Letter: Drug experiences from New York
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: The arguments this week about decriminalising cannabis are inconsistent in many respects. It is this that makes such a policy 'unrealistic', as you state in your leading article today (21 September), not the reluctance of politicians to 'lead public opinion towards such a U-turn'.
It is acknowledged that 'the biggest consumers of illegal drugs are . . . from the middle and professional classes' ('Cannabis vote a reflection of public mood', 21 September). Yet it is still argued that decriminalisation of use and possession will help solve the problem of drug-related crime. Presumably these drug users finance their use from their salaries, not by burglary and theft.
Those arguing for decriminalisation still seem to want sale and distribution to be a serious crime ('US expert supports 'rational' move', 21 September). If individual use is no more serious than a parking offence, more drugs will be used by more people - as many as commit parking offences, perhaps. There will therefore need to be an increase in the (illegal) supply.
Arguments can be made for cannabis to be legalised based on individual liberty, that alcohol and tobacco are legal, etc. However, an argument for allowing more drug use can never be part of an attempt to reduce drug use. It is only by taking a consistent position and being clear about why it is not good for minds to be more and more under the influence of chemicals that progress will be made towards a solution.
Yours faithfully,
JULIAN GALL
Godalming, Surrey
21 September
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments