Ireland to 'decriminalise' small amounts of drugs for personal use

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ireland-to-decriminalise-small-amounts-of-drugs-including-heroin-cocaine-and-cannabis-for-personal-a6719136.html

by werber • 11 years ago

348 144 11 years ago

independent.co.uk

civilian• 11 years ago

Why is 'decrminalise' in quotes? Is it b/c it's only partially decriminalized, or is it crappy journalism?

anigbrowl6• 11 years ago

Because they are quoting the minister, whose remarks form the only basis for the story. No legislation or formal rules have been published yet, so there's no objective basis for describing the proposal. The use of quotation marks is entirely appropriate and not crappy at all.

degenerate• 11 years ago

The crappy part is how the journal author tacked "for personal use" onto the title to make it sound like a move to condone hard drug use, when in fact the movement is just the opposite - to help addicts get clean instead of giving them criminal records. So it's crappy journalism, but for a different reason.

justincormack• 11 years ago

well selling is illegal, so its not legal per se.

gearoidoc5• 11 years ago

If they're being specific on 'profiting' then in theory dealers could 'donate' their stashes to addicts and write it off against the tax man :D

bovermyer• 11 years ago

Ignoring the quality of the article, I am struck by one thing.

Why has Ireland all of a sudden taken such a progressive shift? First national recognition of gay marriage, now this?

I'm loving it, wherever it came from.

jug5• 11 years ago

I came here to say this. This is a huge departure from the status quo in Ireland, very surprised to see this.

borvo• 11 years ago

There's nothing new here, Ireland has been changing at a very rapid pace for the last 20 years - becoming progressively more liberal due to many influences, not least the fact that all of a sudden most young people were staying in the country during the celtic tiger years.

anigbrowl6• 11 years ago

Irish guy here (although I live in California now). Demographics, mass abandonment of the Catholic church in recent years (not least due to sex scandals, and the bruising effects of the global financial crisis, which has led to a more pragmatic assessment of priorities.

I'm very happy about it too. While I'm not in any rush to head home to the inclement Irish weather it feels like a great validation to see this tide of social liberalization. I was born in 1970 and grew up in a country where divorce was illegal, corporal punishment in schools was legal (and liberally dispensed), and drug use was presented as a moral/class failing. Growing up in a violent household in a country where family life was reified, I fled to the UK as soon as I was old enough to leave home and have rarely been back since. Maybe I should start planning a holiday.

patrickk3• 11 years ago

Another Irish expat, living in Germany.

The cynic in me says the timing of the gay marriage, the abortion referendum on abortion and now this progressive drug stance is the government playing a game of misdirection with the electorate.

This current government was elected on the specific promise of fixing the economic mess and getting rid of the disastrous policy of bank debt being hoisted onto the sovereign balance sheet.

I know plenty of people who are struggling financially, losing their homes and so on back in Ireland, but by using controversial social measures (which I agree are a step in the right direction) they are distracting from their pathetic failure to fix the economy (any progress you see economically has nothing to do with the government, but a recovery of the global economy and the multinationals in Ireland along with it. We have very little indigenous industry, startups, etc.)

roymurdock2• 11 years ago

A very random and uninformed guess -

A lot of tech companies have opened up offices in Ireland (ostensibly due to tax laws) and have started to attract young, progressive talent into the country. This investment has helped the economy and raised the standard of living in Ireland, so less people are concerned with enforcing conservative/religion-based regulation.

This article has some better stats/anecdotes:

http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2014/12/08/368770530/u...

comrh• 11 years ago

I don't know if you can give the credit to tech companies, but Ireland is keeping more of it young people in the country after a decade of emmigration and brain drain. Their more progressive attitudes probably have something to do with it.

lucideer6• 11 years ago

I'd really love if this were the case, but sadly it really isn't.

The affect of US tech companies coming here has largely been a small-scale version of Palo Alto-esque gentrification of a small area of Dublin (docklands) and any improvements in standard of living being limited to a small white male tech elite. Overall poverty is up (we're dealing with a very serious recent homelessness crisis) and average standards of living have dropped significantly in the country otherwise and reported economic improvements in world news are typical of our conservative government's focus on primarily export-based GDP figures, etc. over actual progressive population-based data.

I think on the other hand, politics aside, there is a definite strong movement away from the church at least, which I think is largely a lingering result of the various very public abuse scandals over the past few decades.

