enhanced by
Bookmark:
He said: "If someone is caught with £2 of a drug, is arresting the person the best use of police time?
Yes.
War on drugs, another example of labour being all mouth and no action.
Fact is illegal drugs are readily available in every city in Scotland.
As for the police...... their job is to uphold the law not try and change it.
"War on drugs, another example of labour being all mouth and no action."
How's that, the_?
Gnasher do you think the police would even suggested this if labours war on drugs had been even a minimal success ?
Labour promised to address illegal drugs and failed, even to the extent of flip flopping around over cannabis because they couldn't make their minds up.
We are left with is the problem of drugs , and the problems which cause people to take drugs.
The Supreme Leader, Broon and the Grey Man of Abbotsford are fatally wounded.
Go soon, and go quickly, gentlemen.
You've had 10 years to learn your trade and you've failed. Failed big time.
"The Police" didn't suggest this. One particular cop, at an internal seminar, suggested it.
It's his opinion, not the view of the constabulary. I disagree with him on the grounds that coppers' discretion shouldn't go so far as to ignore laws agreed by a democratically elected Parliament. Most cops understand this and do their jobs, as, Im sure, will Inspector Gilhooley, who may well be a bit peeved that his private thoughts have made it int the papers.
As for as the Labour Party is concerned, I don't think anyone there was so daft as to promise to eliminate the possession and use of illegal drugs, which is what I imagine the_ means by the word "address". But this is nothing to do with the Labour Party and I don't see how bringing party politics into it helps in any way since all mainstream parties profess similar approaches and policies.
hire.more.cops
Just legalise the drugs and let the police catch real criminals.
Better still - nationalise the supply of drugs then it will immediately stop being profitable.
#9 Yeah policy of the previous administrations have so clearly failed. It would be nice to see the problem being addressed in a new way altogether.
But back to the police whose suggestion this was, you have to ask why they have to fill out so many forms just because someone thought it was ok to wander about with drugs in their pocket.
The finger is once again pointing straight at previous labour administration.
Or ask why they are so undermanned they are struggling to enforce laws which the politicians declare "zero tolerance".
The finger points guess where? Previous labour administration tightening budgets while mouthing off what a good job they were doing.
It is impossible to discuss this entire topic without the previous adminstrations failings being mentioned. They are directly responsible after all for the mess we are in today.
The police would rather go after gamekeepers and middle class women who have been caught speeding.
Most of these Chief Constables in the UK aren't up to it and should be sacked.
Lunatics running the asylum.
Lets try zero tolerance (as they did in New York). If you do something get caught you get done, introduce more rapid ways of processing people, example retired plods in the process area to cover routine part and the ability to fill in a brief report electronically
Will they be allowed to have little booths, like the other temporary merchants do at the sidewalk sales?
No, not EVEN funny.
This idea is hideous!
Seems a sensible idea, but why in the centre of Edinburgh. Why not out in the boondocks somewhere, get rid of the scruff out of the town centre. Zero tolerance town centre, automatic 12 months in jail. Do your own thing somewhere else, no police, no ambulances, make a mistake and your dead.
Zero tolerance, night and weekend courts and closure of clubs and pubs where drugs are dealt / used might be the way forward.
And don't forget Scotland's drug of choice - alcohol.
14 - a New Town resident writes....
Where can you buy "£2 of a drug" ????
You cannot even buy a pint of beer for £2!!!!!
"An inspector responsible for policing the city centre suggested that officers should stop arresting people caught carrying small amounts of drugs to increase the amount of officers available to carry out street patrols in Scotland's capital"
GRAMMAR!
Should be the number of officers!
# Its not worth a police Officers time to charge for a small qantite of drugs, all the paper work, and yes they should have an area for drug addicts where they can be supplied with clean needles to stop the risk of Hep C, They have a street in Vancouver Canada called hasting st even outside police station where they do drugs buy and sell, A lot of these people are addicted they need help why cant we help them.
Someone with £2 worth of drugs gets free but drop a 25p cigarette end and your fined £60.... It can only happen in this crazy place.
Murder someone and get 5years less time for good behaviour. Theft of money....10years?
Cockeyed!
How about cutting the paperwork and admin that goes along with arresting people for drug offense.
