How about speeding then, or is it only some laws worth cracking down on, ie its makes then money from speeding!!!

"Door staff at pubs and clubs would also be told not to call police when they catch someone carrying drugs for personal use. Instead, staff will be asked to store them in sealed containers until they could be collected at a later date by officers. "

And the band played believe it if you like!

Hmmm Somehow I cant see the doorman thing and collecting drugs working out.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only person who can instruct the police not to report or arrest where that is the norm is the Lord Advocate. The police have no power under Scots Law to "tolerate" or turn a blind eye as they see fit. That was one of the rocks on which the Prostitution issue foundered when the former Deputy Chief Constable tried to use more power than he had, and it is the same here.....rightly so. The police should not be in a position to pick and choose which laws they enforce and which they don't, albeit there may be operational priorities.

How much heroin ect is minor drug possesion !!!
Now the pushers have a licence to carry small amounts to sell !!
Cannot beleive this.

Spectacular, another Lothian and Borders Police own goal

Common sense prevails. A step in the right direction.

1.
I think speed and crack will still be ilegal,just say know.

" excuse me officer, can you please pass me those skins ta"............

Unbelieveable.

So basically there are now varying degree's of what is considered to be illegal?

The law is the law and if you are caught possessing an ILLEGAL substance, you should be prosecuted.

Its not a 'pragmatic' approach. Its a cop out on behalf of everyone involved and just proves the fact that the legal system cannot be arsed to fight the war on drugs.

An unbelievable scheme. Princes Street : Europes only open air shooting gallery.

Craig51 is on the right track here. Lets have the police publicly draw up a whole list of offences which they are now willing to either ignore or at least pay very little heed to. So don't bother reporting any minor vandalism, minor theft, minor assault or minor racism. If it's not worth *their* effort then it's certainly *not* worth your phone call.

How long until the streets are only walked by knife-wielding drug-carrying neds, safe as they are from the attentions of the police ... who are devoting their precious resources to what and where exactly ???

Obviously this policeman has not been to London where such a scheme was in place, which led to an out of control situation. So much so police are now implementing a zero tolerance approach to any possesion offences in central areas of the capital

Its a good idea in my opinion!

nobody gets prosecuted for possession. it's a waste of police time. i'd rather they were dealing with the knife weilding ned than busting some guy for a joint.

"Chiefs say the move would cut the amount of patrol time officers lose processing minor drugs arrests"

We recently watched a couple of intrepid crime fighters spend half an hour of their shift tackling a cyclist who had cycled all of 10 metres the wrong way down possibly the shortest one-way street in Edinburgh. Now that all other crime has been eradicated, this is an excellent way for the police to get through their shift. Coupled with the time spent filling in a report when they got back to the station and the time spent on this "crime" by the procurator fiscal's office, this has to be money well spent. Don't worry car drivers, we'll soon stamp out the bicycle. And the pedestrians are next!

#15

The problem is, is the guy with the joint, pill, syringe, etc, going out on other occassion's armed with a knife and robbing people or their homes, to feed his dirty little addiction?

People involved in drugs may be involved in other crimes, and by showing tolerance to them is sending out the totally wrong message.

Its already not worth reporting minor offences,when my home was robbed I was informed that the responce time was up to 4 hours.bet the Chief did'nt wait that long when they robbed his home the other month,mind you they did'nt ask people in the street if they saw or heard any thing as they did on the Chiefs break in either.What will the next step be,you can carry a knife as long as it only has a small blade and a small caliber gun is allowed too

So I can sit in the pub snorting whatever and if I am not discrete it will be taken away from me. But if I try to light up a cigarette the full force of the law will descend on me.

The council want to curb cheap booze because it makes people out of control and dangerous. But the police want to let them do drugs, as long as they're quiet about it.

Let's get some perspective people please.

Strangely I don't remember any of these senior police officers standing for election last May.

A Scottish Government spokesman maintained that cracking down on drug possession remained official policy.

That's the policy and they don't have the powers to change it. If the city centre becomes a junkies paradise we'll know who to blame.

There are a number of areas of Edinburgh where , to all intents and purposes , there is already a drugs amnesty on the streets. Go and have a walk around those places and tell me its a good idea to send the city centre down the same route.

Absolutely shocking.

"Police chiefs want to free up more time for officers to patrol Edinburgh's busiest area rather than dealing with cases of minor possession. "

Translates as "hide away in the station and eat pies, while letting the call centre screen calls."

#17 cynicaltalk - you cant compare joints and pills with syringes and robbery, totally different world.

