THE great cannabis debate has been reignited in Britain by a government
proposal to reclassify weed as a 鈥渟ofter鈥� drug. If it鈥檚 passed, Britain will be
become one of many countries that are reducing the penalties for cannabis
use.
So is this move part of a dangerous liberal trend that will lead to an
explosion in the use of cannabis and other, more dangerous drugs? Or is it a
long overdue step that does not go far enough towards breaking the link between
marijuana, hard drugs and crime?
In Britain鈥檚 three-tier classification system, cannabis is currently in Class
B, along with amphetamines鈥攁 position that many argue is out of keeping
with the danger it poses. The proposal is to reduce it to Class C, along with
drugs such as anabolic steroids. This would mean milder penalties for
possession, although it falls short of legalisation or decriminalisation.
Advertisement
Supporters of the scheme argue that it will free up police to tackle more
dangerous drugs such as crack. In 1999, nearly 70 per cent of people arrested
for drugs offences in Britain were charged with possession of cannabis.
Processing each offender can take a police officer up to three hours.
What鈥檚 more, figures from last year鈥檚 British Crime Survey show that 44 per
cent of 16 to 29-year-olds have tried cannabis at some point in their lives,
with 22 per cent having used it in the last year. Clearly the law isn鈥檛 holding
everybody back. But will relaxing the law increase its use?
The evidence from countries that have gone even further than Britain proposes
to is clear. In the Netherlands, where authorities have tolerated cannabis use
since the 1970s, there has been no significant increase in use
(快猫短视频, 21 February 1998, p 30).
In South Australia, where users face civil sanctions such as fines rather
than criminal penalties, there has been a small rise. But surveys by the
National Campaign Against Drug Abuse between 1985 and 1993 showed that the rise
was in line with that in states where use was still criminalised.
Results were similar during the temporary decriminalisation of pot in 11 US
states in the 1970s. It seems that cannabis consumption has more to do with
individual tastes and popular culture than the law. Or maybe lax policing means
that changing the law makes little difference.
So reclassification is unlikely to result in an explosion of teenage
potheads. What it could do is make youngsters more likely to trust the drugs
information given by authorities. If those who take cannabis believe its legal
status exaggerates the risks, they may be more likely to try more dangerous
drugs.
For this reason, several drugs charities have welcomed the reclassification
proposal. 鈥淵oung people in particular may be less inclined to try other
substances if they have more accurate information on the potential risks of each
one,鈥� says Roger Howard, chief executive of the charity DrugScope.
But does cannabis lead to hard drugs regardless of what information is given?
鈥淓cstasy killed my teenage daughter but her death began with that first cannabis
joint,鈥� screamed a typical headline in one British tabloid last week.
A study published last year revealed that 99 per cent of young New Zealanders
who took hard drugs had started on cannabis. The link is undeniable, but it鈥檚
not clear if cannabis really is a 鈥済ateway to hard drugs鈥� or whether the kind of
people who take dope are more likely to try hard drugs too.
鈥淚鈥檓 standing in the middle of the road on this debate,鈥� says David Fergusson
of the Christchurch School of Medicine, who led the New Zealand study. His group
actually set out to prove that progression to hard drugs is the result of
people鈥檚 personalities and peer group rather than the fact that they use
cannabis. But they weren鈥檛 able to.
They followed 1265 New Zealanders from birth to the age of 21, gathering
detailed information on their background and behaviour. They found that 70 per
cent of the group had tried cannabis, and a quarter had tried other drugs.
Although two-thirds of cannabis users did not progress to other illicit drugs,
nearly all hard-drug users started off on cannabis. And heavy cannabis users
were most at risk.
Even when Fergusson took account of confounding factors, he found that there
was still a link between heavy cannabis use and progression to harder drugs. 鈥淲e
have probably made the strongest effort anyone has made, but we cannot explain
[the correlation] away,鈥� says Fergusson.
So what is the connection, if any? The most obvious link is that many
cannabis users are in regular contact with drug dealers who can make more money
from drugs such as cocaine than from dope. 鈥淲e need to consider the options
available to us regarding supply,鈥� says Howard.
The experience in the Netherlands, where allowing 鈥渃offee shops鈥� to sell
small amounts of dope means users don鈥檛 usually come into contact with illegal
dealers, suggests this does make some difference. According to an analysis
published in Science in 1997, only 22 per cent of cannabis smokers in
Amsterdam have tried cocaine, compared with 33 per cent of those in the US.
So trying to separate the markets for cannabis and hard drugs such as cocaine
does appear to weaken the gateway effect. 鈥淏ut whether you can separate them or
not is a big question,鈥� says Michael Farrell, a consultant psychiatrist at the
National Addiction Centre in London.
WITHIN half an hour of arriving in Amsterdam, I鈥檝e been offered sex, cocaine
and ecstasy. It makes me think the critics are right about the effects of
Amsterdam鈥檚 soft drugs policies. But after three days of talking to the police,
the 鈥渃offee shop鈥� owners, treatment clinics and locals, I鈥檓 convinced that the
approach is doing more good than harm.
The coffee shops began selling marijuana as early as 1976, and today there
are about 900 such shops. Roel Kerssemakers, who works for the state-run
Jellinek drug-abuse clinic, says this hasn鈥檛 increased the number of smokers.
鈥淭he forbidden-fruit effect is gone,鈥� says Kerssemakers. 鈥淭here鈥檚 very little
peer pressure to smoke.鈥�
More importantly, the shops seem to have been fairly effective at separating
soft-drug users from dealers who peddle harder drugs. 鈥淐offee shops are the most
hard-drug-free places in town,鈥� laughs Kerssemakers, thanks to regular visits
from the police.
And most smokers seem content to try cannabis in their youth and then give up
drugs completely. 鈥淐ocaine and ecstasy have more to do with nightclubs than with
cannabis,鈥� Kerssemakers says. Police officers on the street agree. They say that
the dealers I encountered are small-timers who target tourists rather than
locals.
But recent changes in the drugs policy may have unintentionally jeopardised
the separation between dope and harder drugs. In 1996, coffee shops were banned
from selling to anyone under 18, which has 鈥渢hrown a big vulnerable group onto
the street鈥�, says Arjan Roskam, head of a union for coffee-shop owners.
While the amendment was intended to delay the age at which teenagers start
experimenting with drugs, it has probably only diverted users to less regulated
sources. According to the Trimbos Institute, a mental health and addiction
centre in Utrecht, about 10 per cent of under-age smokers now buy from criminal
suppliers.
The government also increased the penalty for growing marijuana from two
years to four, discouraging smaller growing operations. 鈥淣ow the crooks are in
again,鈥� says Roskam. 鈥淚 think it would be better if it were all legal.鈥�
He may have his wish. 鈥淭here鈥檚 a majority in parliament who are for
legalising it, on the condition that we don鈥檛 do it alone,鈥� says Kerssemakers.
鈥淚f other big countries decide to, we would follow.鈥�
Nicola Jones, Amsterdam
