay Burley (Monday 15th October 2007)

"http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1288396,00.html"

[Tzetze]

Originally Posted by Joe Duffy

Don’t know if this has been posted already, but here is Chief Constable Richard Brunstrom talking to Sky News’s Kay Burley (Monday 15th October 2007)

"http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1288396,00.html"

Hmm, I saw that interview when it went out on Sky News. They've omitted the tail end of the interview from the movie clip on their website.

Kay Burley brought up the fact that Brunstrom used a pic of a car crash victim in a campaign without consulting the victim's family. Brunstrom couldn't comment on the fact because of an ongoing investigation. He explained why he couldn't comment on the issue, yet Burley kept pressing on the issue until the interview ended. Absolutely disgusting piece of journalism by SkyFoxNews.

However, after watching this movie some time ago, I would expect nothing less from Murdoch's drones.