Speed the process up and crack down hard on offenders.
The law is the law - you can't just say "people aree breaking the law and it's too much of an effort to punish them for it."
And if the government weren't so good at spending money on sending all those little offenders on holdiays and training schemes they might have money for the police and prisons.
FOLLOW US ON THE BOYCOTT OF THE SCOTSMAN ON THE 30TH NOV
#16 RBNR - "The only sensible way ahead is to sell drugs through monitoring NHS clinics, and heavily punish any other sources."
Unfortunately, if there were legal sales of drugs then it would only need some large illegal supplier to undercut the price (and they would) and the clean source will be ignored by the users. If we are seriously going to help those who are addicted then the only way to tackle the problem is by provision of drugs and to make the provision free to those who are willing to undergo treatment and rehab for drug use - they would have to agree to come "off the streets" and be banged up, if you like, in rehab until their addiction - and it's subsequent side-issues is dealt with fully. This should include an option for people to come off "soft" drugs like cannabis and "social" drugs like nicotine and alcohol.
I fully agree with you about the punishment of other sources - right down to having a policy of immediate confiscation of all assets other than those that the pusher could prove were not the product of illegal activity.
It's a tough problem and needs a tough solution. Unfortunately, we would have to spend serious money to provide refuge for those who want to come off addictive substances and our Government (Westminster and Scottish) seem to be "tough on crime, reluctant to open the wallet" and are content, instead, to simply talk a good game.
Look at the bigger picture, in afghanistan they wont burn the poppy fields because it would cause total hardship for the poor farmers, they have to find ways to allow them to support themselves and their families, other than producing heroin for the british market.Poor afghan farmers..........
There already is a "drugs tolerance zone" throughout Scotland - the drug in question is alcohol!
Have to laugh everytime i read this "sending out the wrong message" nonsense. Nobody listens. people do what they want and their descision to do so is based on what they see happening around them. If they saw all their mates who use recreational drugs dropping dead all around them like they are supposed to, then that would influence their judgment.
The drug laws are outdated and nonsensical in many cases. Recreational solvent inhalation is legal, as is the consumption of alcohol from the age of five. That shows how sensible and in tune with real life our laws are. However, until the Misuse of Drugs Act is reviewed and overhauled, the police have to enforce the laws, no matter how ridiculous they are. Hopefully at some point, politicians will take proper advice from the real experts in the field and amend the law accordingly. Until that day comes (and hopefully it will), the priority should be to reduce the amount of paperwork and time required to process teh offender through the system, and not to ignore the law as it stands.
Having said that, this appears to have been blown out of proportion by the media (as usual). From what I can see, this isn't a "plan" at all, and therefore there should be no panic about it. It was simply one idea among many to tackle the ineffective and top heavy legislation. There's nothing wrong with exploring all avenues when trying to find solutions to a problem.
Legalize them all, have them for sale at off-licenses. The Mafia, the Taleban and every small time pimp and dealer would lose their power base overnight. No government has ever been able to punish drugs out of existence; 'Just Say No' never worked.
Everyone in Britain is an expert in drugs and the problems they do and don't cause they have been on our streets for years. The nation have been self policing the problem for most of those years effectively. Theses so called experts and politicians who claim some sort of divine right to wield ineffectual plastic toffee hammers at the problem should just keep their noses out and their mouths shut and let the police deal with managing the problem.
The justice system is at fault causing the waste of police time. Implement fixed penalty on the spot fine (works for a speeding offence) of £250.00 for carrying small amounts. Failure to pay up to result in having to pay the full costs of a court action (£1000s). If no ID is being carried (credit card, drivers license, etc.) then this minority will need to be lifted and processed back at the station.
Get rid of the mountains of bumph that the police have to complete after each arrest/stop etc. and release them from the non-productive administrative paper-chase to chase criminals instead.I suspect that alcoholic liver damage is more of a threat to the individual and society than drugs - although both need a full but measured response.
Good post, yolanda @29. The law is indeed an ass. The sooner the drug laws get into step with reality the better.
When I was at school the punishment was not the belt, which invariable we got, it was the fear of others finding out about our "run in" with authority i.e. the schoolteacher in this case.
