Sir,– Further to "It makes economic sense to legalise drugs" (David McWilliams, Opinion, Weekend, May 4th), working in a Dublin hospital just over 20 years ago, I encountered a patient who was a heroin addict. He needed surgery, and post-operatively was in unusually severe discomfort due to the fact that his habitual use of opiates left him strongly resistant to them. Trying to get his symptoms under control, over about a half hour I incrementally injected him with about five times as much morphine as one would usually give. By then he was comfortable. He was about my age, and happy to speak freely to me, perhaps because I was standing there injecting him with very high-quality drugs.
He told me about his daily life. Rather remarkably it involved spending about £200 a day on drugs. This was about what I then earned in a week. However, he had no job. The amount of crime required to fund such a habit is hard to quantify, but must be vast, and no doubt went on seven days a week. And of course, those were only the crimes committed by a single end-user.
Ever since that conversation, I’ve believed that decriminalising illicit drug use would be better for society. We would be able to get accurate data, help those wanting to quit, and crime of various sorts would fall greatly. Even if it wasn’t provided free, the cost of opioids is very low on the legal market, and transmission of disease from contaminated needles should also decline. Users would know exactly what they were taking. And perhaps this step would undermine the raison d’être of many criminal gangs. Legalising illicit drug use ultimately would mean that the vast majority – that is, those of us not using them – would be able to live much safer everyday lives. – Yours, etc,
BRIAN O’BRIEN,
Kinsale,
Co Cork.
A chara, – David McWilliams claims that the prohibition of drugs has failed and that this greatly contributes to criminality. He is right for the wrong reason. Prohibition of drugs has failed not because prohibition in itself is flawed, but rather the penalties for possession in this country are too low and the Garda do not pursue and target the drugs buyers, as they ought to. Someone caught holding drugs in Ireland is more likely to be given a fine than be subject to any serious punishment. If a jail sentence was likely to be the price of buying drugs, this would act as a deterrence to potential buyers and we would see demand fall considerably.
The examples of China, Japan and South Korea show clearly that prohibiting the sale and use of harmful drugs such as cannabis and heroin works when carried out properly and that it can lead to low levels of drug use among the public. Other countries have chosen to be more permissive in this regard and have allowed drug use to flourish. Though there are many champions of this approach, it has led to a large increase in the number of people, and in particular young people, who need psychiatric care. After all, illegal drugs and especially cannabis, are harmful from a mental health perspective in a way that alcohol, for instance, is not.
Alcohol has also been a part of our traditions in a way that drugs simply are not, which is one of the reasons why prohibiting the sale of alcohol in the United States failed. Another reason is that simple possession was not criminalised in any way. The comparison between prohibition-era America and our own problems are therefore invalid.
The reality about the war on drugs is that no such thing exists. Perhaps there ought to be one. –Is mise,
CIAN Ó DÚILL
Blackrock,
Co Dublin.