I have some sympathy for the police in this situation but the cure is not to stop arresting people it's for every sworn constable to park him/herself on the Chief Constable's doormat (and the same in every force in Scotland) and tell their Leader to pass the message to the politicians that they can take all their effin' paperwork and targets and stick them where the sun don't shine.
Then perhaps we can start to get back to proper policing -- i.e. stopping people from breaking the law and nicking those who do.
And #23 -- yes, you bloody well can. Most of the murders committed by the nutters who have been "released because they're not a threat ..." etc, etc. are schizos made that way through smoking large quantities of hash.
Alcohol and tobacco have been around too long to do much about them now but that's no reason to let every other (illegal) drug user get away with it.
Time to crack down on the users.

It is clear the public have no concept of how much time is used up by dealing with minor drug offences. For the police to report a person with one ecstasy tablet found in their possession in a club in the city centre at the weekend means- 2 officers attending (no longer available to attend any other call) Take the person to a police station (which believe it or not could be Dalkeith or Livingston if all cells are full in Edinburgh) and if there is no delay because of a queue, putting them through the system (rights have to be protected and that takes time). Place the person in a cell. Test the tablet. Return to the club to take statements (have to have the evidence). Return to the station to interview the person, verify the persons address (perhaps by having officers elsewhere in the city or another force if they live out with, to go to the home address) so that force is now down by two officers.
Charging the person and releasing them. Then putting the recovered tablet in safe storage (providing an audit trail takes time). Then submitting a crime report. Then returning to patrolling the streets for what is left of the remainder of the shift. Perhaps having to immediately go through the exact same process again for another tablet or small piece of cannabis. (Meanwhile you have phoned the police and are now fuming that the police have not responded to your call. They have not responded because there is nobody to go because they are dealing with such items as an ecstasy tablet)
The next day one officer is no longer available to go to calls because the report to the fiscal needs to be written. If it were possible to condense the process that needs completed into one day and there was cell space in Edinburgh and no queues with the clock starting at midnight. You would have the whole process completed for this one tablet at 07.00am. Well worth it, I am sure you will agree? Tomorrow I’ll tell you about time wasted going to court!

#4 - The police do have discretion, except in serious cases, whether to pursue them or not. This applies to all offences not just drugs. Speeding is different because they make money from it. All drugs should be leglaised and then millions would be saved in enforecement costs.

#25 But the Police still do not have the power, any power, to announce or decide officially that they will not enforce a particular crime or offence. That power lies only with the Crown and the creation of zones of "tolerance" is ultra vires.
That is how it should be because the police should never have the ability to do that unchecked. Its why we have people like the Lord Advocate, Fiscals etc. etc..
I sympathise with the paperwork problem but that is a symptom of the illness not the cause. Plenty other matters take a great deal of paperwork but are still enforced because they affect the quality of life of ordinary citizens, and so does this.
Bet the Chief Constable didn't know about this before it went public!

#26 Wrong, they may have operational discretion but not over an area wide policy as this is.

Perhaps the Leith prostitutes and kerb crawlers should relocate onto Princes St in the safe knowledge that Insp Gilhooley won't bother his arse to deal with them either.

Ridiculous. It has been shown quite convincingly that if you want to lower crime you have to adopt a zero-tolerance approach.

Lots of places in Edinburgh you can walk around smoking a joint and nobody bats an eyelid

Police stopped arresting people for possesion of small amount of drugs in Edinburgh a long time ago, difference is now they are trying to make it 'official'

#24 yada - No you cant. Pure and simple.

People with mental health problems, "schizos" as you offensively call them, have NOT been made that way through "smoking large quantities of hash"! Yes, it has been proved to exacerbate conditions, and I do not condone its use here in the slightest. As I stated before, possessing small quantities of certain drugs is not in the same league as “murderers”, “syringes”, “knives” “robberies” and “schizos”, and if you cant see this then you must break free from your insular life and see the real world - Ask some of your work colleagues, family, friends, doctor, anyone. Its not all smack dens and crack addicts.

#31 Please try to understand that the police are not complaining! This idea is to try to have more police available dealing with more serious things. The public are the ones complaining there are no police available when they call.
The scenario I gave is ONE reason for this.

People have their own idea of what should get priority.
At the moment vast amount of time is spent going through the process of reporting people. T's have to be crossed and I's dotted.
Spending all this police time AND THEN the fiscal decides to not proceed or gives a written warning.
So to repeat the police will continue to do their job and the only people who will suffer is you.

Your call is important to us, please hold while we try to connect you!

A good move.

