We’re losing war on drugs
I APPRECIATE Jeff Williams taking the time to submit his letter ( TB, 5/ 10) in response to my letter ( TB, 2/ 10) on the decriminalisation of drugs.
Although Jeff has entered into the debate with a constructive and opposing viewpoint, I feel it would be more meaningful if such discussions were reciprocated at the political level, where change should be considered and not brushed over as a taboo topic like it currently is.
I would like to clarify my position and respond to Jeff’s assertions that my research on the topic falls short of the mark. At this stage, I would also like to emphasise that whilst relevant, my viewpoint has not captured information relating to the specific properties and impacts of each and every illicit drug as I feel this would be too detailed to discuss in this forum.
My current views on the use of illicit drugs have evolved over several years of experience dealing with the enforcement of drug- related offences in Europe, Cyprus and Australia, while serving in the military police of the British and Australian armies and the civilian police in the UK.
My first real exposure to drug use came from the pill- popping rave scene in Germany and Holland in the early nineties. I was a member of a covert drugs intelligence team operated by the British Army. The team was responsible for gathering intelligence and evidence in respect of servicemen and women supplying illicit drugs.
During the two years I served with the team we carried out covert surveillance and infiltration operat- ions, which often lasted weeks or months in major cities like Berlin, Hanover, Hamburg, Rotterdam and Amsterdam.
My exposure to the drugs scene was therefore real and constant and not just limited to recreational drugs.
Initially, I shared the viewpoint that this scourge on society needed to be smashed by the strong arm of the law.
However, I began to realise that drug users were not the real problem, but those behind the production and supply of drugs were.
My access to information shared by the German police enforced this viewpoint, with their main effort being to disrupt and close down those gangs with suspected links to terrorist and insurgent groups abroad.
Despite those particular experiences being dated, you can rest assured that little has changed and the primary focus of today’s law enforcement is the production and supply chain and not the users, yet possession remains an offence and a drain on resources to deal with.
Interestingly, the major clubs of the nineties had rooms and staff to deal with the undesired effects of the drugs consumed by patrons.
Here we are some 30 years later with similar concepts being recently adopted at concerts like Groovin the Moo. This clearly demonstrates that drug use is not going away, but a more pragmatic approach is finally being considered.
With this continued use of drugs in mind, why do we fail to see the benefits of distributing a drug which has a known content, rather than one which is unknown with more inherent risks attached?
Jeff’s point on the offence being related to possession and not use is partially correct. For example, we now have offences relating to driving whilst under the influence of drugs, and from my experience within the military environment there are offences from a disciplinary perspective which also capture drug use, not just possession. When all is said and done, it becomes a moot point when you consider possession must occur before use.
Obviously, the point of detection would determine the outcome from an offence perspective.
More recently I worked in the overt investigation of drug offences within the Australian Defence Force ( ADF) and interviewed countless drug users and suppliers from an intelligence and prosecution perspective.
Again, my experiences resulted in the same conclusion that drug users were not the problem, with many highly trained, fit and well- motivated young men and women taking recreational drugs as an alternative to the booze culture.
There might be a zero- tolerance policy from the ADF hierarchy, but over the past two decades the way drug users in Defence have been dealt with is significantly different to the dated approach of one strike and you’re out. Why do you think that is?
I acknowledge that by emphasising the overwhelming negatives of alcohol abuse, my point was lost on the ridiculous concept that one is legal and one is not. Still, I would suggest that from the vast majority of our population who legally consume alcohol, only a minority of consumers account for the associated behavioural problems.
I believe this is the case with drugs. However, the funding for education and rehabilitation is seriously deficient, and with all governments preferring to invest money in ineffective detection and punishment, it’s understandable the budget is unable to support an alternative approach. CHRIS WHITWORTH,
Idalia.