Pubs can sell booze for longer: Gawd bless ya Royal Family

Clearly the Government had not realised how easy they were making this for me. With the Royal Wedding this year, pubs can stay open later, they have announced. Presumably to help us all join in with the 'celebrations.' Throw in some extra Bank Holidays as well, to put us all in a good mood, whydontchya?

Are we really to believe that the Wedding is not being used as propaganda for the House of Windsor?

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5hBg7p0FsMkJ11qtaFzJFDVAs9T3A?docId=B8048511294827797A00

Drugs and a hero of 7/7

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-12118069

This is a story of a firefighter that has been jailed for 14 years on a conviction of drugs smuggling. This firefighter was commended for his rescue work during the bombings in London on the 7th July 2005.

This story reminds me of the axiom: 'There will always be someone, poor enough, desperate enough or stupid enough to get involved in the drugs trade. The rewards are just that big.'

Good on ya Bob!

Just wanted to add my voice to the volumes of people that have supported Bob Ainsworth in his call for ending prohibition.

Its time that gangsters get out of the market.
No matter what regime we put in place of prohibition, it won't be perfect. But it will be better than what we have now.

Well done Bob. I support you.

News on Irvine Welsh and Skagboys

The latest news is that Irvine Welsh's new book is due for a release in 2012. Curious as I was led to believe it would be this year.

Thinking of the children when it comes to drugs? Think Again

The link for this video is in a previous post to access on You Tube - but I thought I would download it straight on to here anyway. If you are worried about the kids, then maybe we need to get in place some age restrictions.

Concern over Iain Duncan Smith

Earlier, this column drew concern over Iain Duncan-Smith's influence over the Conservative Party, for which read, influence over the Con-Dem government as a whole.

I am glad to acknowledge that LBR is not alone to be concerned with Mr Duncan Smith. Elements even within the Torygraph...whoops, sorry, The Telegraph have concerns too.

Read Tom Chivers here:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tomchivers/100048529/iain-duncan-smith-is-cherry-picking-stats-on-broken-homes-and-criminality/

I particularly like the comment that Mr Duncan-Smith using the misleading statistic. This struck me particularly after listening to Radio 4's 'Thinking Aloud' program, broadcast to podcast on 27-10-10. On the show, Pat Thane of King's College London said that broken marriages are not down to lower morals in today's society.

People like Duncan-Smith seem to hanker for a golden age that didn't exist and are keen to blame the complex problems of society on to a lack of morality. Especially if those lacking in morality happen to be other people. It is good to see that at least some parts of the media are not prone to this type of babble.

"Ten Storey Love Song" by Richard Milward

This is the author’s second book, following on from the fantastic “Apples.” A departure for this book is that it has no paragraphs and no chapters. Or rather the book consists of simply one paragraph and one chapter. To begin with this makes this novel a challenging read, as there are no natural breaks with which to put the book down, make a cup of tea, go to work, and drink beer or whatever one would do in those moments in between reading. The lack of paragraphs and chapters seems to suggest the ‘interconnectedness of everything’ or at least all the characters in this book. However I am open to other suggestions. If you have heard the phrase of ‘interconnectedness of everything’ before, then look no further than Douglas Adams’ Dirk Gently. One is more than happy to purge others for inspiration after all. Milward is my kind of writer. Observant, funny and original, plus the story is about intoxication. What could be better than that?

Just set aside huge chunks of time to yourself in order to read it.

Somebody think of the children! Vote Yes on Prop. 19

Are you from California? Are you worried about your Kids?
Then, this November, vote YES to Prop. 19.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g29WZuhD8OY&feature=sub

Why Women should support drug policy reform

Jack Cole used to be an undercover narcotics officer for the New Jersey State policy.

Here he explains why women should support drug policy reform. Please watch and get involved.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGy-j2AjqN0

Woman's magazine gets the message: Marie Claire

Women will be an important demographic in changing attitudes to our War on Drugs.

Isnt it time to end the failed policy called prohibition?

http://www.marieclaire.co.uk/news/thebigdebate/502923/should-cannabis-be-sold-alongside-alcohol-and-cigarettes.html

A Great Tshirt - Cops Say Legalise Drugs

LEAP - a great organisation. They say yes to prop. 19 too.
http://www.leap.cc/cms/index.php

Mens Magazine gets the message.

Notice I refer to Esquire as a 'Men's magazine' rather than a specialist gentleman's publication. Which would mean something completely different.

Anyway - here is a link I found;
http://www.esquire.com/the-side/richardson-report/drug-war-facts-090109?click=main_sr

The headline says: "A Radical Solution to End the Drug War: Legalize Everything." LBR has a question though: is it me, or is opinion beginning to change in favour of drug policy reform?

Wise words from the Judge: Make Pot Boring

LBR asks all Californians to vote YES on prop 19.

Judge James Gray says it all:

http://judgejamesgray.blogspot.com/2010/10/lets-make-pot-boring-by-judge-jim-gray.html

A new recruit against the drug war: Jane Asher

The picture is from the front page of the Daily Mail (7-7-10). Back in July Jane Asher raised concerns that the war on drugs has failed, after a visit to Glasgow.

But lets make this clear. Glasgow faces the same problems that urban areas all over the UK face. Drugs are readily available and prohibition is unable to do anything to prevent their availability.

Jane Asher was right to draw our attention to this issue.

Links below are from The Telegraph and news.scotsman.com . Interesting to ask why The news.scotsman.com felt the need to give more space to Mothers Against Drugs (MAD) than a serious discussion of the issue.