Edit: That NPR article is interesting in its focus on Cork. I live in Dublin, so I can't really comment much anecdotally on Cork, but with the exception of Apple, almost all major US tech firms that have HQ-ed here (Google, Facebook, MS, Twitter, etc.) are Dublin-based, so it seems an unusual focus in that regard.

bcoughlan• 11 years ago

If anything there has been a net emigration of young people here in the past few years due to the global economic crisis. We have had multi-national technology companies in Ireland for a long time, so it's not that.

Ireland lived under the thumb of the church until the 80s. They dictated the morals of the nation, and when their corruption and hypocrisy was exposed it became OK to speak out against them without being ostracized. Condoms were legalized in 1978, without prescription in 1985. Homosexuality in 1993. Divorce in 1995. We transitioned from one of the most conservative countries in the West to one of the most liberal in a remarkably short time.

The gay marriage referendum was primarily seen as younger generation issues, but I was pleased to see that the older generations showed their support in the end - the general attitude was "It's not harming anyone, so why should I stand in their way".

Our government, however, would never be the first to make bold reforms in drug laws. We have the United States, Portugal, the Netherlands and Spain to thank for the progress made. Some former ministers responsible for drugs have come out in support of treating it as a health instead of a criminal issue AFTER they left office.

Anyways I think that this is just an election ploy for the youth vote. Here is what the current Taoiseach (prime minister) had to say about legalising cannabis on the Youtube Digital Debate Q&A at the last election: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6k9sohbulg (the typical answer to a question was about a minute).

lucaspiller2• 11 years ago

Unless you are Google size the tax laws don't really make any difference, even then you only need to have a company registered there, you don't need an office full of techies.

Dublin is good for tech companies as it's easy to do business and get investment, English is the main language, there is good internet [0], you can quickly get to central Europe (thanks Ryanair), and compared to London the cost of living is a lot lower. It's just a shame about the weather...

[0] Unless you are stuck in a building only served by Eircom.

lucideer6• 11 years ago

Not to take away from either positive story - both are really fantastic - but I think they're both isolated events, with slightly different causes, and sadly don't really represent a paradigm shift.

The national recognition of gay marriage was a worldwide story largely because it was a popular vote. Other - perhaps more generally progressive - countries had already legislated for it without needing that public vote. We only needed it because our actual constitution is so outdated and regressive to begin with.

The drug decriminalisation is more surprising, and rather than being something representative of the current government (who are otherwise extremely conservative), it seems more to be the work of a single relatively maverick government minister. However, while he seems genuine in his attempt, there's a general election in the new year so it's likely a pre-election promise and not something that there's intent to deliver on in this term.

secfirstmd• 11 years ago

"extremely conservative"?

I would have to challenge that. Certainly on a global scale (versus US, UK, EU etc), the current government is not that extreme.

gearoidoc5• 11 years ago

Irishman here - living in Canada nearly two years now.

It's not very sudden to be honest - changes like the Marriage Equality Act have been wanted by a lot of people for a long time.

The criminalisation of drug use clearly doesnt work the entire world over. In Ireland, especially Dublin, it's not unusual to see a heroin addict shooting up on public transport.

I honestly feel that Irish people are in general a fairly liberal bunch. It can't be emphasised enough how much the Catholic Church held the country back. I don't think non-Irish people will understand just how high esteem (read: fear) that we held the institution in.

All we need now is to remove religion (not necessarily the teachings but rather the role the Church plays) from the eductation system and we'll really be getting somewhere.

arcadeparade• 11 years ago

God is dead, paedophile priests, neighbouring cultural hegemons and cheap credit have killed him.

madaxe_again2• 11 years ago

It's a nice idea, but I can see the UK leaning on them, hard, not to do this. I can see the arguments now:

- People will get the ferry to Ireland and bring them to the UK!

- Drug tourism! Amsterdam! Everybody hates Amsterdam! Look at how terrible everything is there!

- Think of the children!!

- It's not aligned with the UK's policy of increasing criminalisation!

- Think of what you'll do to your prison sector!

Hopefully Ireland will give their former (hell, ongoing) occupiers the finger should they dare raise a stink.

peteretep2• 11 years ago

    > I can see the UK leaning on them

    > Hopefully Ireland will give their former (hell,
    > ongoing) occupiers the finger

I think you vastly over-estimate the importance of Ireland to the British government.

greggarious• 11 years ago

Can you elaborate on how Amsterdam is terrible?

I recently spent a week day. (Partly on vacation, partly on business.)

I saw a country with great public transport, decent food, a vibrant arts scene, and while yes, the smell of weed was everywhere, people seemed way more laid back. No roving bands of drunk frat bros, no meth tweakers, and police who viewed their job as to increase the enjoyment of all citizens and visitors, rather than generate revenue for the township through fines.