Why waste time punishing recreational users of E, speed, coke. More time can be focused on more serious crimes like dealers, "knife weilding neds" lol, robberies, assaults.

Take it further and legalise, tax and control it. Cut out the dealers and helps prevent your recreational user being exposed to the criminal circle.

#36 You forgot to mention you are still waiting on them coming to your house in response to a call you made months ago.

#36 GT
Even I would be proud of that effort. 10/10

A sensible pragmatic move as a step towards complete decriminalisation.

But why confiscate people's drugs? If the police want a wee bit of personal they should pay for them like everyone else.

Quite right. A good move.

One day we'll see sense and legalise the lot.

Definitely a good idea. Sure exposes the narrow minded amongst us too!

Police will next be told not to prosecute for minor rapes and peadophilia, this stinks, these laws are there fopr a reason and it is the Police duty to enforce them. and until they are removed as being laws they should do so.

This just gives succour to those such as peadohpiles who will klep pushing until they get their way.

it is sickening .

I had no idea I shared my city with so many narrow minded and almost offensively ignorant people.
Criminalising people for minor and personal drug use does not help this society. The majority of people I know partake on occassion and they also manage to hold down jobs, pay mortgages, vote, volunteer, give to charity etc etc etc. They are NORMAL!!!!! Shock horror I know for some of you. You seem to think people who indulge in anything other than a nice wee nip of Scotch are the scum of the earth. Guess what? Most aren't. Seriously, so many of you people need to get a life. The postings on this site make me sick to my stomach sometimes.

I suppose if the police find 20 Marboro on your person they'll throw you in Saughton.

Surely the solution is to speed up the process at the custody facilitiesand get the cops back on the street. James (1) seems to think it too unimportant for him to deal with. I wonder what his degree is in? What we need is hard and fast policing with zero tolerance. And senior officers with the desire and will to make it work. Fat Chance!

#44 jenni - Couldnt agree more!

#43 sanity is relative - comparing peadophilia to recreational drugs...??? read post 44 you muppet!

#43, you must have a strange moral sense if you equate someone puffing an occasional joint with rape and paedophilia.

Bottom line not enough cops on the streets .sytems in place that make arrests- to- court more time consuming.not enough support from the many depts who are supposed to help officers.

44, I have seen peadophiles reported that "partake on occassion and they also manage to hold down jobs, pay mortgages, vote, volunteer, give to charity etc etc etc."

The point is the LAW is decided by Governments NOT the POLICE.

48, rapists and paedos use drugs ........... tolls of their trade

#50 Spot on!

#50, do you really mean that you think all laws are of equal importance? Don't you realise that some things are always wrong (e.g. murder, rape, assault, etc) and some things are wrong merely because there's a law against them (pubs serving drinks after 10pm until the licensing laws were changed)?

The correct response to silly laws is not to enforce them or, better, to scrap them.

Good Idea but from the wrong place.

The ONLY way that drugs can be legalised is by government along with the increased health funding and support that would need to be put in place at the same time.

I wonder if there is a politician in the background somewhere suggesting policies that will make the Scottish Office 'look good' If less people are charged for possession then the drugs crime statistics will go down - and the Government anti-drugs policies will appear to be working!

Cynical - moi?

47,

Why do you resort to abuse? my point is simple, Police should enforce the law, they can suggest changes through the proper channels as can we all, but to let lawbreakers away with an obvious crime is unacceptable.

My flat was robbed by a gang of junkies, TV gone PC gone, laptop gone, pictures of family smashed, urine faeces all over bedroom, wife terrified to stay there anymore, police said and i quote, "There is less that 5% chance of you getting any of this back, make a list for your insurance company."

I wished that day I had been in the USA and that I had come in on the scum doing what they did and I sure as h*** would have used my PTC to its fullest effect.

53, if the law is on the books it has equal importance yes.

This very much sounds like a cop who has suddenly got the ear of the media and has blabbered far too much without ever having thought of the consequences.
#44 Whether you like it or not, like #4 says, it is not a matter for the Police to decide to have an area where they will not report people to the Procurator Fiscal for committing an offence. They have no power at all to do that. Only the Lord Advocate can do that or a change in the law through Parliament, not a cop simply deciding. Whether or not the law should be changed is a totally different argument altogether.
I really fear for our City if this is brought into practice. What is the Chief Constable Strang saying? Does he know about this?

Are you honestly equating a paedophile with someone who occasionally indulges in a wee something something? You poor sad deluded souls.

54 agreed ..................................... of course it is a numbers game.

