The Real Reason Why Drugs Are Illegal

[sunshine band]

Well there are two things, one is the law as set down by parliament in the Misuse of drugs Act, and the second thing is what the govt choose to do with their administration of it. The Act itself is quite good, its neutral as to what persons are controlled with respect to what drugs, the criterion is that the controls with respect to persons concerned with drugs should be made to address misuse of drugs that leads to social harms, ie it is outcome-based.

What the govt have done is propagate numerous lies about the Act that most people believe, and it is a crucial point that parliament never said that using drugs (with the sole exception of opium as a legacy of the Hague Convention and the opium wars) would be illegal. What they are supposed to do is to stop the anti social misuse of drugs by restricting your rights to possess and do business with potentially harmful drugs in situations where such anti social outcomes are likely. So for example they could say that if you are under 18 its illegal to possess a drug, so persons over 18 who are not in some very high risk group like persons diagnosed with serious mental health or personality disorder issues can own the property. This differentiation between positive, neutral and negative outcomes is impossible in most peoples minds under the Act because they think that using drugs is illegal, and if it were, nothing in terms of sensible regulation would even be possible. They compound this belief by coining expressions such as 'illegal and illicit drugs' which simply do not exist. I say this as the law controls the person not the object (drug), the person is controlled with respect to the object not the other way round. By making people believe objects have legal status (illegal), we then think that's what the law says. It doesn't, but they have administered the Act in a fashion which to all intents and purposes makes all meaningful use of controlled drugs involve an illegal act of possession. They should actually make exceptions for property rights which opens the door to peaceful use where possible but nobody really seems to get it.

If you think the law makes drugs illegal then that is an indivisible state of affairs where ALL ownership in drugs is illegal so there is no imperative to make the necessary regulations to free the reasonable adult. They also make the other lie of 'legal drugs' by default, so persons misusing alcohol and tobacco are seemingly outside the remit of the Act when in fact they are not. The result of reversing the law to appear to control drugs and not persons is to reduce us to slaves without agency, to deny us freedom of thought and ways of being on the supposed premise that we are in fact always illegal because we are in reality the illegal object in the way we are depicted in policy, we are objectified, we have no proportionality of respect for rights, for privacy etc because simply put drugs have no moral or legal agency, and so our connection with them is the same. In reality we should not be the subject of the law until the threshold for interference into our liberty is crossed, ie we cause harm.