How did it fail, exactly? According to Wikipedia, drug use in the Netherlands is lower than America's in every possible category. The number of drug-related deaths in the Netherlands is lower than the EU average. The Dutch Government is able to help 90% of the drug users that seek help. Sorry, can't see that as 'failure'.
Legalization makes marijuana (and other drugs) safer for a lot of reasons:
1. You could buy pot from government-controlled places, where quality of the drug is guaranteed (no fillers!).
2. Users whom drug intake become problematic can legitimately seek help, which is more unlikely if your drug of choice is illegal and stigmatized in your society.
3. You don't have to get into illegal, dangerous drug trade in order to get your drug of choice. You can buy pot in the nearest coffee shop, safely (for example).
That surely happened in the Netherlands. I fail to see it as failure. What I see as failure is the growth of a culture that condemns drug use, as if it is something absurd and immoral, when in fact it _isn't_. People has been smoking pot world-wide, for thousands of years, without causing harm to others.
I could go on and on about the immorality and degenerating effects on society caused by the _drug war_, which is much more damaging than drug use itself, but I think I'll stop here.
EDIT: I'd like to make clear that, although a pot smoker myself, I don't think using drugs is inherently good or bad. In fact, in most cases, it can be (very) bad. But the fact is that people do drugs and will always do drugs, most without major bad consequences for themselves and others. Drug use is a fact in most societies (if not all), and that being so, it would be better that we manage it the best way we can. Criminalizing it certainly is not the best way (probably the worse).
Yes the drug use is lower; what they never say is that it was lower anyway. And is still comparable to other EU countries with much much stricter drugs laws. Also they are not the lowest in the EU.
I do feel like points 2 and 3 could be fixed without legalising.
Point 1 is something I dont feel would happen anyway; it would have to be opened up to companies (and taxed). Which potentially ends up legitimising the drugs gangs :)
could go on and on about the immorality and degenerating effects on society caused by the _drug war_, which is much more damaging than drug use itself, but I think I'll stop here.
This is a dangerous argument; Im not sure legalising drugs would stop all that. Firstly because there are plenty of other drugs. And secondly because there is no way they would let the drugs be legalised without a fight.
These are serious, organised and very rich gangs.
------
I should also ask if you've been to Amsterdam; they are very strict about smoking on the street. And possibly stricter on drinking in the street. A large number of the coffee shops have been closed down too (and they are by no means "safe" in the way you suggest).
Yes, of course there are countries with a lot lower drug use rate. But I bet this is a cultural thing. It is a fact that the drug war has negligible effects on controlling drug use. It failed completely in the US, for example: drug use didn't go down in general just because it's illegal. In the Netherlands, when pot was decriminalized, the percentage of people doing it didn't fluctuate much, as you pointed out. That makes me believe that making drugs legal or illegal won't do much for controlling drug use.
I'm sorry for not citing any sources for the info I provided here, but one can always Google it.
About point 1:
People have distorted views about marijuana traffic in the US: a lot of it is made by middle-class citizens, who grow their own pot and sell to friends (specially in California). This is absolutely non-violent.
Unfortunately, because of current drug laws, the great majority of the drugs still come from violent, armed drug cartels. Unfortunately, that violent nature of drug trade is unlikely to change for some drugs (like cocaine), since so much dirty money is made from it.
Yes, there are very serious, very rich, very organized drug cartels. Many politicians and other powerful people are involved with drug money, and the drug cartels' influence in world politics is enormous. That is the main reason why drugs are still illegal. Legalizing drugs is not appreciable by the giant, violent drug cartels. It is only appreciable by the users themselves, and should be appreciable by the whole society (which unfortunately is not the case, since the big media successfully makes it's case for keeping drugs illegal).
If drugs were legal from the start, today it would be probably be taxed and opened up to companies like any other business. No problems with that!
Well, about points 2 and 3, I very strongly feel that they are inherently associated with drug legalization.
I do agree that legalizing drugs is very hard to legalize. That is so because of the big cartels influence in the world. I strongly feel, however, that it should be our goal.
> I strongly feel, however, that it should be our goal.
The key issue to get sorted first is whether the aim is to help lower drug use (the camp I am personally in) or just to relieve some of the issues.
If it is the former then I think Sweden's example is the best; they have a very strong anti-drugs policy and there's is amongst the lowest rates of drug use in the EU. That's quite strong evidence for tougher laws.
If the aim is the latter (alleviate issues) then we need to discuss legalization or decriminalization. Decriminalization is much more likely but doesn't really alleviate the drugs gangs problems and the worries about control.
The other issue with drugs is control: if you limit the THC content in Weed how do you control that? And how do you stop a trade springing up (like in Holland) of stronger cannabis strains outside of the restricted THC limits?
It's a vicious cycle; the best way to stop the gang problems is stamp out drug use. THEN talk about proper legalisation. IMO. There is no other way to start with a clean slate.
Speaking personally I am for the relaxing of personal possession laws. I think a lot should be replaced with counselling and support (optional). But conversely I am behind much much stricter laws for drug distribution and supplying. Stuff like instant deportation, asset freezes / seizures, longer stricter jail terms.
No, I have never been to Amsterdam. I am aware of the shrinking in the number of coffee shops. This is mainly because of international pressure: they are hardening the rules for the coffee shops, trying to limit tourist's access to them. I don't agree with that, but I understand it: international pressure is not easy to manage.
Legalization makes marijuana (and other drugs) safer for a lot of reasons:
1. You could buy pot from government-controlled places, where quality of the drug is guaranteed (no fillers!).
2. Users whom drug intake become problematic can legitimately seek help, which is more unlikely if your drug of choice is illegal and stigmatized in your society.
3. You don't have to get into illegal, dangerous drug trade in order to get your drug of choice. You can buy pot in the nearest coffee shop, safely (for example).
That surely happened in the Netherlands. I fail to see it as failure. What I see as failure is the growth of a culture that condemns drug use, as if it is something absurd and immoral, when in fact it _isn't_. People has been smoking pot world-wide, for thousands of years, without causing harm to others.
I could go on and on about the immorality and degenerating effects on society caused by the _drug war_, which is much more damaging than drug use itself, but I think I'll stop here.
EDIT: I'd like to make clear that, although a pot smoker myself, I don't think using drugs is inherently good or bad. In fact, in most cases, it can be (very) bad. But the fact is that people do drugs and will always do drugs, most without major bad consequences for themselves and others. Drug use is a fact in most societies (if not all), and that being so, it would be better that we manage it the best way we can. Criminalizing it certainly is not the best way (probably the worse).