#53, so you believe that murdering someone and selling alcohol before 12.30 on Sunday are equally important?

many of you seem to neglect the background to the drugs world, money laundering, terrorism funding, sex trade abuses, theft, violence ........... not to mention the ongoing medical issues ........... far to simple to say let them smoke occasionally ...........

#55, wouldn't it be better if the police, rather than wasting their time with petty drug offences, were able to devote more time to solving serious crimes like the burglary of your flat?

And hasn't it occurred to you that if drugs were legalised and hard drugs were available on prescription, junkies wouldn't need to burgle flats anyway?

#61, the background you describe stems from the fact that drugs are illegal. Legalise them and control their use, and most of the crime would disappear.

#46 As I said and your are proof positive that the public do not know how long it takes to deal with someone who is arrested. The same amount of time is taken for shoplifting, assault, drink driving and drug possession.
Your speed up the process comment is like telling an athlete to run faster or footballer to score more goals. Easy to say hard to achieve.
You have rights and need to be given them. To speed up the process would mean not giving you your rights. Do you want this?
Dealing with drugs is part of the job and not a problem. From the publics point of view it becomes a problem when they are assaulted by a drunk at the taxi rank and there are no officers to deal with it. There is not an endless supply of police officers. A new box is not opened when the others are all in use.

62 63 why don't you try reading what I wrote.......... instead of the sarcastic .......

"And hasn't it occurred to you that if drugs were legalised and hard drugs were available on prescription, junkies wouldn't need to burgle flats anyway?"

you could have said you agread with my

"The point is the LAW is decided by Governments NOT the POLICE"

and realised that is what I was saying already

#61

Fair enough police should uphold the law, but the point trying to be made here is that it is time for a change. The law has changed over the years and will continue to do so.

One more thing. Trying to draw comparisons between peodos and recreational drug users is pretty daft.

Surely it would be better to cut all the procedures and paperwork so that arresting officers can get back on the street quicker? It sends out entirely the wrong signal. You can arrested for sitting with a can of Special Brew at Hunter Square but not for possession of heroin? Time to re-assess that one I think.

Urban, you seem to be missing the point that if the law needs changed then policians do that. Its not up to the Police to make up the law or to dispense with laws as they go along. That's a fundamental principle in law.
A Tolerance Zone for drug use, eh? The Tolerance Zone for prostoitutes failed because it was against the law, and so is this. Interesting, though, that the promoter of the Zone in Leith and a supporter of the idea of a cannabis cafe in Newhaven retired from the Police after they both failed and is now the Drugs and Alcohol Tsar for Edinburgh. Mmmmmm, interesting juxtaposition.
I wonder if Margo cares to comment in her column in Wednesday's EN.

by the way legalised and taxed?? if the dealers can produce it cheaper then there still will be an issue after all ciggies from EU are easily found in Edinburgh, handguns can be bought in the city ............

#65, the law on drugs is obviously silly - so silly that no sensible policeman should waste his/her time on it, any more than before 1980 they should have devoted their resources to trying to catch adult men in bed together in the privacy of their own houses.

Our Scottish Government has no power over drugs laws. The London Government won't reform drugs laws because of the silly puritanism of Middle England. But the drugs laws are daft nonetheless, and IMO we do a service to common sense by disobeying them, just as the police do by not enforcing them.

#69, how could the dealers provide hard drugs cheaper if they were available to addicts on prescription, which would cost them nothing?

#68, I'm totally in favour of a tolerance zone for prostitutes, whether legal or not. Indeed, I believe that prostitution should be legalised and controlled, for the sake of the health and safety of the sex workers.

Silly laws simply bring the law into disrepute.

#73 You should change your name from Urban Guerilla to Urban Anarchist because anarchy is the result of what you propose. Ignore the laws of the land that you choose.......... presumably until you are a victim.
James(1) After many years in the Police, I can with some degree of authority say that there are ways, many of them, to speed up the custody process and you know it.

#73, how could I be a 'victim' of someone puffing a joint in the street? It's a victimless crime - and it shouldn't be a crime at all.

The police should concentrate on stopping crimes that harm other people.

#75 You clearly fail to understand the drugs world of Edinburgh and Scotland, where drugs come from and where the money goes with that comment. Anyway, perhaps if you ignore the law, you may get to tie up some of James(1)'s time.

Sanity - Sorry, but you are simply not understanding. I am sorry that you were burgled, its sounds awful and wish you the best.

However, most people who carry and use illegal drugs are not junkies, and do not resort to crime and violence to fund something that is not an addiction. Criminalising people for using/possessing small quantities is not the reason that such horrendous crimes like the ones against you and your wife happen.

