I like the comments that legalised "NHS" drugs would be so uncool that no-one would want to do them. Could the state score a surprise victory by making healthy eating or exercise illegal?

Bob, Reading,

I found this article to be naïve and socially abhorrent.

Does anyone really think that if we take away a source of revenue for the street gangsters and their Mr Bigs, that they will just retire to the Spanish Riviera with their profits?

Somehow I suspect that they will just move onto other, perhaps even more barbaric ways of extorting money from the poorer and more vulnerable ones in our society. Anyone for a round of child prostitution?

Children have been mugged and knifed for their Nike trainers or iPods. The problem about schoolyard violence is not that the latest reasons are to do with drugs, but that there is something very wrong in our society that allows children to even contemplate such acts. Parental and societal controls have all but disappeared – but does Ms Cavendish have a ready solution for that?

As HL Mencken once wrote: for every big and difficult problem, there’s a solution which is short, simple – and always wrong.

Sam H Ahmedzai, Beauchief, Sheffield, UK

Just one small mistake in an otherwise brilliant article - legal drugs could and should be substantially more substantially more expensive than illegal drugs. Nobody goes down a dark alley with their hands full of money by choice - certainly not to buy product of unknown quality and quite possibly contaminated with poison!

Andy Dyer, London, UK,

I could not agree more. Nice to read a little common sense in these pages. If only we could read the same sensible views in the Mail, we might at last be getting somewhere.

Adam Cathro, Melbourne, Australia

tax it and pay a few nhs bills.. tobacco and alcohol have been legalized for years. and the anti smoking lobby is winning . Though food addiction is on the rise and thats legal too.. If its pure and relatively cheap it will certainly reduce the criminal gangs influences. It may even reduce the amount of bad ecstasy and ice use. and that has to be a good thing...
I am the right weight , I don't smoke or use any recreational drugs.I am not a sex or adrenaline junkie.. My middle aged kids tell me i will die unexpectedly from nothing at all and boredom at 101.

rwn, muston,

Legalisation of any currently illegal drug would certainly not remove criminality from supply-even if Boots could get product liability inurance! Could they, really? For say crack cocaine or fentanyl? The business about taking the criminality out of supply is plain nonsense. In the UK more than 20% of tobacco product is counterfeit, smuggled or both with Mafia (real Mafia) involvement. Societies have always protected themselves against what are perceived to be damaging social behaviours by laws or taboos, sometimes religious taboo. Where for example there is effective taboo against alcohol the social damage is much less than in our society. Alcohol & tobacco are far more personally & socially damaging here BECAUSE they are legal. So although some drugs use is higher than is good for the UK, by those lights, restrictions on the supply of the illegal drugs is massively successful. Not as successful as it could be if the UK had not been under sustained attack by the legalisation lobby.

David Raynes, BATH, UK

Spot on!!! I've never been a user of "illegal" drugs, but totally agree with this article.

Mark, Kettering, England

I accept Camilla's arguments; on the whole legalisation could be effective, reducing crime and de-glamourising addiction. But the fact remains that while one third of teenagers have 'tried' drugs, this trying often amounts to no more than once or twice at a party. The difficulty, the risk, the company you're obliged to keep and the fear of the drugs being cut with anything from glass to rat poisen are enough to put most people off. Make the drugs legal and 'safe', and while addicts might be more easily treatable, there would be exponentially more of them. Cocaine is a highly addictive substance - not everyone continues to use it 'recreationally', and while some drugs may be 'low risk', ecstasy can cause instant death on the first use. It may be less dangerous than alcohol in general, but the long term effects have not yet been discovered, and the occurance of sudden death is unpredictable. How could a packet in Boots or Superdrug carry that kind of health warning?

Emma Whipday, Oxford, UK

"thank God the UK is a democracy and the minority of people with this bizarre attitude will never have their way!"

This is why we shouldn't have a democracy - we need a libertarian one party state!

Martin, Kent, USA

A nice statistic is to compare the revenue of the Coca Cola company ($28 bn in 2007) with total drug revenue - the UN's conservative estimate above is $330 bn but the real figure is probably far higher. Coca Cola puts the non-alcoholic ready to drink (NARTD - honestly!) market at $580 bn. The "War on Drugs" hasn't merely failed embarassingly, it has taught a generation of kids that the law is useless (which has always been true and is probably a good thing), it has created enormous suffering and it has established drug barons who are so far beyond the law they're now in a position to challenge states. So, a win all round then, but our politicians will continue to beaver away at a broken policy because they're too gutless to admit they're wrong. Which is why we are not having a referendum on the EU - the state is too arrogant.

Mike, London,

Medicalisation of heroin in Switzerland has reduced the number if addicts. Kids are in it for the glamour, hanging around in queues with pensioners for prescriptions just isn't glamourous.

Roo, London,

thank you for at long last a realistic and sensible comment on drug use in the uk today. It is a massive unspoken thing that goes on in so many places by such a wide spectrum of people. Middle england needs to wake up and realise like is said in this article that not everyone who takes drugs is an addict in the same way that not everyone who drinks is an alcoholic. Now if this kind of balanced and sensible view on drug use could only filter through to the whole nation.

Kevin Green, Glasgow,

This is amazing. Actual government decision making involving drugs based on facts and not dogma. wow. Well, all one has to do is compare America to Holland and see that tolerance and regulation win out over the violent crime infested, corrupt American failure. Hollands drug use rates among its population have been consistenly lower than America with comparitively little police enforcement. Americas favourite drug, alcohol, was temporarily prohibited in the 30's and all it did was funnel huge amounts of money into the non taxed underground economy and entrench organized crime. Criminals do not want any othese substances legalized. What does that tell you? Al Capone and the likes thrived. Thank you prohibitionists, thank you for nothing. Legalize, tax, regulate, reduce harm

Rob, Toronto,

Brilliant article! Not to mention that legalising drugs would create a whole new source of tax revenue - maybe enough to pay for Northern Rock?! Let's hope that Alistair Darling / Gordon Brown reads this and sees a way out of the budget dilemma.