If that's hell, well, call me a Satanist because I'm sold.

fuddle• 11 years ago

The Irish were one of the first to ban smoking in pubs too.

vixen992• 11 years ago

The word 'progressive' has been hijacked and used to suggest the existence of valid arguments prior to their serious examination. Time we junked it.

Of course the same game can be played by pointing out that progressive diseases inevitably lead to a fatal outcome.

lorenzhs• 11 years ago

No, it has not been hijacked - it has two meanings. See, for example, https://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/learner/progre... or consult your favourite dictionary.

humbleMouse• 11 years ago

Wow, this is great. Thank gosh there are still sane people running somebody's government out there.

lucideer6• 11 years ago

However, while Mr O Ríordáin told The Irish Times that there was a “strong consensus that drugs across the board should be decriminalised,” he said it would be for Ireland’s next government to discuss.

Is probably the most important paragraph there. Election is in the new year - this is probably pre-canvass fluff. That does still indicate a belief that this is what voters want however, which is positive.

onetimePete• 11 years ago

Anyone remember the absurd projects to freeze parts of humanity in the 70s - to solve problems.

Are drugs not basically a freezing process? You age, yes, but you are out of society, out of the high consume, reproduce circle, into something that gets you nowhere and costs you nothing but lifetime while doing them.Actually a good problem solution, if controlled by the state.

Lucky for us, every parent on this planet will scream in protest on this statement and enforce a counter policy to extend behaviour control into adult-hood and guarantee offsprings offspring. Thus a Thrug-of-War ensues, called the war on drugs.

seanmheff• 11 years ago

There is an election coming up. Maybe its smoke and mirrors

mahouse• 11 years ago

Especially smoke.

iamcurious• 11 years ago

It is a step in the right direction, but it still half-baked. Without decriminalizing production as well, they are maintaining a monopoly for those that works outside of the law. Which means a very profitable tax free market that has to recreate all of the state features like physical safety and insurance policies from scratch. Every nation that forbids something that is in demand, is gestating its own competition. The laws of capitalism are brutal and can not be escaped. I wonder how far we can go by following the principle that it should be easier for demand to be satisfied legally than illegally.

seanieb• 11 years ago

Far from half baked (theres a pun here if I look hard enough), Portugal stepped up and did the experiment already. And it worked.

rwmj3• 11 years ago

The OP's point is that decriminalization leaves the market, the money and the tax revenue with the criminals. As a taxpayer, I want a fair proportion of the money to go to the government, and only full legalization and regulation does that.

Broken_Hippo2• 11 years ago

Oddly, I was talking to a man in Amsterdam about half-baked laws such as that. Making as much of the process transparent as possible means there is more likely to be "safe" products, comparatively, and legalisation with controls seems to be the way to go so far.

anigbrowl6• 11 years ago

I agree with you but remember that Ireland and the UK are islands, which immediately puts them in a better position to deal with smuggling compared to countries that share long land borders. I think this is why island nations are generally a bit more conservative - it's much more practical to control imports.

donohoe• 11 years ago

That's a very broad conclusion to draw!

pjc50• 11 years ago

Coastline is no easier to police and allows transit at any point. Cornwall practically counts pre-20th-c smuggling as a traditional heritage industry.

Although I think in practice most drugs come by air like in the rest of the world.

patrickk3• 11 years ago

The Irish Navy is tiny, and there are countless inlets and bays which a smuggler could use. One popular drug smuggling route is Colombia -> up the coast of West Africa -> Ireland, and then onwards to the UK market.

There was a famous incident a few years back where a relatively small boat deployed from a 'mothership'; sank in high seas (heh), dumping its cargo of hundreds of millions of cocaine into the water. Locals were finding bales of coke worth €1.75m each on the beaches in the area.

If you look at what has been intercepted, and what must get through to the end market, then billions of Euros worth of the drug must be smuggled through Ireland/Irish waters.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/icrime/wild-coast-sinks...

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/cocaine-in-yacht-s...

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/jul/08/drugsandalcohol.dr...

bko• 11 years ago

Couldn't agree more but I don't think it has to do with capitalism, but economics. Regardless of the system in place, if there is a high enough demand for a product, as there is drugs, there will be a supply.

An interesting example is how drug use is actually rampant in US prisons, some of the most controlled environments in the country. No ones idea of a free market capitalism, but somehow drugs are still very accessible.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jan/27/drugs-inside...

oxide2• 11 years ago

the one I know for sure about involved visitation.

wives and girlfriends are asked to smuggle something in for a significant other inside of themselves. a toilet trip later it gets removed and passed off, and voila. even a small amount can curry quite a bit of favor and of course cash. because of the risk involved, the price is well marked up.

seems like the guards would have to be on the take, though, because I'm not sure how the inmate is supposed to get it from the visitation room back to his cell.