#75, the problem of the drugs world is that drugs are illegal. If all drugs were legalised, and if the harder ones were available to addicts free of charge on prescription, then drugs-related crime would vanish. A pity we're too puritanical to see what is obvious common sense!

What is a "small" quantity of drugs? How will officers be able to rapidly assess the quantity? Will addicts start carrying small sacrificial quantities that they can surrender to police so as to preserve their real stash? One can see addicts commuting to and from their stashes all day, only ever keeping small quantities on their persons.

Semi-legalisation of drugs has been tried elsewhere. It is a dunderheid's plan, that only a pothead could have devised, because the rules become abstract and murky, both for the police and the drug users. This leads to more tension and trouble than exists with clearcut laws. Legalise drugs entirely, with sales through government controlled outlets. The sale and use of certain dangerous drugs must be confined to government shooting galleries - i.e. clean, properly equipped clinics with medical supervision available. This will kill the illegal drugs trade. The failure of governments to act in this manner makes them complicit in the deaths of many people, most of them young.

#79, excellent post full of common sense. Thanks!

For god's sake! Drugs are ILLEGAL. If you are caught, you should be PUNISHED. What next - house breaking, assault, stabbings, murder? JAIL THE JUNKIES!!!

#81, you miss the point. Housebreakings, assault, stabbings, murders, etc. harm others.

Puffing a joint does not.

#82 - Just to clarify, then. You're suggesting ignoring laws, made by Government on behalf of all of us, that you don't agree with. Is that correct?

#73 Urban guerrilla: Yes, you are 100% right about prostitution too. As you will know the redoubtable Ms St Clair has tried for many years to get Parliament to see the necessity for legalising prostitution. Unfortunately the dishonorable members with their dishonorable members relish the excitement of indulging in the forbidden far too greatly to legalise it. Victorian hypocrisy lives on...

Meanwhile, many women are being subjected to horrific violence and health risks, most of them under the control of male-dominated drugs gangs and the like. Towns in the enlightened Netherlands have brothels run by municipalities, with regular medical and hygiene inspections, security guards, and freedom for the women to ply their trade without being beaten up by pimps. Furthermore they have access to support services if they are trying to break out of drug addiction, or have children to care for. And what is more, they pay taxes, just like anyone else.

In some matters the UK is still a barbaric, backward society, ruled by morons. Take note, Gordo!

#82, if they're silly and obviously unjust, then yes. For instance, I have gay friends who as consenting adults had sex together before 1980, which was then illegal and could have landed them in jail. I think they were right to disobey the law, because the law was silly and an unjustified infringement of personal freedom. If asked, I'd have done everything in my power to aid and abet them.

#83 Bill C: None other than Mahatma Gandhi did just that! If enough people disagree with laws that are obviously injurious, and the government does nothing about it - then yes, you should organise opposition and break the laws of idiots. It was done in India in the 1940s, it was done in the USA in the 1950s and 60s, it was done in South Africa in the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s. If the laws are patently unfair and unjust - go ahead, organise mass protests and break the damn things on a massive scale, so that the legal system is overwhelmed and must give way.

#84 No problem with legalising prostiution as you describe - it's the street prostitution that is the issue where 99% of the women in Leith (research has shown) do not wish to choose that way of life. And yes, Urban, they are victims of pimps, pushers and gang masters all who have their pound of flesh and the victims are then dumped - no support, no care, no way out of their habit. Victims of complacency.

#86 I can't see mass protest in support of a Drugs Tolerance Zone in the centre of our Capital, can you? Thanks for the history lesson but the comparisons are not valid.
#85 Some countries and cultures favour less control of drugs to us and some favour the abuse of children. If a number of people in this country wanted that, are you in favour?

#87, 88, legalise prostitution and you break the power of the pimps, pushers and gangmasters.

The abuse of children is obviously immoral and unjust, and I'm not in favour of it. Abusing children is wrong because it's wrong, not because there happens to be a law against it.

#90, wow - I'm terrified of passive smoking every time I walk in Princes Street Gardens. Much more scary than being mugged or having my house burgled.

And BTW I don't use illegal irrecreational drugs -because I've got no desire to, NOT because they're illegal.

Oh cmon , the police have been "PRIORITISING" for years.

Do none of you think anything happens until it gets printed here?