Rowan, Oxford,

If drugs were given away free by the state all the crime linked to them at the moment would be wiped away in a single move freeing up the police to concentrate on the real issues. The irony is that state provided drugs are likely to remove much of the appeal that drugs hold for the young. They will come to be seen much like council houses and NHS spectacles - not something many celebrities or aspirational young people would really aspire to.

Bruce Mcaaw, Grantham,

One thing most of you seem to have missed- if drugs are legalised the dealers are not going to walk away and get a job, so they will find some other way (extortion?) / robbery, organised crime to feed their "fix" for money and control.

Tony, Harrogate ,

an excellent, sensible article. i am an occasional drug user and i really enjoy it - but i would much prefer to buy from legally controlled and regulated sources, rather than some dodgy punters.

i don't do anyone any harm while smoking up, etc. and i detest the thought of those involved in the trade being forced into dangerous practices to get the stuff to me. however, it's not enough to stop me.

haunj, birmingham, west midlands

You could buy cocaine over the counter in this country until 1916. So it would be NOT be new.

http://www.cocaine.org/coke.html

Peter Hayes, York,

Such is the efficiency of the drug supply market that it is generally cheaper to get stoned than to get drunk. This is a huge factor for teenagers and the poor.

Legalise it and you shift demand from dangerous drugs to safer ones by the amount of tax that the government levies on each one.

Matthew, New York City, USA

It is all too easy to settle for keeping the status quo. The entire legal system and jail industry would falter if a constant supply of criminals wasn't kept rushing through their veins. I remember reading somewhere that society needs a certain percentage of criminals so that our betters can be draconian and our taxes can be gathered in a state of fear. Children play with fire, especially if it is naughty as well as dangerous. If it were all legalized it would slow down - loads. Ain't going to happen because there is a hidden income and knowledge is still to be gained from overdoses and long term addiction.

Terry, Radstock, UK

I am puzzled. Whilst I can (almost) see how legalisation would rid us of the underworld lords who deal in drugs, I do not quite see how it would reduce the numbers taking drugs. What exactly is the greater evil? Why should we condone drug taking - whether purchased from Superdrugs or Mr Hard? Why should our children be subjected to the exposure of drugs as if they were lollies? There are many products that can be purchased from Superstores and equally from a black-market. What makes you think that hard drugs would be any different? All that would occur is for the underworld to undercut the prices in the Stores and thereby make drugs even more accessible.

Annie, Cambridge, UK

Well said. But the most important objective is to put dealers out of business. This could be acheived by buying up all cocoa, poppies, etc. at source at market prices and supply the products for free, to addicts only, on condition that they signs up for therapy and to be consumed under supervision. Dealers would have no income so would be finished. Then we could control addiction properly and manage it until it disappears entirely.

R Mason, London, UK

I'm not sure that leglising drugs wouldn't create new problems. there are existing problems with alcohol and cigarettes to which this would add. maybe we should have a more realistic approach to those who misbehave whilst under the influence (of alcohol or other any drug), who harm their own health or who commit other crimes to fund their habits.

personally, I think if we had a more draconian approach to dealing drugs, so that it simply wasn't worth the runners and other low level employees of drugs inc being involved, the business could not survive. fat cats can't be everywhere at once. the people selling drugs to children should be in prison (if not hanging from a rope).

if we aren't going to take the problem seriously enough permanently to remove anyone even vaguely associated with the drugs trade - dealer or user - from society, we might as well legalise it all. and educate people. and we'll still have to hold them responsible for any other crimes they commit.

jem, london, uk

"Drugs that are seized should be laced with chemicals additives, to cause side effects such as nausea or temporary blindness"

OK I've heard a lot of ridiculous suggestions in how we should deal with the drugs problem, but that just about tops it. The point of drug laws should always be to reduce the harm they cause to individuals and society, people seem to forget that sometimes.

We already have enough problems arising from adulterated drugs, why would you want to increase the harm they cause?? More hospitalisations, more deaths, yeah great idea... The only way we can ever make progress is by bringing drugs into a legal, strictly regulated market. At the moment, all we are doing is financing and empowering criminal gangs while at the same time failing to stop use.

LC, Manchester, UK

OK, a good article but I must pull you up on two completely erroneous statements.
1. Dealers DO Not give free samples away to kids or discounts for 'trading up', any more than banks give away free money. Beleive me. They do not have to. In all my years, I have never actually seen or heard this happening, apart from ill-informed people, well removed from the drugs trade.
2. Our laws did not, in any way, create crack or skunk. Crack has been around since before the misuse of drugs act (it was often called freebase) and came about due to users cleaning their coke (a chemical process to rid it of impurities and cutting agents) and so that it could be smoked, thus creating a more immediate high.
Skunk was developed in Holland in the 70's by smokers who wanted to maximise THC and lessen reliance imported grass and hash which was often of inconsitant quality.