Yes. Nail the guy or girl with £2.00 of drugs and take them to court. Embarrass the hell out of them. Possibly make them lose their job over it. Hit them where it hurts.
In the long run, cut the demand for drugs and hurt the suppliers. If the law is broken, how can a P.C. decide not to uphold it? Come on..........
This is a very sensible suggestion but why not go the whole hog and leglaise all drug use. It would save millions on enforcement and free up our police and prisons. You would also be able to tax it and put the dealers out of business overnight.
No doubt Inspector Gilhooley will be rapidly moving to a nice desk job at Fettes where someone can keep an eye on him.
In Islamic countries, even liberalised countries like the UAE, there is a zero tolerance policy on drugs and there is a 'zero' problem. Perhaps we should look and learn!
25# by your logic we should have seen a massive increase in home brewing and illegal sales.
I can't follow why say small scale prostitution is illegal and to be policed heavily whilst small scale drug selling which is also illegal can be ignored.
Also drugs do not come into this country in small quantities and because of this fact it proves there is no such thing as a war against drugs going on.To supply the existing market must require large shipments and those behind these never seem to be caught, juts the tail end charlies get caught.
#34 - so laws should change to reflect what we are told is mass disobedience thereof?
Here's a thought: most people DON'T do drugs as defined by the MDA, therefore it is a lesser number than the majority of the population.
A small number of Muslims living in the UK deem it appropriate to murder their female relatives in the event that they exercise their right to choose what male companions thay have relationships with - this they call honour killing.
Most muslims in the UK DON'T deem such actions appropriate.
Therefore by your logic, we should legalise such murders because some people are doing illegal activities, making the law unsustainable.
Get knotted - the Police are there to enforce the law, not pick and choose where in the country they are going to apply a form of judicial apartheid.
(I use apartheid in the sense of what it was supposed to mean)
BTW, I see we're not being allowed to comment on the arrest in Sudan of the British teacher whose class named a teddy bear Muhammad. What price free speech, eh?
#44, yes indeed. I wonder why? (As if I didn't already know.... )
#43, murder is wrong because it's wrong.
Taking drugs is wrong only because there's a law against it, like selling alcohol before 12.30pm on Sundays. It isn't wrong in itself.
It's ridiculous to compare the two.
#46 no it isn't. The 'wrongness' is not the issue - it's the subversion of societally agreed democratic process.
Society has in the main agreed, by means of its elected representatives, that the sale and consumption of certain narcotics within terms of the MDA is wrong. A minority disagree and therefore break the law.
Murder is wrong, because most of humanity agrees that it is wrong to kill a fellow human being. A small number of human beings have determined that it is acceptable in the circumstances I described in #43 to kill another human being.
Post #34 believes that in these circumstances the law should therefore be changed. It's called equal treatment old bean.
I've just had a thought, as an additional example, let's take housebreaking. The Police reputedly don't catch housebreakers (instead manning speed cameras - which is b*ll*x - I spent 30 years in the job and never went near a speed camera)
Does this mean there should be HB tolerance zones?
Why is the Scotsman refusing to allow comment on the arrest of the teacher in Sudan?
#47, that's silly. Housebreaking is wrong in itself. Taking drugs isn't wrong in itself. There merely happens to be a (silly and puritanical) law against it.
I'm shocked and stoned...: - O
# 39 DXBSteve, Dubai: "In Islamic countries ..... there is a zero tolerance policy on drugs and there is a 'zero' problem." - Pakistan, Nepal Kashmir Afghanistan - No problem? - Get real - LEGALIZE!
25. Montford's JaicketI'm with you on this idea. Something has to be done to end the problem. We could start by identifying police activities which could be regarded as not being 'the best use of police time' and doing away with them. I'm sure most policemen could think of a few. I would consider that arresting people who break the law would be regarded as a good way of using police time.Considering the druggies: how did they get into this situation in the first place? It can't be ignorance, given the publicity the effects of drug-taking get. Should we consider letting them destroy themselves with their drugs? Decency and Humanity suggest not but the idea is tempting.
In some parts of the world - I believe Singapore is one of them, Malaysia another - possession of illegal drugs is a capital offence. Does anyone know how serious their drug problem is?
#47. You have no idea what I believe, old bean!
