<doc.id=0205.a2>
<title> SHOULD "SOFT DRUGS" BE LEGALISED? </title>
	All over the world there is a discussion about narcotic politics. On one side there arethose who suggest a liberalisation or even a legalisation of the "soft" narcotics (marijuana and haschish), while people on the other side wants restrictive narcotic politics. I agree with the ones who believe in restrictive and preventive narcotic politics, and don't believe in a legalisation of drugs, not even "soft drugs". In this essay, I'll take up some of my main arguments againstlegalisation of "soft drugs".

	First of all I would like to tear down one argument, used by advocators of legalising "soft drugs". They claim that "soft drugs" are harmless, but it's proved that even small dozes of for example haschish hurt the brain and use of "soft drugs" also lead to further experimentation on other drugs. They are often an entrance to heavier drugs.

	Secondly, people who want a legalisation of the "soft drugs" can't answer questions on how they are planning to carry this out. For example I would like to know by whom the quality of the drugs will be checked, and who'll decide the strength and price of them? If drugs from society are lighter, and perhaps also more expensive than the ones on the street, no one will buy them. 

	Other questions which the followers of legalising don't have any answers to are for example if the State will have monopoly of drugbusiness or if private corporations will have access to it as well. And have they planned to have agelimits, or restrictions for people with sensitive and important jobs like drivers, doctors, teachers and pilots? How much and how often should you be able to buy drugs? Will "drug-shops" be open twenty-four-hour a day? If not, people who want drugs will buy them on the streets anyway. I haven't received any answers on these questions, but spokesmen for legalisation maybe have planned to release "soft drugs" without any regulations at all, because regulations only create conditions for a black market.Besides that the campaign to legalise "soft drugs" gives non-satisfaction answers, or often lack out of answers on how they plan to carry out their ideas, there are more reasons against legalisation of the "soft drugs".

	One of these reasons is that there's a connection between access to narcotics and use of them. If society decides to legalise "soft drugs" it becomes easier for people to buy them, and thereby they might end up in an abuse, because of the increased access to "soft drugs". This also effects the connection between supply and demand of these drugs. If there's a combination of easy access to large amount of "soft drugs" with liberal attitude from society about drugs, more persons will try the legal drugs, also those who wouldn't have tried if drugs had been illegal. This lead to higher demand and suddenly "soft drugs" have created a legal market with supply and demand. To decrease the number of (ab)users there must be a small access to narcotics and difficult to get hold of them. If there also are unpleasant consequences for using or dealing with drugs the amount of people who is taking them won't increase in the same way as if "soft drugs" were legalised. Left is only a group that run the risk of getting into drugabuse from the beginning. This group can society reach through support and treatment. Only then abuse can be defeated.

	Society must take responsibility for its citizens. Abuse have to be seen in a social relation, not in a medical one. Society must prevent that young people gets into drugabuse, by preventive work, by not legalise drugs and by helping addicts through treatment. We must believe in society without narcotics, and not let "soft drugs" be legalised. It's when we give up our hope of a drugfree society legalisation movement can win. That's why many people supports "harm reduction" movement instead of supporting preventive work. Unfortunately "harm reduction" alone can't decrease the number of addicts. We need for example preventive work among young people to stop them from trying drugs.

	If the number of addicts shall decrease, society can't declare that it's all right to use drugs. Then young people get a liberal attitude towards drugs and they are more likely to try them. If it also is easy to get "soft drugs" and that it's legal to use them, many more risk to end up in an abuse. When "soft drugs" no longer are strong enough, addicts will move over to heavier drugs, and this way society never will get rid of drugabuse and narcotics, and social misery will increase. We must declare a war against narcotics, instead of be resigned to drugabuse.

Karlsson, Kenth, 1993: EG - Sverige/Norge och drogerna
Pockettidningen, nr 2/1994 årg 24: Den berusade älgen. Alkohol- och narkotikapolitik i förvandling	
</doc>