Scotty, Black Rock City, Nevada

The most dangerous drug, alchohol, seems to be totally acceptable with the majority of the public/governments/do gooders. Now in the UK, pubs can apply for 24hr licensing, which is just turning most town centres in to a drunken battle ground most weekend evenings. Now, I dont know about the majority of people, by I find this disturbing. I've encountered drug users on pot, coke, pills, smak, lsd, speed...etc, and I still find that most of these people are less intimidating than drunks.
Most people I have spoken to who dont want drugs legalised are alchoholics, and most of these drink and drive too.
Most people who love their alchohol, dont want drugs legalised, and most people who want drugs legalised will, like me, slag of alchohol all day.
Drug prohabition has been running for years, and has solved nothing. It does not work, so try something else.

dom, London,

I find this rather frustrating. Typical middle class view. it is fine for them and their glamorous friends to do drugs in their noting hill homes but the dealer who is on speed dial for them is a terrible individual. its crazy and so hypocritical. I abhore drugs and the damage they do to families but any half decent economist will tell you there are two sides to this problem - supply and demand. attack them both equally so yes arrest kate moss as well as the drug dealers. and NO do not legalise drugs. Even the dutch are clamping down now

SL, Lndn,

We don't decriminalise robbery because we have trouble policing it! Promoting the use of banned substances needs to stay illegal. Celebrity users are in a way promoting drug use because of there status and should therefore be jailed in the same way as any other pushers. All those walking about flaunting the rewards of drug trading should be pulled in and subjected to a tax audit so their assets can be ceased and they imprisoned. Drugs that are ceased should be laced with chemicals additives, to cause side effects such as nausea or temporary blindness. These drugs should then be returned to the supply chain. Through time people will be afraid to buy drugs in case they cause side affects. There is nothing glamorous about stumbling around blind while throwing up. We must increase penalties and take every step to eradicate banned substances and those promoting their use or supply.

Tony Woods, London, UK

yeah wow imagine that
pass the bong, camilla

ian c, london,

Camilla,

this is so much of a no-brainer you have to wonder "what's in it " for our politicians to consistently ignore the obvious. But then of course these are the same class of no-brainers that set up a bureaucratic behemoth to levy Road Tax when the simple thing was and still is to levy it proportionately by sticking the cost on at the petrol pump. Would these dunderheads ever get meaningfully employed anywhere else?

john, bangkok, thailand

This does bring to mind a little detail. Canada is against the death penalty. For a while they refused to extradite wanted persons back to the US if they were going to face the death penalty in the US. When last I heard this was no longer the case, since so many US murderers were heading north, knowing that they wouldn't be extradited. It will be similar with addicts, they will all head to Britain where drugs would be readily available and cheap. Then the miniscule amount of drug related deaths can certainly skyrocket to equal tobacco and alcohol related deaths, they are legal after all.This is not a black and white issue, a suitable 'grey' area in the middle needs to be found.

Rose, USA,

Very True. Legalisation and much of what you say , would be a serious way to moveforward , but sadly the criminals etc would prefer the status quo. Sometimes it is hard to know who are the real criminals , Governments, civil servants etc
as what is going on in UK and Globally with drug culture and youth is a disgrace like the acceptance of cocaine in middle class and suburbia ! Educationalists have failed ! and the media to, to glamourise the Moss type stories !
TV should have on a regular base and be ofrced to screen programmes showing how drugs kill and kill families in all sorts of ways ! and what a true waste it is - it was a waste at the turn of the 20 th century and is even more so now !!

David Thompson, monte carlo, Monaco

As a citizen of the USA, I can attest that our war on drugs is a farce. The only consequence is that 1 out of every qoo of our citizens are in prison, most for drug-related "offenses". I live in a major city where heroin, cocaine, and marijuana are readily available in neighboroods all over town: taxi drivers will deliver one to dealers; at some intersections, dozens of dealers are to be found on every corner. The only people profiting from this are the crime lords and the law enforcement squads, both groups bloated by the cash to promote or curtail drug trafficking. It is absurd!

P Smith, DC, USA

I doubt that the leaglisation of drugs would lead to a safer nation. Here in Britain, we are dubbed a 'binge nation', in reference to our tendency to drink far too much, for the sake of drinking, and then ending up puking on the street corners, or generally causing havoc, getting lost and whatnot. Last time I checked, alcohol was legal as well.

I am not suggesting that we should ban alcohol, but rather, that we should consider attitudes towards alcohol, and the psychology of people in general before we draw idealistic conclusions. Personally, I think we will end up in the worse, with a lot more teenagers disguising the stuff from the police, and hanging out near the 'Superdrug', and I suppose things like 'drug-pubs' would open up as well. I think the UK would be ridiculed by every nation from Angola to Zimbabwe, and the mental and social health of the nation will suffer a great decline.

Tanvir Hassan, Lincoln, Lincolnshire

Camilla Cavendish I applaud you. If more journalists and politicians stood up and told the truth how you have then the world would surely become a better place.
We're not blind, we all see exactly this happening before our very eyes, in our streets and pubs. We need to end this ridiculous global civil war.

Wm O'Brien BSc, Norwich,

And then of course there's the killer argument: you can tax the stuff if it's legal! Just think how much the Govt can make out of adding tax at the same level as, say, tax on beer. 75% isn't it? And the police would be freed up to do other things.

C A Ramsbottom, Rugby, UK

Part 1

I applaud the spirit of the article and I am as equally in favour of seeing drug crime decrease however, the legalisation of drugs will cause a huge increase in mental health problems amongst the section of the population to which you refer. Depression, schizophrenia or bi-polar disorders are not an acceptable cost in the legalisation of drugs. It is an absolutely proven fact that drugs contribute to the aboove conditions and youngsters pre-disposed to such conditions, they are a trigger.
People who advocate such a move usually take the example of the Netherlands where legalisation of drugs has been a success. But as a nation, we are not of the same disposition in terms of our social abilities. People in the UK often take drugs (including the consumption of alcohol) to ease their attempts to socialise as they lack confidence. The Dutch naturally have more confidence, a product of a more cohesive family structure in their society.

Roger Hunt, Aldershot, UK

Excellent article. It's good to step back once in a while and look at a problem differently. It could solve a lot of problems.

