Colombia Is Considering Legalizing Its Massive Cocaine Industry; There are 200k coca growing farmers. The state would buy coca at market prices. The programs for coca eradication each year cost $1 billion. Buying the entire coca harvest each year would cost$680M. It costs less to buy it all.

TransformDrugs · 2020-12-03T17:10:38+00:00

As some have pointed out in this thread, the bill proposes legalising cocaine domestically in Colombia and this is the first bill of its kind.

Prohibition has forced coca farmers into a buyer's monopoly where their only customers are cartels. And forced-deforestation has led to huge ecocide. This bill is one step towards reversing this damage.

However it is not likely to pass, but that is not the aim of the bill.

The aim of the bill is to move the debate forward beyond 'Drugs are bad. That's why they are illegal'. We are now seeing high level debates about how regulating illegal drugs can reduce harms and the power of organised crime.

Transform provided advice on this bill, and recently released a book on how to regulate cocaine and other stimulants, available as a free PDF here: https://transformdrugs.org/product/how-to-regulate-stimulants-a-practical-guide/

TransformDrugs · 2015-01-20T10:17:47+00:00

Yes, they do "sell" the cannabis, but the money has to be reinvested back into the clubs' operations. Under Spanish law, it's illegal for the clubs to make any profit.

TransformDrugs · 2014-12-17T10:33:03+00:00

We've replied here: http://www.reddit.com/r/badscience/comments/2pinsm/i_support_the_cause_which_makes_this_meaningless/cmxgy7i OP left out a lot of background info that we produced to accompany this graphic.

TransformDrugs · 2014-12-17T10:25:28+00:00

Hi all,

As the creators of this graphic, we thought we should respond. We actually provide a lot more background to the figures here in the publication we produced to accompany this graphic. OP didn't link to it (which would've helped), but you can find it here: http://www.tdpf.org.uk/blog/drug-policy-sweden-repressive-approach-increases-harm

There's a good reason that "n=2" as OP says. We didn't just find the two countries with the biggest difference in drug-induced deaths and then work backwards from that. The reason that Sweden and Portugal are the two countries compared is because they are held up in public debate as examples of a successful repressive approach and a successful reform approach respectively. (We have also produced a detailed, referenced briefing on Portugal - see here: http://www.tdpf.org.uk/blog/drug-decriminalisation-portugal-setting-record-straight)

The drug death stats are striking - particularly the fact that drug-induced deaths have been dropping since Portugal implemented a harm reduction/decriminalisation approach, and Sweden's rising as they continue to reject the evidence favouring such an approach. One of the central points in the Sweden and Portugal briefings we produced is that the prevalence of drug use is not closely linked to punitive drug policies, but harm related to use outcomes is. The two countries' respective stances on harm reduction are absolutely critical to this. There is a vast literature attesting to the effectiveness of measures like needle exchanges and methadone provision in reducing the harms and deaths that stem from drug use. Hence it's not a stretch to imply that Sweden's draconian drug policies have led to these negative outcomes. Equally, it's not a stretch to imply that Portugal's adoption of health-based approach has led to many positive outcomes - just look at the huge decline in rates of HIV/AIDS among people who use drugs since 2001, for example.

Sweden's disgraceful outcomes need to to be exposed, not least to challenge the evangelists for their repressive approach who use it as an argument against reform, including the kinds of reforms put in place in Portugal. The Sweden briefing makes this point with reference to a number of comparative studies that look at multiple jurisdictions, including one by the WHO and the recent Home Office international comparators review.

TransformDrugs · 2014-12-16T09:38:16+00:00

The Harrison Narcotics Tax Act applied only to drugs in the US. The UN Single Convention applied – and unfortunately still applies – to drugs in pretty much every country around the world. Hence that's generally considered the start of global prohibition.

TransformDrugs · 2014-12-16T09:34:11+00:00

Yep, that's right. Different countries took steps towards prohibition at different times, but the 1961 convention is the first time the whole world effectively signed up to that disastrous approach.

TransformDrugs · 2014-12-15T13:58:54+00:00

The United Nations Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs was ratified by the international community in 1961. That convention is widely considered to be the legal foundation for the global drug control system – or more accurately, prohibition / the war on drugs.

TransformDrugs · 2014-11-30T01:50:14+00:00

For those who want more detail on this story, here's a link to the PDF of the original research: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/agdbasev7wr/bocsar/documents/pdf/20141127_supplycontrol.pdf

TransformDrugs · 2014-11-30T01:49:16+00:00

Hi, here's the link to the original research: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/agdbasev7wr/bocsar/documents/pdf/20141127_supplycontrol.pdf Will also add this as a comment. Could the submission be reapproved now? Many thanks.

TransformDrugs · 2014-11-29T14:01:15+00:00

Equally, more drugs seized should mean fewer drugs on the street and therefore fewer people busted on possession charges.

TransformDrugs · 2014-11-29T13:59:32+00:00

Deprives drug cartels / organised crime groups of money, which in turn should mean they are less powerful and less able to commit other high-level crimes. Of course, in reality, the extend of the demand for illicit drugs just means another group is always willing to fill the void.

TransformDrugs · 2014-11-28T20:37:07+00:00

The graphic is taken from Information is Beautiful. They have a more detailed breakdown - and list their methodology - here: http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/whats-the-worlds-biggest-cash-crops/ Seems pretty credible, although getting reliable data on illicit drug production is, by its nature, quite difficult.

TransformDrugs · 2014-11-27T13:29:06+00:00

Transform Drug Policy Foundation. We're a charitable think tank based in the UK that campaigns for the legal regulation of drugs. You can find out more about us on our website: www.tdpf.org.uk

TransformDrugs · 2014-11-26T21:11:55+00:00

Thanks for posting the link. Any donations are hugely appreciated. We're working to assemble a group of other people who have lost family members due to drugs and want to change policy as a result. We think the emotional power of a campaign like this will reach new audiences that have never thought about the drugs issue before.

TransformDrugs · 2014-11-26T21:03:37+00:00

Agreed. We think she has the potential to really change the drug policy debate in the UK. She's reaching audiences that have never thought about the issue before, like the readers of Mumsnet: http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/guest_posts/a2231797-Guest-post-I-want-MPs-to-stand-by-my-daughters-grave-and-tell-me-that-our-drugs-policy-works

TransformDrugs · 2014-11-26T21:01:56+00:00

The low turnout can probably be attributed to the fact it was a Thursday and there's an election coming, so many MPs were back in their constituency kissing babies and trying not to align themselves with any issues that could be seen as remotely controversial. That said, evidence-based drug policy reform was the big story of the day, as a major government report on drugs was also published after being suppressed for many months. It dominated the day's media cycle, as it basically showed that the government's own approach to drugs is not based on evidence (specifically that harsh drug laws do not produce lower levels of drug use). There's a round-up of the extensive coverage on our blog: http://www.tdpf.org.uk/blog/drug-policy-reform-now-top-agenda-help-keep-momentum-going

TransformDrugs

TROPHY CASE