I'm sure they have something figured out, anyone who can light a cigarette with an outlet is bound to be a crafty cat.

icanhackit• 11 years ago

It is a step in the right direction, but it still half-baked.

We all want the revolution overnight but it takes careful and calculated steps to make progress. Consider Representative Barney Frank (D-MA) when accosted by a Republican Rep who claimed the States' Rights to Medical Marijuana Act was a sly step towards the process of legalizing marijuana outright. Barney's (paraphrased) answer: Yep, you got me. That is our goal.

And of course once you've legalized the selling of marijuana, you're potentially opening the doors for other substances. But they come with their own set of problems and taboos so it will take time.

Initiatives have to start somewhere and demonstrate their utility with minimal fuss. Baby steps, but in the right direction.

hodder• 11 years ago

"And of course once you've legalized the selling of marijuana, you're potentially openings the doors for other substances"

I agree you've got to start somewhere. I find the argument that marijuana is a door opener to other substances is flawed though. If pot didn't exist, would the same argument be made for liquor stores, tobacco sales, coffee shops, red bulls at 7/11, cough medicine at Walmart etc? Or is it just because of the stigma around marijuana?

tn13• 11 years ago

Socialist revolutions happen overnight but capitalist changes need to happen over time. In case of India it took 50 years for the government to realize that it is nonsensical to restrict how many nut bolts a factory could produce.

swimfar• 11 years ago

What is that a reference to?

tremon• 11 years ago

As opposed to, say, capitalist revolutions that happen overnight and socialist changes that happen over time? What's the point of adding "emotional" qualifiers to truisms?

rmc2• 11 years ago

USSR and the Eastern Bloc fell quickly.

oxide2• 11 years ago

I disagree that it's half-baked, in fact this is a huge victory. A step in the right direction, indeed. Now, if only we can keep from going two steps back.

gotchange2• 11 years ago

Which means a very profitable tax free market

That's totally untrue. Drug lords still have to contend with law enforcement raids and busts or bribing govt officials for their goods and products to "reach the consumer" constituting in effect a tax on their operations.

rwmj3• 11 years ago

That's only a tax in the very narrow sense that it keeps prison officers and policemen in jobs. I want the money to go towards general taxation. In Britain some £6bn is spent on cannabis each year. Taking a third of that in tax raises enough to reverse half of the chancellor's very controversial recent cuts to tax credits.

Geekette2• 11 years ago

Very interesting news! I wouldn't have expected Ireland to be on this forefront. When I got to the paragraph below, I also couldn't help wondering which nation that was:

"His comments follow a leaked report from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, appearing to call for a worldwide decriminalisation on 19 October. The report was reportedly withdrawn after at least one nation put pressure on the international body to bury the findings of Dr Monica Beg, chief of the HIV/AIDs section of the UNODC in Vienna."

gearoidoc5• 11 years ago

Curious as to why you "wouldn't have expected Ireland to be on this forefront".

Not trying to sound accusatory - just genuinely curious on the perception.

DanBC4• 11 years ago

Stuff like this (2014) http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/17/ireland-woman-f...

Geekette2• 11 years ago

From an outsider perspective, I viewed Ireland as somewhat socially conservative. "Somewhat" meaning that while a significant proportion of the population has liberal/progressive views, I felt that segment was less than majority, therefore unable to swing the vote on issues like this.

aianus2• 11 years ago

They still criminalize abortion over there. I definitely had the perception it was a highly religious and conservative country.

hoodoof8• 11 years ago

To really solve the social problems, the sale needs to be legalised.

Making the sale a criminal offence puts money into the hands of organized crime, drives up the prices, forces addicts to steal to buy their drugs and leads drug users to take "worse" drugs like methamphetamine because "better" drugs aren't easily available.

Drugs need to be made legally to ensure quality, to remove harmful impurities, to ensure the dosage is consistent and predictable which reduces risk of overdose, and especially to ensure that when a person consumes "drug A", they do not in fact get a dose of the more addictive/harmful "drug B" (i.e. methamphetamine).

Governments stand to make tax dollars off marijuana too.

There's a trail of logic that must be followed - if it is OK to buy and consume drugs, why is it not OK to sell them?

The only caveat is that methamphetamine should remain illegal to buy or use. The idea being that people will use "less harmful" drugs than methamphetamine because they are available cheap, easy and clean. The strongest possible justification for legalization of sale and use of drugs is to minimize usage and supply of the greatest of all evils - methamphetamine.