Stem, Warrington, UK

I wonder how many muggings, robberies and burglaries are the result of Heroin & Crack addiction.
I remember Judge Pickles stating many years ago;
"an addict who was raising £800 per day by means of crime could be treated for 40p a day on the NHS"
The reality of tackling drug culture is it is not one James Bond style Mr Big running the operation, it is a culture deeply in grained in 21st century British society and criminalising a significant number of that community can only serve to make it impossible to police.
significant number

Michelle Little, Slough, UK

Part 2

Successive governments over the last 50 years have destroyed the principal of the family unit. Society has reaped the consequences of such a libertine approach to policy. I refer to the following:

Family breakdown causing an epidemic of single parent famiies who haven't got time to contirbute to the education and nurturing of their children (I know, I'm a School teacher, I have the first-hand evidence to back up what I'm saying.)

Lack of respect for authority stemming from the gradual erosion of powers from the courts and the criminal justice system, favouring the criminal and neglecting the rights of the victim. Removal of significant tax benefits for married couples, the glue of society.

If you want to solve the problem then get to its root. As for the legalisation of drugs, we are just looking at a measure that would merely scratch the surface of a problem which at its heart is not a question of economics but of society burying God and religion.

Roger Hunt, Aldershot, UK

A sensible article. Prohibition has never worked as it only makes the relevant drug more attractive. Legalise all drugs, tax them like alcohol and tobacco and use the tax for the NHS.

While we're at it give all the tobacco and cannabis junkies somewhere to indulge their vice where it doesn't bother the rest of us - Dutch-style 'coffeeshops' where the weed can be purchased for consumption on the premises only.

Paul, Coventry,

To Rachel in London: it's quite easy to take the moral high ground over someone how takes cocaine given the nature of its production (have you ever heard of Columbia?). Cannabis or ecstacy production do not necessarily face the same moral issues, as they could be (and are) produced here much more easily than cocaine.

Andy Taylor, Reading,

Luckily the majority of people in Britain do not share Camilla's fantastic view of the drugs problem in this country - thank God the UK is a democracy and the minority of people with this bizarre attitude will never have their way!

Drugs are horrible, and the damage they cause to society is tremendous. Alcohol affects the body - drugs affect the mind. It doesn’t make any difference how much drugs cost, addicts will still resort to crime to fund their addictions. And if organized criminals cannot profit from drugs they will simply turn to equally evil alternatives such as prostitution!

Eddie, Manchester, UK

Well, you know you have no choice if you are hooked. You simply have to obtain the drug - perhaps users could get a fix at a centre or local clinic legally, simply by walking in.

But, this notion of Superdrug or Boots selling crack and heroin is nonsense!

The British of course sold opuim (heroin) in this way to China for many years in the same free trade vein, it conicidently solved the Empires huge trade deficit for Chinas goods and tea. The effects were not postive for the Chinese.

Mr A Hammond, Liverpool, UK

Splendidly sensible article.

Unfortunately we only get splendidly stupid governments.

Chris Blackmore, Melksham, England

every change creates a new set of problems how are you going to protect these drug supermarkets from crime, how are adddicts going to afford to buy there products and how are you going to regulate moving up the drug ladder say from marijuana to cocaine.

tim hoton , hamilton, canada

I agree, all drugs have a certain take-up level regardless of legality or illegality. There may be an initial curiosity increase but poppers are legal and there aren't hordes of users roaming the streets using them.
Legalising hard drugs would cut dramatically the crime associated with obtaining the money for them and allow users to reclaim their lives and rehabilitate themselves,saving the NHS from the complications of contaminated drugs ie amputations,abcesses etc. This continue's to blight the lives of users even when they have quit their habit.
Unfortunately this move would be interpreted as endorsing drugs and akin to releasing Myra Hindley, no politician will want to take the risk of implementing this.

Natalie El-barrawi, Retford, England

This article presents a set of systematic solutions to a problem that is fundamental to human nature - the need to alter our perception of reality and relieve stress through chemical means. No culture has ever been exempt vice or free from obsessive pursuits in one form or another.

This solution has been presented several times by high ranking and experienced members of governments and police forces world wide. Notably an 18 year veteran of the Vancouver police force by the name of Gil Puder was featured in a film by the director Jerry Thompson in the late 90s.

The film: Stopping Traffik: the War Against the War on Drugs. presented Puder's belief that "The reason that we should give up on drug prohibition is not that it isn't perfect. It's that there is absolutely nothing right with it. Drug prohibition does exactly the opposite of what it was intended to do. Drug prohibition creates violence. It creates more addicts. It creates more dysfunction in society."

Peter, Beaconsfield, UK

excellent article i just wanted say why should the do gooders get to say what i can and can not take / use in my own body i dont like alcohol its known to cause lots of different problems social and health wise yet this is legal all you people that say drugs should not be legal are hypocrits i wonder how many of you drink or smoke how would you feel if you were fined thrown in jail or couldnt get a job because you couldnt have a glass of wine or drink in the pub treat ALL DRUGS the same treat them as health problem not criminal

cannbis man , manchester,

The criminals only deal in drugs to make a huge amount of money. This being the case they will turn their attention to other criminally lucrative exploits. It won't cut crime, only cut a type of crime to be replaced with another.

Personally I am for legalisation but lets keep the criminality in a realistic perspective. These people want the bling but don't want to do an honest days work to get it. They will simply switch trade.

Richard , Jersey, CI,

The key to 'drug control' or sensible using of drugs, is education. Education is the key to making the right choice for yourself. Whilst drungs are illegal, people (esp kids), are not being educated properly about the effects, consequences, pros and cons of drugs use and abuse. By properly educating the youth of today we are more likely to have a positive and productive future.
A friend died from an overdose of heroin, if he had been told that mixing alcohol with herion can slow the heart rate dangerously low, he woud still be alive. All he was ever told was heoin is bad, and so he tried it.

