Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP) UK Conference
Last month, in my new role as Director of LEAP Europe, I was invited to do a talk at the SSDP conference in London. It was great to meet the key SSDP organisers, and also share a platform with Jason Reed, the co-ordinator of LEAP UK.
The student activists of SSDP are demanding that our political classes instigate a mature, fact-based discussion about the “war on drugs”.
Sorry to rehash all the well-known articles about why this “war” is such a failure on every conceivable front, but just let me reiterate three key points: prohibition will always fail (as this classic “Yes Minister” scene depicts), and the regulation and taxation of recreational drugs (in the same way as alcohol and tobacco) would be good for society and for the economy; it would decapitate organised crime and, in some cases, the funding of terrorism; and it would make the use and possible abuse of recreational drugs a health issue rather than a criminal matter.
The students get this — why can’t our politicians?
Jason and I had a warm welcome from the SSDP. They can see the value of law enforcement professionals — police, judges, lawyers, and customs and intelligence officers — using their experience to contribute to the debate. I look forward to LEAP working more closely with the SSDP.
And do drop me an email if you would like to help LEAP in Europe.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.




the reason the anti-drug policies fail is because they are designed to fail. these drugs were made illegal so the jewish mafia could make billions. the stronger the politician’s stance against decriminalisation or legalisation, the more likely they are in the pocket of the jewish mafia. when tel aviv is feeling alturistic, they let the cia or mi6 syphon a bit of spending money off the top so they can fund their terrorism, black ops and false flags.
“The students get this — why can’t our politicians?”
Because they are paid 20% of the profits from illegal drug sales by the drug dealers.
Think about it. 10,000 people elect someone to represent them politically. Those 10,000 people make it clear that they want drugs to be legal.
The person they elected then votes “No” on legalizing drugs. Why? He knows the 10,000 people who he is supposed to represent want drugs to be legal. He knows there is a good chance he will not be re-elected if he doesn’t vote “Yes” for drug legalization. Yet he still votes “No” on drug legalization.
People do what is in their own best interest. What could be better than getting re-elected to a job you told the public you wanted?
How about 20% of the profits from the sale of very profitable illegal drugs?
If the politician doesn’t get re-elected, who cares? 20% of the profits from the illegal drugs sold to the 10,000 people who elected him is probably millions of dollars.