Far from believing that something becomes right by legalised, my point is that the laws are supposed to reflect real harm, and, as far as possible, protect individuals and society from that harm. Therefore, drug laws should focus on the real dangers. As it stands at the moment, it is legal for a 10 year old to consume alcohol (providing it is not in licensed premises or in an outdoor public place), or inhale deadly sustances (volatile substances and/or tobacco) for pleasure. The law allows for a person responsible for premises to ignore the use of heroin on those premises, but not the use of cannabis. There are many examples of where the potential for harm is not addressed by our laws, and in some cases, the dangers of behaviours which are legal by far outweigh some which are not. I didn't say that drug use is good, or normal, or to be condoned. What i said was that the laws need reviewed because they are not in touch with reality, which is a completely different thing.
'We have a responsibility to provide a high-visibility presence.' - what for? To deal with people who have £3 worth of drugs? Doubtless the criminals will be really scared with all the extra police on show - NOT!
#53 - that's not how I understood your original stance.It seemed to suggest that because there was supposedly significant disregard of the law, it should be repealed.
You now seem to be saying that all legal instruments in respect of intoxicants should be reviewed; I would agree with that - the whole thing is a mess.
The MDA arises from a belated form of class war (that comment risks identifying me!) while the law in respect of liquor is trying to accommodate too many vested interests. As for sale of solvents!
It's good to find a poster that doesn't degenerate into hysterical or snide name calling on here BTW. That put me off before.
#39 DXBSteve: I disagree with you there, Iran has a heroin problem and in Saudi Arabia organised crime controls the supply of alcohol.
#37/#50 Nort/kinneucher: agreed!
Am I the only one who thinks drugs are actually both fun and educational?
How come no-hoper jakey druggy criminals get their tolerance zone when professional, law-abiding, sensible, intelligent smokers don't?
Somewhere someone's priorities are totally wrong.
Here in Canada those caught with a specified amount of marijuana "for personal use" are fined allowing the police to pursue much more violent and serious crime.
This decriminilisation of possession for personal use - as opposed to possession for the purposes of trafficking - caused much controversy at the beginnning but has now been accepted by most Canadians.
But I can see where this "drugs tolerance zone" could quickly degenerate into a soft and HARD drugs haven and all the social ills that that entails because the hardcore pushers would seize on the opportunity to push (no pun intended) their mind and body destroying "wares".
Is it possible that legalisation of recreational drugs is always so resisted because of the detrimental effect it would have on the alcohol trade. Freedom to use drugs other than alcohol would almost certainly decimate it.
It could even be a solution to all the drunkenness and violence that goes with it. I know a chap well who was a whisker away from being an alcoholic until he found that there were other more pleasant and less dangerous things around. Hardly touches a drop of the stuff now.
So where is the haggis hunt site? When does the hunt begin?
#58 In my experience and the experience of all drug users I ever came across (we're talking about people who smoke joints, use ecsasy, speed or cocaine) were never 'pushed' into taking drugs. In fact, quite the opposite, more often than not its the user chasing after the dealer, frantically trying to sort out some stuff for the weekend in the club or at home.
The same is probably true of hardcore addicts of herion, it's very unlikely anyone pushed drugs on them in the first place.
Recreational drug users are not victims and are not forced to consume drugs! And once agan pose no threat to society!
Is "zero tolerance" working? I don't think so. There is still plenty evidence to suggest that illegal drugs are widely available throughout Britain. Why? Because of the vast amounts of money made from their distribution. We need to start with the children and try and improve education to discourage them from starting to take drugs.Legalisation of drugs might be one way of destroying the huge profits that are made from selling drugs. No politician from any major party will be keen to support such action as they all want to be seen as "Tough on Drugs"I would like to hear a REASONED debate on the pros and cons of legalisation of drug taking from people involved in the problem(s) Police, Medical Staff and Customs to name but three.
#58. TimW1234
I agree.
The area could, and probably would, degenerate as you have described.
Many years ago, it would appear that the powers that be weren't thinking clearly and didn't do enough to prevent the problem we have now. If they had dealt severely with the dealers then, we would not have such a big problem. I would like to see dealers being hung for trading in human misery.