A, London,

Brummy Lyn - I wish I lived in your rosy world with your lovely friends.
In the real world - even beyond London - drugs are endemic in our society a sad fact. And most of us are touched by the trade in one way or another - we all know someone or know someone who knows someone who is either user, or addict, or victim.
We can all pontificate about the evil of drugs, who knows what is the best policy, I don't.
I have always been a prohibitionist - taking the moral high ground perhaps - but I can see the counter argument for legalisation.
Maybe it is time to carry out a great social experiment - legalise cannabis, control its sale, fix the price to undercut the criminal and see what happens. Give it 12 months and see what happens on the estates, in the playgrounds in the prisons.
Are we brave enough?

Paul, York,

An extremely interesting article and a view that merits serious consideration.However, did she consider the addictive nature of the drug cocaine? Did she consider that despite widespread use of this "marching powder" one of the main reasons why alot of people (students) do not take it with regularity is in fact the inflated price. Students smoke cannabis- it`s cheap and accessible. Students use ecstasy- it`s cheap and accesible. Students occasionally dabble in cocaine- it`s overpriced. Consider this scenario.
Day one of hundreds of thousands of student loan installments, a trip to the high street would really actually mean a trip to the high street. On route to Marks and Spencer why not stop off at boots and purchase some cut price and good quality cocaine. Next stop McDonalds, the toilets of course and then with basket in hand march around Marks grabbing anything and everything in sight- good bye loan.

Kit Taylor, Newcastle Upon Tyne, England

Lyn,Birmingham - "Nobody with any morals or decency would touch cocaine" who are you to judge??? Really though just so you know just because you dont use drugs doesn't give you or anyone else a moral high ground. Alcohol which is totally socially acceptable causes far more deaths than any type of recreational drug and had it only just been discovered it too would probably be illegal due to the physical and social affects. Alcohol usage is one of the key components in domestic violence and abuse, it also fuels the fighting in pubs/clubs/bars and streets. It is worth mentioning that this sort of behaviour is not associated with drug use. How much tax payers money do you think is spent each year dealing with alcohol related illness such as cirrhosis, heart disease via the NHS? Well circa 3 billion per annum actually (source BBC). Point made.

Rachel, LONDON,, LONDON

At last ! A sensible article on the subject.
I said in 1971 at the time of the introduction of the Misuse Of Drugs Act that it would achieve little other than create another class of criminals. Thirty years and more little has changed other than that so much crime is evidently drug - related. Remove the need to steal while at the same time providing treatment is the only answer to this curse.

Anyone who thinks Amy Winehouse encourages people to take drugs is an idiot. Just look at the poor woman - for heavens sake !!!!!!

Stephen Reeve, Southend,

Whilst I agree that the decriminalisation of Cocaine et al would cut the dealers legs from under them, there are, of course, tremendous risks. Perhaps it would be better to make the offence of dealing in drugs viz importing, processing ( cutting) wholesale or retail selling punishable from first offence with a mandatory 35 year sentence without appeal.

Further ,for the media to abstain from lionizing so called celebrity addicts, Ms Moss, Ms Winehouse and Mr Doherty, which latter was named as NME's icon of the
year, should be shown to be what they really are weak sad cases and self abusers.

p.race, pulborough, UK

Just to put things into perspective. In countries where alcohol is illegal you can still by it on the black-market, poor/dangerous quality, uncontrolled and and un-regulated. If dealers are making £330 billion a year a 1% tax gives us 33 billion pounds to sort out problems like over abuse and health issues. Plus add in the cost we would not be spending on policing illegal dealers. Make it safer so you know what your taking and do it in a controlled environment. When cannabis was down graded we didn't see millions of people suddenly start getting high and we don't have to legalise everything, heroin and crystal methe for example are extremely harmful to the people who take them and for their famillies. Leaving the fashion statement up to celebrities (or the stupid) will only ruin things more. If we want to do things right for society we need to educate and then LET PEOPLE DECIDE!

Matt Welsh, London, UK

Brilliant article. Makes sense, but unfortunatley will never happen. Countires can control the distribution of alchohol, but cannot control the drunks. More violence is caused by alchohol worldwide than between rival drug gangs.
Go back about 100 years, Coca Cola contained cocaine, and most drugs were legal. It's only in the last 40-50 years that this prohibition has been pushed, and now look what is has done. Made the situation worse. Governments state that drugs are bad for you. Obviously people have listened, because the amount of drug users has increased dramatically over the years. If drugs were really bad, people would not take them. Unfortunatley, people like taking illicit substances, and until that changes, there will always be illegal drug use, whether people like it or not.
Alchohol & tabacco are the 2 most dangerous substances, they put more people in hospitals and/or coffins than other drugs. All illicit drugs are dangerous though, especially if taken in excess.

dom, London,

It’s clear that the current policy on drugs is not working. Therefore it should change. Why not get them on prescription from your GPS surgery, for example. No need to rob and steal to finance the habit, no need to share dirty needles or risk drugs contaminated by being cut, or risk OD due to variable doses and no need to deal with the criminal underworld. Camilla Cavendish is right and it will never happen so long as politicians have no courage.