We need to accept that people want to get high. You can't arrest that human desire out of existence. We can however remove the harmful effects of criminalization of the sale of drugs.

Criminalization fills prisons, wastes police and legal resources, destroys families, prevents people having functional lives and creates both organized crime and petty crime.

N.B. personally I'm not interested taking in any drugs except alcohol and caffeine so I'm not angling to be able to get high. I wouldn't take em even if they were legal and free.

avree• 11 years ago

Why do you think meth is worse than heroin?

hoodoof8• 11 years ago

Meth junkies go on violent psychotic rampages killing and injuring other people and have no other thought in their brains except to get more meth. When I read in the newspaper about someone murdering their family I expect, and often find either a statement or suggestion that the perpetrator was using meth.

Heroin junkies go to sleep and are making a poor health choice but it is possible with clean heroin to lead a functional life including work and family.

Drugs that harm the user are "better" (as such) whereas drugs that result in harm to others are "worse".

ryanlol3• 11 years ago

Heroin related problems are rarely caused by the substance itself, rather lack thereof.

cthalupa2• 11 years ago

The only caveat is that methamphetamine should remain illegal to buy or use. The idea being that people will use "less harmful" drugs than methamphetamine because they are available cheap, easy and clean. The strongest possible justification for legalization of sale and use of drugs is to minimize usage and supply of the greatest of all evils - methamphetamine.

You seem to have an oddly demonized view of methamphetamine. The reaction on people is fairly similar to dextroamphetamine, which you probably know of by the name of 'Adderall', and we prescribe it frequently.

Meth is mildly neurotoxic and adderall is not, so it's definitely worse for you, but we let people do plenty of things that are bad for them.

Not that I'm suggesting anyone go out and develop a meth habit, but if you're arguing in favor or legalizing everything but meth you're already arguing in favor of quite a few things that can cause personal damage.

The violence surrounding meth is much the same as the violence surrounding most other illegal substances - driven by the actions taken to procure funding of the substance or procuring the substance itself.

hoodoof8• 11 years ago

I'm not sure I understand your point. Are you saying meth is "not that bad"? If so then you and I must be reading different newspapers and watching different TV channels.

InclinedPlane• 11 years ago

It doesn't matter if using meth will 100% guarantee that someone's life is ruined, people still need to have that freedom. Because denying it actually leads to worse outcomes, and worse negative externalities.

hoodoof8• 11 years ago

The distinction is whether or not the user harms other people when stoned. Meth addicts become psychotically violent.

andyl• 11 years ago

A small step to remove the fetters of intolerance. But if legalizing small amounts is good, then legalizing large amounts is better. Nobody has the right to limit my ability to take large amounts of drugs - that's my personal business.

vixen992• 11 years ago

Yes they do and no it isn't unless of course you're a hermit living in isolation. For anyone else it's virtually impossible to ensure you (let's go with your example) take all the consequences of your actions as you must if you go along with the dictum 'do as you like if it doesn't affect others'. As a society we curtail many freedoms. Necrophilia hurts no one so should it be legal? Suppose millions decide it's a desirable activity. Do we then decriminalize it?

BTW I wonder if Ireland is going to permit industrial production of the desired drugs? As I understand it, the 'small step' as you call it is akin to legalizing the possession of stolen goods.

aburan282• 11 years ago

The biggest misconception about drugs is that they were outlawed because of their dangers to society/health. You would be better off habitually using heroin rather then drinking or smoking tobacco

lucaspiller2• 11 years ago

Although I'm generally for legalising drugs, in the short term my concern is this is going just increase petty crime. As gearoidoc said in another comment:

In Ireland, especially Dublin, it's not unusual to see a heroin addict shooting up on public transport.

I lived in Dublin city (2 and 1) a few years ago and it's not exactly the safest place. Even in the middle of the day, in the highstreet, I've seen fights between people. This is going to come across as "drugs are ok" and more people will get into them, which will lead to higher petty crime rates.

frenchie091• 11 years ago

This headline is plain wrong. Ireland isn't about to do this. The news is that our drugs minister is talking about it in the media, and talking about the need for the next government to talk about it. A conversation has started, that's all.

zamalek• 11 years ago

How are they skirting around the narcotics treaty[1]? So far as I understand, that treaty is a significant hurdle for most countries considering or implementing legalization. Are they just ignoring it?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Convention_on_Narcotic_...

Ireland to 'decriminalise' small amounts of drugs for personal use

Related Stories