Excellent, abusing children is wrong but abusing street prostitutes is OK, then. In some countries, children are defined in different ways in the eyes of their laws. YOU say it is immoral and unjust but in some countries it isn't. If there was a sufficient groundswell of opinion to adopt that here, would you agree?
I agree with Caora Dubh on her brothels but not by abandoning the poor street prostitutes.
So Urban, on what do you base your vision of behaviour which is acceptable to all then? If you agree, it 's OK? If you don't, it's OK? Where does that leave society? That is why we have laws, to regulate and legitimise behaviours.

#93, laws are there to protect others, not to infringe harmless personal liberties and to create victimless crimes. Simple.

Sometimes there has to be a degree of arbitrariness - is someone a child at 15? At 16? At 18? This can be debated. But law and morality are not identical - if, say, it were legal in Scotland to have sex with children, it would still be immoral and unjust. Surely you would agree with this?

Finally, how on earth do you make out that I'm in favour of abusing street prostitutes? It's our silly laws that cause them to be abused.

Can't wait for reply. Thanks for discussion.

Most of the people commenting on this really have no idea about drugs. A lot more people than you think use drugs, A LOT MORE. The minority of them are problem addicts, the ones who are addicted to heroin or crack, who have to mug, steal, break in to houses to fund their habbit. The VAST MAJORITY of drug users, who use weed, ecstasy, cocaine, mushrooms, speed etc, DO NOT have addiction problems which cause crime. They go out (or stay in), have a good time and cause NOBODY ANY HARM WHATSOEVER.

You cannot compare joints, ecstasy etc with herion and crack 'junkies'. There are responsible drug users amongst students, doctors, nurses, lawers, managers, shop workers, mechanics, office workers, - well just about anyone.

Get your heads out of the sand and understand that the majoriity of drug users are responsible, normal, working, people who pose no threat to you or society. Stop criminalising people for having fun, while you sit there smoking your cigarettes or drinking a glass of wine, beer or spirits - they are drugs too.

Urban, you seem to always mention "someone puffing on a joint". If you read the article this does not only apply to the 'joint smoker'. It also applies to heroin and cocaine, which I presume will include crack cocaine. While someone puffing on a joint may not be alarming in this day and age, someone injecting heroin in a stair or taking crack cocaine in Princes St Gardens will be quite alarming to the majority of people.

This approach will also undermine the cops on the street as a junkie will no doubt try to rub the cops faces in it as they know that they will not be prosecuted.

If kids are playing football outside your house and you call the police to complain would you want them to come as soon as they could?
Would you also want police to deal with all persons in possession of drugs to the full extent of the law?
Which is more important? Annoyance by youths or drug possession?
Then why would you complain when the police take ages to respond to your call?

Charging someone at the club with the offence would save a HUGE amount of police time.

Unfortunately at present this is not allowed but this new proposal if it were permitted would go a long way to having officers back on the streets. From potentially tying up officers for 7 hours. You would reduce this time by at least 4 hours. That is just for one drug possession call.
They still get reported for the offence.

#97, if heroin and crack cocaine were legalised and controlled (see the earlier post about 'shooting galleries'), there wouldn't be a need for people to behave in this way.

But even if they did, I can cope with being 'alarmed' but not harmed, much more easily than with the real crimes that police would be freed up to investigate by not having to bother with people shooting up, etc.

And why *should* junkies on the street be prosecuted? Who are they harming, if they're not threatening people or trying to rob or attack them?

Shooting gallaries would attract people who would want to sell drugs ie; a place where lots of drug addicts congregate. There is a good chance that people who go to the shooting galleries would be targetted by dealers who wanted the money which they would lose if things were legalised. I think that drug users would be bullied into buying there drugs regardless if they were available on prescription. Free drugs on the NHS would cost the country millions and it would only get worse!

Junkie's using needles in parks, on buses... children could get harmed. Crack cocaine makes people very unpredictable... you could quite easily be harmed.

#100, the point is that drugs would not be sold at the 'shooting galleries'. They would be available, free, on prescription. No dealers, no money changing hands, and hence no drugs-related crime.

Free drugs on the NHS would be a cheap price to pay to get rid of the scourge of drugs-related crime. I'm all in favour of the idea.

If an adict woke up in the morning and went to collect his prescription i'm pretty sure that he/she would head to the first place possible to take their 'medication'. They would be suffering withdrawls and would want to take their medication as soon as possible. They would not want to walk to the next shotting galarie.

The drug dealers would also want money that they no longer have, as they may be living beyond their means.

