I watched part of a local TV program yesterday : ‘council matters’, sitting of the local city council meetings. One item they were discussing : potential locations to allow sale of ‘Psychoactive substances’ (aka ‘legal highs’). This seems a little strange to me; after a public backlash, these substances, generically called ‘legal highs’ were supposedly removed from sale & I understood that any licenses were suspended or cancelled.. pending further legislative review. BUT listening to the brief comments by local councilors, it sounded like there could be a ‘covert’ effort/moves to allow them back on sale, in the near future ?
This is a total legal inconsistency.. as they refuse to consider, similar legislation for ‘natural herb’ cannabis or other drugs (eg MDMA). WHY ?
During the discussions it was mentioned that they were gearing up for updated laws, to allow retails sales to possibly recommence. The issues were around avoiding these sales to occur near ‘sensitive’ sites: schools, mental health hospitals/residences, maybe churches etc. BUT if these substances do go back on sale.. anyone wishing to get them, will find these licensed outlets. There was also mention of these substances meeting ‘low risk’ requirements.. this is the other inconsistency; there are claims that these SYNTHETIC cannabinoids are somehow less harmful & lower risk than the natural plant.. TOTALLY RIDICULOUS, but true !!
One comment made (paraphrase) ‘whilst these substances are unpopular with some in society.. the reality is you will not stop them’; the same could be said about all other ‘illegal drugs’.. so why are they still excluded from this legislative review ?? Double-Standard