Frankly if addicts want to mess up their lives with drink or drugs, there is little that can be done to stop them - they will find a way. We should, however, insure that there habits are not a problem for the rest of us – through the huge level of crime that an illicit drug trade engenders. Make them legal, available (in some sort of controlled way) and offer counselling and help to those who want to quit. Oh and life imprisonment and complete confiscation of the assets of any remaining drug smugglers

David, Brighton, West Sussex

I feel the article is sense from the point that something has to be done, however the glamour of buying from boots or superdrug is poorly thought out. I live in sweden where the government still owns and runs the off licenses. I feel that If this acticle had put forward a more mature solution.where the government would have state run shops selling small quantities to people over a certain age with proof of ID, where also a maximum amount bought per week, or month is only allowed.
This could be taxable for the government to cover costs and also generate extra money for the treasury. Genuine addicts would get a higher allowance and anyone abusing the system would get a ban from purchasing for a certain amount of time.
I agree that chemists would have a moral problem with supplying this, so the job would need to be done by trained staff, who would need to be licensed, just like publicans.
Anyone who has the cash can already overindulge, so I do not see this as a valid point.

james, stockholm,

Alcohol is legal. Some would drink sensibly but others don't. Could Camilla Cavendish solve the problems associated with alcohol first before promoting the legalization of narcotics? Could she please clean up any vomit and broken glasses found in the streets of Surbiton or even break violent fights? How about stopping underage drinking all on her own? As for the legalization of narcotics, I think the drugs barons will probably just create another drug.
Anyway, please can I have her address so that I can pass it on
to a nasty man who has links with drug dealers? I would like to see Miss Cavendish and Mr Samuels deal with him when he could not get his own way. I think he prefers narcotics than his medication for his mental health problems. I still have not heard from Mr Samuels.

Carolyn, Surbiton,

I agree, and so do at least two of Manchester's Drug Squad. I suspect that, in private, the majority of police would too. There is no chance of this happening. The legalisation of the Swedish oral tobacco product snus would eventually prevent thousands of lung cancer deaths, yet it will not happen because probably more people will end up addicted to nicotine - a fairly harmless addiction - it is the smoke that causes most of the damage. Unfortunately the prohibitionists always win the day.

Jon, manchester, uk

Donovan, you have completely missed the point! FARC and Taleban get funding from drugs BECAUSE drugs are illegal. End the war on drugs and you cut the funding to the likes of FARC and Taleban almost overnight - legalisation gives a degree of control and leverage on drugs markets that prohibition abdicates. Lets not forget of course that cocaine has a 3,000% profit margin and the US alone has poured in $4bn into Columbias war on drugs - put simply, Columbia is never going to be a peace until the war on drugs is over. Likewaise, buying raw opium in Afghanistan would keep the profits out of Taleban hands and into schools, hospitals and communities that urgently need development.

Will, Barcelona, Spain.

So instead of suggesting taking tougher stance on the dealers, she thinks their trade should be legalized?!

In another country, hundreds of dealers are executed anually - in here you want them delivering drugs to Boots...

Acibeb, London, UK,

Drugs are cool. A contentious view but is it incorrect? I don't see bright young things abusing horlicks or fijian cava, nor chewing coca leaves. Boots is not cool in a pop culture way, it's functional, reliable and comfortable. If cocaine was as cool as Boots, a lot of recreational drugs would lose attraction. Heroin addiction would still be around just as alcohol addiction is but who would start if it had all the rebelliousness of superdrug. Will anyone have the guts to try it though?

John, Knutsford, UK

Having seen and experienced the effects that both recreational use and addiction have had on my friends and family, I had always been in favour of legalising drugs - taking the glamour and social stigma away from the streets, not to mention reducing the huge problem of drug gangs would seem to be resolved to a huge extent by legalising drugs and providing them for sale in pharmacies.

But how will the pharmacies going get hold of a steady supply? Merely legalising drugs in the UK is going to escalate problems in the 'supplying' countries to a huge degree. I live in Colombia now, and this country is being destroyed by Le FARC, all in the name of drugs - not because people have a huge addiction problem here, but because of the amount supplied to countries such as the UK. Much of the violence, kidnappng, murder and extortion here all goes on in the name of drugs.

So how will the UK fulfill a constant and controlled demand, without supporting terrorism?

Lorna Phillips, Bogota, Colombia

"Annual deaths from drug use (about 2,000) are still minuscule compared with those related to alcohol and tobacco (about 160,000)."

Drugs - illegal and small death rate; alcohol and tobacco - legal and a massive death rate...... and you really think legalising drugs is a good thing? What a genius...!!

I mucked around with drugs in my late teens and 20's and if I'd have been able to get hold of them from boots I'd have taken a lot more. Thankfully they were n't and long may that last.

Billy, London,

Bravo, an excellent article which addresses the reality of the situation.
Sadly the powers that be are unable to accept the reality. My guess is that they are all too aware of the situation, but the act on it would be perceived as too high a risk.
You can bet that the big booze vendors would be the loudest protestors, well equal with the ill informed, never tried drugs before brigade who think they actually know what is best for everyone else.
Legalization really is the only way currently. The battle was lost years ago.

Lloyd, UK,

2000 deaths from illegal drugs and 160000 death from legal alcohol and tobacco, and you want to legalise drugs. Hmmm......

Bill, Lonodn,

a very well written article & Very agreeable. To David Donovan Boots would not buy from the Taleban. If The Drugs trade when commercial it would create a vast amount of jobs Creating the drugs and taking all the Extremely harmful substances out of them E..G Glass. It would take along time to be able to get this but i believe it is a good thing. And if the govement put a tax on the drugs we would be a very very very rich country. Legalising certain drugs would cut down on so much violence and do alot of good. Alcohol & Tabacco are legal? WHY!? they kill just as much! If it was legal people would learn to udnerstand it more the same with Alcohol & Tabacco (Smoking Kills, Harms your Baby...Alcohol related deaths etc) Personally i agree with this but as a country we are not ready for it yet.

Cameron, livingston, W. Lothian

A sound idea.. or something like what countries like Malaysia do can be tried. Dealing in Drugs carries the Death Penalty. The deterrence seems be helping immensely there.

Shivey, London,

What a superb and refreshing read. It's heartening to know there's at least some with the power to reach people with their heads screwed on. If only Whitehall had such counterparts...

