An Officer Speaks: Should Drugs Be Legalised?

I apologise to everyone who regularly visits my blog that I have not been posting for some time now. One reason is that I simply do not have the time. Another is that I have determined not to respond to any adverse media reports concerning the police services of England and Wales. Why? Well, other police bloggers do so and I would merely be writing about the same topic but in a different manner. As I have said before, I only ever wanted to explore what it is to be a police officer and to share this with a wider audience. I wanted to demonstrate that being a police officer isn't just a job, it's a vocation, something that affects every aspect of your life whether on-duty or not.

I can't think of any better way to illustrate the above other than in this latest guest posting. It's from a police officer in Canada who devotes his own time to an issue he feels very strongly about: the legalisation of drugs. Of course, I have read about this in numerous newspapers, but it has always been portrayed as an indication of defeat on the war against drugs to even to consider it. I'm still undecided on the issue, but will certainly post a comment once I have digested what Officer Bratzer has written.


I would like to thank the Inspector for the opportunity to write this guest post. A successful blog represents a great personal effort and it was gracious of the Inspector to share a community of readers drawn together by his excellent writing.

A little about me: my name is David Bratzer and I am a police officer from Canada. I have a strong interest in drug policy reform which I pursue off-duty as a volunteer with Law Enforcement Against Prohibition. LEAP is an international organization of 13,000 current and former law enforcement officers who seek to minimize death, disease, crime and addiction by gradually legalizing and regulating all drugs. I should clarify that my opinions are my own and they do not represent those of my police department. Also, I still enforce the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act while on-duty (this is the act that criminalizes drug use in Canada). This might seem hypocritical - and often I do feel that way - but one can’t swear an oath to uphold the law and then pick and choose which laws to enforce.

The argument in favour of legalizing drugs like cocaine, heroin and ecstasy is not that they are beneficial or fun. Instead, LEAP argues these drugs are so dangerous they need to be regulated and controlled by the government. Under prohibition, the government has no control. It is the drug dealer who chooses price, purity, cutting agents as well as business location and operating hours. And these dealers certainly are not asking minors for ID, nor are they encouraging their
customers to moderate or abstain from drug use.

After decades of heavy enforcement, illicit drugs are cheaper, more potent and more available than ever before. By legalizing and regulating drugs, the British government could launch an economic war against organized crime by removing the profit motive from the black market.

Although legalization might seem like some kind of crazy utopian idea, it is actually a well researched crime control theory with broad support from across the political spectrum. This includes conservative organizations such as;

The Economist magazine as well as The UK Libertarian Party which promotes the “legalisation of all narcotic substances for adult consumption” as part of its platform.

LEAP has several representatives in the UK: Francis Wilkinson, retired Chief Constable from Gwent; Paul Whitehouse, former Chief Constable of Sussex; and James Duffy, a retired police inspector from Scotland. The Transform Drug Policy Foundation maintains a more complete list of officers who believe the current drug laws should be partially or fully abolished.

LEAP also offers stealth membership for those officers who are concerned about personal attacks and harassment if they go public with their views. You might have noticed that many of the names above are retired officers or senior police managers. Perhaps the readers of this blog can enlighten me: what are the laws and policies in the United Kingdom regarding police officers and free speech? What would happen if rank-and-file serving officers called for drug legalization as a public safety measure?

This is an important question because the War on Drugs has been a disaster for British police agencies. It is time for officers at all levels to acknowledge the significant damage done to the vital profession of policing through the enforcement of drug prohibition.

These consequences include diminished public respect, alienation from youth, recruiting difficulties, increased call loads, budget pressures, unfavourable case law, drug-related corruption and on-duty officer injuries and deaths.

Drug trafficking and drug use are consensual but harmful activities. Criminalizing these activities instead of regulating them results in gang violence, organized crime, property crime and the spread of HIV and Hepatitis C. Police and the legal professions must examine crime control efforts with a critical eye, particularly in the area of drug policy because the time for change is long overdue.

What do you think? Should drugs be legalized and regulated?