I'm not sure it would. Most drug addicts would want as much of their drug as possible and would claim they took a lot more than they do. Also the user tends to have to continually 'up' his dosage as the drug no longer has the desired effect. This then results in tax payer touting the ever increasing NHS bill for the drug user to swan about not paying taxes, safe in the knowledge that they are in their shooting gallerie.

Where would you put a shooting gallerie? Would you want one next to where you live? Will we put it in the middle of Edinburgh for the tourists to visit? If it's in a hidden away place will the users not complain about the location?

Too many problems with it I think.

I don't think there are too many problems. There are far more problems involved in keeping drugs illegal!

And I'd far rather have a shooting gallery next to where I live, than have my house broken into by addicts needing money to buy a fix from dealers.

Where is the first place that they'll go to get money when their prescription is not enough and the doctor won't 'up' the doseage and they need to go to a dealer... right into the house next to the shooting gallarie.

If things did become legal then there would still be a black market. The NHS could not just keep feeding addicts drugs free of charge. Plus, doctors would not be able to give out excessive amounts of drugs for fear of someone overdosing. This would then put the black market prices up and could result in more break ins occurring as the dealers would know that the people coming to them would be desparate.

Afghanistan and Columbia would become more lucrative than Iraq.

An outbreak of common sense? Someone better check the water supply.

Prohibition didn't work with alcohol and it's never worked with drugs either, not even where they've hanged drug users. In Britain we can't even prevent drug use in prisons and we've got people there locked down 23 out of every 24 hours and under constant watch the rest.

We'd be better legalising it and using the tax from that to fund healthcare for those addicted enough to get into trouble.

Of course what's being suggested here will still leave drugs, and drug profits, in the hands of criminal gangs. Hopefully it's just a stopping point in a journey towards a more sane destination.

If the police already turn a blind eye to pubs illegally serving alcohol to drunks whats the all fuss about??

#105 The majority of people who use heroin and crack cocaine do not have jobs. How are they going to pay for these 'legal drugs'.

I can understand those that are professionals who use the drugs at weekends will be able to afford this and won't nessecarily commit crime to finance them using them, but heroin and crack cocaine is a different story.

SO YOU PUT HERION ON PRESCRIPTION ............ is that not state murder as the dose rate would have to be increased until the adict was no longer functioning, ............. do you advocate a no level in the blood to drive or what?

Completely logical and sensical approach which should be extended right across our towns and villages. Drug abuse is a problem but so is alcoholism and even nicotine addiction. By allowing such a common sense approach to drug use as opposed to drug abuse the police will be able to concentrate on more pressing matters...

#109... Nicotine addiction and crime tend not to go hand in hand... not heard of a nicotine related crime. Alcohol is a problem, but nicotine... and that's coming from a non smoker!!!

#105, Fernando Poo,

Just interested but where did they hang drug users? Wherever it was I can't believe it didn't have a deterrent effect.

#108 Sanity,

In countries like Switzerland where people are put on heroin by prescription, the doses are not usually increased. In fact, they are usually reduced with the users leading a normal working life, unhindered by the need to steal to feed their habit.

#110 Eckles....that's because nicotine isn't illegal. Addicts can walk to the shop and buy it, no organised crime gangs, with guns and violence, control the nicotine market. Nicotine can be just as addictive as heroin.

Herion and cocaine used to be legal, way back in the 1900s. There was no crime associated with it.

Fact: Drugs being illegal cause crime - not the drugs themselves.

#112 Adam,

Good point but you missed out the most important part of it. Nicotine addiction will cost you around £5 to £10 a day, even at the governments inflated prices whereas heroin addiction will cost you around 4 times that, largely as a result of it being illegal.

Let's face they've been allowed it at gorgie for years why not princess street.

#115 Chairman Gordon,

Where exactly does it say in his comment that he thinks legalising drugs will eliminate crime?

And the Netherlands have not legalised drugs, only marijuana as far as I know.

Citizens of Edinburgh do not worry as a Police Officer working in Edinburgh I will NEVER EVER LET anyone off with having drugs no matter how small the amount. My belief is no matter how small the drugs we catch on them they were at one stage part of a very large consignment. Where will it end it worked in New York zero tolerance. Maybe the bosses at L & B should look at the new very expensive Police logo what's the point.

#117

Your senior officers issue you with instructions to confsicate but not arrest people for possessing a small amount of drugs but you do the opposite. Just interested but how does that work?

The government have legalised two drugs where they make money cigarettes and alcohol and look at the problems those two have caused in money and health etc., etc. Legalising drugs is not the answer can you imagine the first court case from a junkie with a lawyer trying to screw the legal aid system even more because 'his client' was given heroin that was 18% pure for the state controlled pharmacy and he overdosed because he was used to 14%. Personally anyone caught dealing in drugs should be hung from a lamp post on the royal mile, it might not solve the problem immedaitely but they wont be turning up and wasting court time - time and time again.