First step is to close Rose Street not for the Canabis but for the booze. Hypocritical Scotland! Edinburgh city of John Knox and of Rabbie Burns who said : "The kirk and state can gae tae hell and I'll gae to my Anna!" And what of the "Mandies" areas around Airdrie, drugs, all prescribed on the National health? Scotland give your head a shake! The Glasgow Professor should get in touch with a Simon Fraser University Professor in Vancouver named Neil Boyd, - might enlighten him somewhat.
Didn't L&B try that with prostitution ? Since when did Gilhooley have a right to decide which laws should be enforced and which should be ignored ? Polis obviously still promoting idiots.
#57 well said mate
Isabel:
Nothing could have prevented the 'problem' we have now, apart from perhaps a more pragmatic approach to drugs. Humans have always taken drugs in some form, for spiritual or recreational purposes.
I would like to see you hung for advocating the killing of people. If people didn't want drugs, there would be no need for dealers. Don't you get it? Sure, there is human misery among the hardcore addicts of heroin and crack cocaine - caused because of illegality of the drugs and not necessarily the drugs themselves. I don't see any misery among the clubbers I see in the hundreds if not thousands in Edinburgh alone over the weekend - everyone seems to be thoroughly enjoying themselves and guess what - didn't have to mug old grannies or steal stuff - they paid for it with their wages.
How would hanging people help anyway? It wouldn't. Drug laws are no deterrant for those who want to take drugs - it's high time the laws were done away with and we can get rid of all the misery CAUSED BY THE LAWS
#68. Adam562
I take it that you are one of the those who need drugs in order to have a good time. What a sad bunch you are.
In your last paragraph you make it sound as if I was saying we should hang users but I distinctly said hang dealers.
If dealers hadn't pushed the drugs so hard, there would not have been so many people hooked on them. Dealers are out to make money and don't care how much misery they cause. A lot of users think they are in complete control of how much they take but before long many go on to take harder drugs. The dealers have created a big demand for the drugs - not the other way about.
It's always wise to remember that cops in general aren't the smartest cookies in the Jar.
As stated in the article I believe the cops just want to avoid a difficult job. The sad truth is that drug cases are here to stay and that isn't to say they should therefore be tolerated or accomodated in any way.
66 and 67 YOU DO NOT EXIST! go to 8888.
Her Royal Highness, Catie.
Ok, sorry, you said dealers. Still won't help though! Can't you get it? If there was no DEMAND from users, there would be NO dealers.
No one forced me to take drugs, I was in fact anti-drugs, just because I was always told you that they ALL will ruin my life and kill me. Hmmmm...I saw people smoking joints, they didn't die. I tried it and it was highly enjoyable. I then tried ecstasy and speed....so called killer drugs. I didn't die, nor did anyone I know. Again, I had a highly enjoyable time.
Luckily, I'm not so stupid as to realise that heroin and crack cocaine are not as harmless and I haven't touched them, nor have any people I've met out clubbing for the last 5 years. So your point that peple go on to take hard drugs is flawed, Isabel. Of course, there are some, a minority, who move on to heroin addiction.
Stop labelling all drug users as the same. And all drug dealers too. Do you advocate hanging the guy who's approached by people in a club to buy some ecstasy - who hasn't forced it on anyone? Or the guy selling bits of weed here and then to people who were never forced to smoke it?
Whether you like it or not, the view you have of drugs is extremely flawed and out of touch with the actual reality of the situation.
Oh and Isabel. I don't care if you think I'm sad because I sometimes use drugs on a night out. I use ecstasy perhaps once every 3 or 4 weeks. I hardly ever drink either. How much do you drink Isabel? Perhaps, I might find YOU sad.
Just because you don't agree with something, doesn't give you the right to force your views down my throat and dictate to the rest of society that they are sad because the don't use the 'accepted' drugs of society (alcohol and nicotine). I can put whatever I like in my body, and I will deal with the consequences (if there's any).
Also, I do understand that the issue of drugs is not all rosey and nice, heroin addiciton is a terrible thing, but the vast majority of drug users and dealers do not fit the stereotype of violent, junkies who live for their next fix and push their drugs on helpless people. Lot's of people use drugs, and the vast majority of them are otherwise law-abiding, hard working, citizens who quite frankly shouldn't be persecuted for having a good time, just like the rest of the population does by guzzling down pint after pint.