An Explanation for My Epiphany

I have to admit I've had cause to reflect on blogging after reading that one of my fellow police officers described my last post as being one from a 'brave' police officer who is prepared to carry on 'causing trouble with this police blogging lark.' I'm not brave, I've never intended to cause trouble, and this isn't a lark for me. I'm a coward who hides behind anonymity, I am not responsible for the 'trouble' police bloggers cause - the government is - and I take all of this very seriously. If we didn't write about what irks us, the public would think that we are indeed agents of that government, and not servants to the public.

I want to stress at this point that I haven't taken offence by Area Trace No Search's comment, not a bit of it. He writes a great blog and I sincerely hope he continues to do so. What's more, I hope that my last post doesn't lead that fine officer to cease blogging because he's concerned that my declaration of support for the Libertarian Party is unbecoming of a police officer and would therefore lead other unscrupulous journalists to 'out' us. However, I have to say that upon reading the Libertarian manifesto, I finally found a party that reflects my deep-founded political beliefs. In particular, their views on policing. Here is an excerpt from their manifesto on policing:

1. The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder.
2. The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon the public approval of police actions.
3. Police must secure the willing co-operation of the public in voluntary observation of the law to be able to secure and maintain the respect of the public.
4. The degree of co-operation of the public that can be secured diminishes proportionately to the necessity of the use of physical force.
5. Police seek and preserve public favour not by catering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service to the law.
6. Police use physical force to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or to restore order only when the exercise of persuasion, advice, and warning is found to be insufficient.
7. Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent upon every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
8. Police should always direct their action strictly towards their functions, and never appear to usurp the powers of the judiciary.
9. The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with it.

This is not the viewpoint of some lunatic-fringe contingent. It actually extols all of the elements of policing that I and my fellow police bloggers write about on a daily basis. It's what we want. It's what you want. More pertinently, the above principles are those laid out by the founding father of the first ever professional police force - the Metropolitan Police Service - and that man is Sir Robert Peel. I should also point out that Mr Peel was a Conservative, and he lived in a time when conservative principles were those that are now reflected in the policies of the Libertarian Party. So, if my identity is exposed and the Chief Constable should decide to hang me for my views, then so be it. Hang me. Hang me high.

On a different but related note, I read an excellent post from Hog Day Afternoon today. Not just for the fact that it was so well written, but for one sentence. It was his desire to get home to Mrs H. I don't know why this hit a chord with me, but it did. So, I am to take a brief respite from blogging, only for a few days, to spend some time with Mrs Hobbes and Baby Hobbes, even though my wife is quick to expose my faults.

Anyway, I hope this encourages Area Trace No Search to continue blogging, he would be a sad loss to the community. Until I return, I'd appreciate your thoughts on this and my previous posts. I've messed around with the settings on my blog, and if anyone cares to comment on previous posts I should get an e-mail alerting me, so I promise I shall respond.

In the meantime, please don't forget to show your support on Armed Forces Day this weekend. It's a time to show appreciation for all of those young men and women - past and present - who are prepared to give their lives in order to protect our liberty.

Kind of brings all of the above into perspective, doesn't it?

An Epiphany

Hopefully, my last two posts on The Need for Justice clearly set out my values and principles, together with the reasons (naive reasons perhaps) as to why I joined the Police Service. To date, I've never been affiliated with any politcal party because none of them espouse the philosophical principles I hold. That was until I came across a web-site via Katabasis that is.

Unfortunately, as a serving police officer, it is a disciplinary offence for me to become politically active. Nor should I publically promote the viewpoint of any particular party because this may not represent the views of the Utopian Police Force. What a shame. I strongly discourage any of you from clicking on the links on this page (which I didn't put on here) and, if you do, well, it's nothing to do with me. I don't agree with their views as a serving police officer, even though as a citizen I do agree with them. However, I don't have the same rights as an ordinary citizen.


So, whatever you do, don't join this party and never, ever, stand for selection within that party as a candidate in any of the general, local and European Elections, because I can't say I'd like to see this party win. And I can't say that I would vote for them.

Even though I would.