Danny, Sheffield, UK

Making narcotics legal and cheaply and easily available accessible to the mass market a wider circle of the dissafected and better stll the dispossed young at school age could be seen as a panacea for the political establishment fear of the radicalizing aspects in globalization; it could however make binge drinking seem like a tea party. If you discount the health care strains shown under economies in crisis, the prognosis for taking care of the casualties does not seem promising - you don't need Nobel prize to see that surely.

Nicholas Xenakis, Borough, Walworth, London, England

So if drugs were legalised and we could cocaine and heroin from say boots, where would boots get it from? FARC and the taleban ? Its not enough to say that those countries that house both groups could crack down harder on them, because they are already fighting a loosing battle, the only other option would be sending british troops (more) to the countries to aid the effort. are you in support of this?

DAVID DONOVAN, london, uk

Ditto to nearly all the other comments here on this article: faultless reasoning, couldn't agree more.

If I could help this become actual, I would.

Which is most probably why it won't be implemented by any foreseeable government in my lifetime. Sigh.

Tom, London, UK

Excellent article this time. What a pity politicians prefer to allow drug fuelled crime to continue

WAB, London, GB

40 years ago I watched an television interview with the man who was the first black mayor of an American city. he said the we ought to legalise drugs so that we could fight them on a different battleground - one where we stood a chance of winning.

Since that time I have never heard a more sensible suggestion about drugs.

Ray Frowd, Cambridge,

Under the new regime where I can get all the Coke and E I want will I also be able to get any other drug I want over the counter without a Doctor's prescription? If I can get coke why not valium?

TJ Murray , London, England

Sensible article. Crimalising large proportions of otherwise law abiding people (recreational users for instance), Fuelling the criminal gangs, and abandoning vulnerable users to a vicious black market is a backward policy imo, and destined to fail with some nasty consequences, as we see so often now.

This is not about being pro or anti drugs, but harm reduction and having an adult and humane approach to this issue.

Unfotunately I think it's politically impossible to do, the papers wouldn't allow it. And many politicians don't do sensible, just point scoring and fear mongering.

Tom, Newcastle,

Camilla, if you want to come out in favour of drugs, you need to find a more positive marketing image than Amy Winehouse with needles in her toes. Sounds like some kind of new age acupuncture. No, wait, you're bang on.

Nobody forces an addict to associate with criminals. In the words of Radiohead, "you do it to yourself". The wonderful thing about the rule of law, whatever its individual shortcomings, is that one chooses or not to break it. This responds to a basic human need identified by Spinoza, who not coincidentally was Dutch, that Man be given the appearance of free choice.

Pierre Bernardi, Paris, France

very sound article - spot on.

Unfortunately the chances of govt taking a principled stand on anything important are zero - as witness their lamentable performance last night

cuffleyburgers, Lucca,

This is not just about drugs, it is about prohibition and all 'ban' culture in general that is prevalent today!

The same argument, same points, can be made for alcohol laws, tobacco laws, obesity laws, present and / or future (inevitable). Legislating against any 'moral' issues have to date, and will in the future, inevitably fail, producing very undesirable unintended consequences. Why can't people see that!

winstonian, Darlington, UK

Although I agree with legalisation in principle, it would have to be done on an international scale. Otherwise the one country with the most tolerant laws becomes a mecca for the world's addicts. Short term this would be very damaging, and I think is partly to blame for the limited success of the Dutch policy of being tolerant to cannabis users.

Tom, London,

This assumes a willingness on the part of UK retail pharmacists to go against their professional code of ethics and sell drugs which they know would be actively detrimental to their customers' health. Perhaps Camilla thinks we should start recommending a line to go with their lemsip for people feeling tired and run down with a cold.

The major users of pharmacies are the elderly and mothers of young children; these, more vulnerable sections of society should not be sidelined by pleasure seekers demanding a little something to help them through their stressful day or night.

Victoria, Carlisle,

Poiliticians are petrified of approaching this subject, yet they justify their failure to keep the promise of a referendum on Lisbon as "leadership". They need to take a rational stance on the drugs problem or confirm everyone's opinion of them as self serving wastes of space.

John Ledbury, Kings Lynn, England

Let's go back a bit......During the Great Depression 1929-35 President F D Rooseveldt said that "what this country needs is bold experiment. If a policy isn't working we should admit it frankly and try something else." Wise words but really just commonsense. The problem - or one problem - is that our politicians seem unable to bring themselves to admit that they are ever wrong or mistaken. We see this pathetic conceit in so many fields and yet everyone knows that we are all fallible.
To quote another sage from the 20th century, J K Galbraith:
"when circumstances change and the facts change I change my mind : what do you do ?"

Lewis Thomas, High Wycombe, Bucks. UK

Intelligent , forward thinking and effective ... it will never happen .

Benzo, Nr Chelmsford,

I love realism.This article is where it is. One major reason for
maintaining illegality is that the source of production cannot
be controlled, and thus the substance cannot be taxed. Add to
that the about turn required to change moral tack, and permit
consumption of a substance, blacked for the poor, and merely
tolerated for the rich, renders political action incapable and
impotent. Buy it all, with discount for bulk purchase, tax it and
sell it. Screw the mafia, narcotraffickers, in one go, and change the world. Entrepreneurial spirit will find its' way around
that one anyway, not to mention customs and excise devices.

Geoffrey Swain, Almancil, Portugal

The facts are there for all to see. The constant violence of this sub culture of drug dealers dominates our city centres, where the quest for fabulous riches (untaxed) and the greedy murder and maim for even more. The drug addicts, just like alcoholics will always be with us. Abolition of alcohol in the US did not work and our present laws do not work. By legalising drugs at a stroke you would bankrupt these dealers and middlemen as their expensively acquired stock would be worthless. The drug adicts would be clearly identified and could be offered treatment. The adicts would no longer have to thieve and break into our houses and cars and ulitimately the very lure of drugs would diminish as all the glamour of doing something perceived as daring and 'in' as taking banned substances would subside. The police would be able to concentrate more of their resources on other things and the country would be a happier place. We just need braver politicians than we have now.