The great thing about being a Police Officer in this country in that we have a power of discretion - if I charged someone with a crime in this country it is upto the Procurator Fiscal to decide whether that person with be formally charged not my supervisors. We may get instructions but the decision is mine not theirs, sitting in their seats in their comfortable offices - its the paperwork that kills everything

3 days to boycott the scotsman day.

Fri 30 november boycott the scotsman forums

any poster failing to adhere to the boycott on fri 30th novemeber will themselves be boycotted.

it.gets.more.crazier.inscotland.every.day

#116 : Marijuana isn't legal in the Netherlands. They're still signatories to international drug treaties. It's simply that small amounts of cannabis are tolerated in certain cafes.

#123,

Thanks for that. I was just waiting for someone to pick me up on that one.

You know the expression though...if it look like a dog, barks like a dog, smells like a dog.....

In my experience, there was masses of cannabis available in nearly all those cafes and people could smoke and eat the stuff in virtually every bar as well.

But thanks again, because your point only highlights the nonsensical point being made by Chairman Gordon.

Six Million Dollar Geezer, when you've finished d!cking about with people smoking a joint can you try and trace the drunk guy who assaulted me 8 years ago and bit off part of my ear? The police know who he is, but when he ddin't turn up to court the police haven't bothered to find him.

#123 have you actually been to the netherlands ?

Netherlands haven't legalised drugs, marijuana/weed/joints are just tolerated. People don't have to go to dodgy dealers to buy weed (which doesn't make people rob, steal or mug - just in case you didn't know that), who may entince them to try other 'harder' drugs.

Illegal drugs are often labelled as 'controlled drugs' - but the funny thing is, they are the most uncontrolled things ever! You have people making them in illegal labs, idiots with guns selling them, gangs having 'turf wars' to keep their market area. Obviously this is not the image of all drug dealers. I've known many drug dealers, who if you didn't know they sold drugs, you would think they are an 'upstanding member of society'.

It's time to get rid of all this stereotypical nonsence about drugs, and see the REAL picture. Drug users are persecuted for absolutely NOTHING. And those who have problems with drugs need HELP not jail. Jail quite frankly makes the problems worse. Do you advocate putting alchoholics in jail, simply because they got caught with a bottle of vodka?

This thread wonderfully illustrates the power of prejudice over common sense.

Look for the best way to reduce the sort of crime that harms others (rather than being a crime just because there's a law against it, like selling alcohol before 12.30pm on Sundays) and then act on it in order to bring about a better, safer society for all.

IMO that would be through the legalisation and control of drugs.

#127,

Nice post.

The only thing I've ever heard from politicians about drugs is they're bad because of the damage they do to people. Well, even if you accept that sweeping statement as accurate in all cases, they are basically saying they are going to criminalise and prosecute people for harming themselves. Where's the logic in that.

Leaving aside alcohol and tobacco, that same logic means you should prosecute people who self harm, try to commit suicide or practise dangerous sports.

What about ethical crime reporting. If someone reports a crime to the Police they HAVE to deal with it. Also offences under bthe misuse of drugs act is a priority for Lothian and Borders Police so how can they ignore any of it

Though i'm sure this will be an unpopular view, the proposal to ensure better police time must be good one. It is already a regular criticism of the police force that too much time is spent doing paperwork and not enough time getting 'the bad guys'. If someone is caught smoking a joint, the police have to take him into the station, fill a bunch of forms, and charge him for 'possession'. is this 'really' useful? I agree with the police chiefs idea of giving the police some discretion, not saying they let drug 'gangsters' get away, but give the officers the choice. If shows the difference between a guy smoking a joint and a gang having a 'druglab', frankly it is nice to see the head of lothian police having a pragmatic and sensible view of drugs. It is rather old to have these zero tolerance fanatics raving on their high horse about how drugs should be 'stamped out' when they'll quite easily sit at home on a friday night and tank back a couple bottles of vino because thats socially acceptable.
It is particularly sad to see the massive u-turn the govenrment has taken on cannabis. If my memory serves me right, in 1997 labour raised the debate on downgrading it to class C. But now with all this 'supa skunk' scandals! dominating the news the debate has effectively reversed! a shame, maybe bill hicks 'relentless' should be mandatory in school across the land and soon we'll be Holland of the north. a wishful prayer i feel.