nation of potheads

Talking about aversions and principles, I am against drugs of any and every kind. I do not support their usage based on peer pressure or novelty. Though an ardent abettor of experimentation, I have a subzero tolerance towards the excuse of trying these vile dependency-inducing substances .Be it just once, for the first time or for the heck of it. It is one of that weird, personal bete noire.

Speaking of which, some twenty-four years ago, the Dutch government embarked upon an innovative trial, a tolerant "soft drug" policy, differing broadly from that of its European neighbours. The new drug legislation differentiated drugs such as heroin, cocaine and LSD, which were viewed as presenting "an unacceptable risk," from the "softer," less dangerous cannabis products.(source:http://www.parl.gc.ca/37/1/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/ille-e/library-e/dolin1-e.htm)

This has caused friction between the Netherlands and other countries about the policy for cannabis, most notably with France and Germany. As of 2004, Belgium seems to be moving toward the Dutch model and a few local German legislators are calling for experiments based on the Dutch model. Switzerland has had long and heated parliamentary debates about whether to follow the Dutch model, most recently deciding against it in 2004.

Possession of 30 grams of marijuana or hashish (supposedly enough to satisfy the average user's needs for several weeks) was decriminalized. The Dutch government went ahead to permit sale of marijuana and hashish in licensed coffee shops, with certain restrictions. I am no expert and I am sure the assessors had their reasons. However, how can one exercise regulatory control over a subject controlled by his/her dependence of an addictive chemical compound. The dependence of which causes wars, robbery, gun-shots, vandalism, looting when withdrawal symptoms set in. While some may hail the highly progressive outlook of tackling the problem, I fail to understand this blatant endorsement by the government.Of course there are consequences of the legalization of the so-called risk-free drugs, whose repercussions today are wide-ranging.

Firstly, THC (delta-nine-tetrahydrocannabinol), the component that provides the high was 3-5 % in traditionally grown cannabis. Nederwiet, the now-popular Dutch-grown cannabis, is far more potent, with a THC that can rise to up to 20 percent, providing a quicker, more enduring high. Greater quantities of the elevated-level THC cannabis is required to get a high as smokers developed a tolerance to the high THC-level joints. THC, which does not dissolve in water, is absorbed by human fatty tissues and remains there longer than either nicotine or alcohol. Thus, the THC effects remain with the heavy user far longer than they realize, causing a decline in short-term memory, and diminished ability to learn and decreased motor skills.

Secondly, twenty odd years ago, the Netherlands was comparatively free of international drug-trafficking criminals. Today, Holland has become an illegal drug producing and distributing giant, a devastating threat not only to the Netherlands but across Europe.(source: wiki).

In the Netherlands, the national drug policy has officially four major objectives:
• To prevent drug use and to treat and rehabilitate drug users.
• To reduce harm to users.
• To diminish public nuisance by drug users (the disturbance of public order and safety in the neighborhood).
• To combat the production and trafficking of drugs.

In all fairness to quote statistics, 9.7% of young adults (aged 15-24) consume soft drugs once a month in the Netherlands , comparable to the level in Italy (10.9%) and Germany (9.9%) and less than in the UK (15.8%) and Spain (16.4%). Dutch rates of drug use are lower than U.S. rates in every category apart from drug related deaths.
(source http://www.drugpolicy.org/global/drugpolicyby/westerneurop/thenetherlan/)

Most countries take the point of view that drugs are detrimental to society and must therefore be outlawed, even when such policies fail to eliminate drug use. Significant numbers of policymakers in the Netherlands believe that, if a problem has proved to be unsolvable, it is better to try controlling it instead of continuing to enforce laws with mixed results. What they probably don’t take into consideration is that the monitoring is intended for humans, the worst offenders of any pragmatic policy. Another factor is that as a small nation with high literacy, income and government aid, these liberal laws may work to varying degrees.But can one ever imagine implementing the same in other countries?

I am no preacher. There is enough knowledge and information at our fingertips. Reason and comprehension abilities if we can spare a few minutes to mull things over. Legislative liberalization , policy modification , reverse psychology or rampant availability cannot affect or dramatically alter the basic response of the human body to the chemical reactions induced by potent substances. One can choose to learn a lesson from A Requiem for a Dream. Or relive it.