David Nammory, Liverpool,

"For people under 40, drugs are ubiquitous. Most of my generation thinks of cocaine much as our parents thought of single malt" - who do you think you are speaking for, Camilla? It's the height of arrogance to try to shore up your wooly thinking by co-opting a whole generation into your perspective. There is a world beyond you, beyond the media, and beyond London, and people in that world still have the perspective and morality to know the difference between cocaine and a single malt. Nobody with any morals or decency would touch cocaine, not because of the effects on themselves but because of the rank explotation involved in its production, which would be unlikely to cease were it made legal. Anyone who has anything to do with it is complicit in murder. I have managed to reach 35 without taking, dealing or being affected by drugs, and so have my friends. Who's to say your experience is more typical than ours? Such arrogance some journalists have!

Lyn, Birmingham,

Indeed, as others have said, thank you for at last presenting a realistic assessment of the drugs situation and what needs to be done.

Prohibition is harm maximisation write large. It prevents any form of control or regulation of a trade selling dangerous substances to millions of people whilst at the same time preventing any proper study of that user group.

Please, lets have a proper debate about drugs. Keep it up.

Derek Williams, Norwich, Norfolk

The benefit of legalisation would be the removal of the huge profits to a major illegal activity. I am not in favour of selling it, but would allow people to receive drugs on the NHS at cost. This would lower petty crime. Note that the costs do not just accrue to our society, but drugs money funds insurgencies/terror groups. We could undermine the Taleban and FARC. Vigorous education campaigns and barriers to receiving drugs (form signing, counselling, etc) would help to reduce the downside of legalisation - an increase in users and addicts. But probably a price worth paying. The cost benefit analysis is definitely in favour, but morally the case is more ambiguous as one must assess the damage to those who will become addicted who might not have done if one maintains the ban.

For those who want "evidence" -

http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/archives/2005/03/the_failure_of.html

Gary Becker, Nobel prize winner in economics, on the failed war on drugs

Ken, Oxford, UK

A friend of mine gave up cocaine when he came to London, because it was so cheap that anybody could afford it.

Jane Dinham, Oxford,

One of the local neighbourhood teen drug gangs makes money hand over fist. They are known to the police. They have at least 3 different houses where they keep their stash. This means that for the police to do a raid, they would need warrants on all 3 properties and dozens of officers to carry out the raids. They will never get the warrants, and do not have the resources. The gang knows this.

Dealing cannabis involves little risk of prison (esp to under 18s) and large financial rewards for those able to organise protection. Unlike heroin and coke, the supply comes from local cannabis farms and is fragmented - so the gangs supplying it to customers are small and defined by territory. The violence comes from fighting over territory which is really fighting over money.

By contrast, no-one gets murdered for supplying alcohol (although increasing taxes on booze will make the market more profitable to organised crime)

Dr Smith, london,

One of the problems that has always struck me is the hypocrisy of politicians. Either "I tried but didn't inhale" or "I tried but I didn't like it". Fine, but manifestly large numbers of people (not myself though) do enjoy taking drugs, and it might be helpful to have policy at least influenced by that fact. Any policy based around "drugs are bad, OK?" which tries to target people who clearly think drugs are good is doomed to failure and ridicule.

John Scott, London,

One of the most sensible articles i've read in a long time.

Galen Moore, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

I think any right thinking person would agree that the current policy is not working. Also, there is not a magic solution which pleases everyone. However, legalisation would be a significant change to help against violence, drug wars, prison overcrowding and releasing police resources for more appropriate crimes.

Of course, there will be more users and more problem users but society would be better able to treat them and at least they won't be stealing and committing crimes to fund expensive habits.

Until we see the current illegal drugs as no different to their currently legal brother and sister we will not understand the way to treat them all is with the same policy, and as we have seen all too clearly, the policy of prohibition does not work.

And as has been rightly pointed out, the damage and cost to society in terms of cigarette treatment and deaths, and alcohol related treatment, violence, drink driving and deaths is considerably more than that related to illegal drug use.

simon, valencia,

Please keep writing articles such as this. Well done

The people that jump up and down and claim a moral right to protect soceity from the ills that they see are blind to the fact they are causing them.

I do like Partick's example of university students being apathetic during a lecture. . . really. . universtity students apathetic to a visiting lecturer? i think the biggest issues was that he was surprised by this!

Howard, Tokyo,

The 'fight the good fight' brigade will shoot this idea to pieces. They are the same people who are convinced that capital punishment works. So you see however a good suggestion this is ( and to me it makes perfect sense) there is no chance of persuading these types to change their minds.

I urge you to keep writing articles like this hoping that one day we will rid the streets of dangerous thugs ( who have too much money) and let people contribute for their sins to society (via tax) rather than having to pay back to society because they were caught with 20 quids worth of narcotics!

Billy, Bangkok, THailand

Is there international empirical evidence that legalisation of drugs is beneficial to society? Switzerland and The Netherlands have allowed a degree of legalisation but reduced that degree over time,apparently.

In China before the revolution, legalised opium smoking seems to have caused severe social problems .

When Malcolm Muggeridge was on a lecture tour in Egypt,he noticed that many university students were very apathetic from smoking hashish.

When the Shah of Iran came to power,he undertook major public programmes to eradicate addiction to heroin,including mass imprisonment.

Even if these examples could be used to provide empirical evidence of the risks of legalisation,that would not necessarily prove the case for making drugs illegal.

patrick slattery, Dublin, Ireland