The Telegraph gives Jane Asher a more balanced report.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/celebritynews/7875642/Jane-Asher-calls-for-drug-laws-to-be-liberalised.html

http://news.scotsman.com/entertainment/Jane-Asher-attacked-over-drugs.6407526.jp - for 'Mothers against Drugs' quote

Politicians that support our drug laws: Cowards !

Paul Flynn explains how history will view his colleagues for not speaking out on the War on Drugs.

Drug Testing: good for parents, then good for the Police

The one objection to ending prohibition that you often hear is the increased use of driving under the influence, with the police being unable to detect drug use by the roadside like they can with drink.

Breathalysers are portable, but drug detection was always a wee bit more problematic. This begs the question as to what the Police having been doing all this time to detect driving under the influence of drugs until now?


Well ask no more -

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8017473/Five-minute-drugs-test-can-tell-parents-if-their-children-use-cocaine.html



However, a quick look at the Daily Mail's comment page suggests that these kits could be used as another tool in the fight to control drugs and keep them illegal. (Comments were accurate at the time of publication of this article on LBR)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1314041/Vantix-Parents-drug-test-childrens-saliva-cannabis-cocaine-use.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

Of course this assumes that these tests work as advertised. Is it possible somebody may be found guilty on one of these machines, and yet they are in fact innocent?

Change the title Elizabeth Burton-Smith: what my family did on drugs

There is no doubt this is an authentic and heartfelt book. It comes with much high praise, from no less a source than our former PM Gordon Brown and current home secretary, Theresa May. Anyone aware of the inadequacies of the Misuse of Drugs act will begin to hear alarm bells ringing as soon as they have read such endorsements. For how could such members of the establishment ever endorse a book that is then critical of prohibition?

The obvious answer is that they wouldn’t. Not that this should detract from this book. No, the book in many ways condemns itself. This is a story of one family’s tragic loss of one of its members to drug addiction, whilst the surviving twin is a recovering heroin addict.

Time and again the narrative by the family’s mother, Elizabeth Burton-Phillips wastes no opportunity to warn of the dangers of drugs and to tell the reader drugs are evil. In many ways this is conventional fare and herein is the problem. Alternatives to current drug policy are not on the agenda in this book.

Here it is worth taking a further look at the book’s title. Mum Can You Lend Me Twenty Quid: What Drugs Did to My Family. And there you have it. This is a story of what the drugs did. This reviewer is certain that this family has suffered during the period of time its’ sons were addicted to heroin. But what follows in the narrative is that the blame lays at the door of drugs, and what drugs did to my family. Yet it never asks if an alternative future for Burton-Phillips sons could have been had under a regime that regulated and controlled drugs, rather than leaving this to criminal gangs.

It does not take a person with a cold heart to adapt the subtitle and question whether it should read: What my family did on drugs. Not when you consider that parents that have lost their children to drugs, but want to see the back of the Misuse of Drugs Act, face a much harder time in getting their voices heard by an unsympathetic media. Indeed, it would be interesting to see former Prime Ministers and current Home Secretaries address their concerns once in a while.

The War on Drugs: it's worse than we thought

LBR was always under the impression that prohibition cost the UK £14bn a year. This figure comes from the pressure group Transform. But not according to the House of Lords. That bastion of radicalism have said the cost is actually £19bn. Every year.

Whilst Labour have elected a new leader (just announced) and the Con-Dems work on a spending review, the cost of keeping drugs illegal are not the agenda.

If you do not trust this column - then ask the House of Lords.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/democracylive/hi/house_of_lords/newsid_8735000/8735625.stm

One day, somebody will die

A fire at a cannabis factory. If there was a fire at a brewery we would be asking questions about how we can improve safety regulations.

An illegal product is beyond our ability to improve the methods used to make its production safe. Prohibition is the cause of the problem. Not the solution.

http://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/news/Cannabis-factory-goes-up-in.6390793.jp

The Labour leadership and medical cannabis: the Milibands

In the last couple of weeks both the Milibands visited Yorkshire in an attempt to convince Labour members to elect them to the leader of the party.

Both performed well, although one impressed your correspondent more than the other. But more of that later.
One question that the both candidates were asked was as follows;
"In the USA 14 states have legislated to improve the quality of life for patients suffering from: Cerebral Palsy, Multiple Sclerosis, Glaucoma, Cancer, Aids, Parkinson's Disease and Arthritis. A 15th state, Arizona, will legislate on this issue in November. 72 per cent of Arizonans support implementing the new law.
The issue is legalising medical cannabis.
Do you support legalising medical cannabis in the UK? Or do you believe patents should be arrested for taking cannabis?"

Now, it would be nice to report that either of the candidates supported measures to help protect patients. Neither did, and would not have been realistic to expect otherwise. It was interesting to see how they handled the question, which of itself was important in the context of becoming leader of the Labour party. Both admitted they had never been asked the question before, which again is important to see how they handled themselves with a question that is unexpected.

David Miliband said he did not want to make any comments about Cannabis in case the comment was taken out of context. But he did not want to see patients arrested either.

Ed Miliband said he didn't want to give me a glib answer and would talk to me about the issue afterwards, as he did not know much about it. After the meeting we then had a wee chat about the issue.

Now their replies were very similar. But my judgement is that Ed was warmer of the two and gave a slightly more impressive answer. Still David Miliband still looks very prime ministerial and very good on TV. My vote is still up for grabs.