Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Law Firm Events
Law Firm Deadlines
TCLA TV
Members
Leaderboards
Premium Database
Premium Chat
Commercial Awareness
Future Trainee Advice
Forums
Aspiring Lawyers - Applications & General Advice
Applications Discussion
Herbert Smith Freehills App
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Jason S" data-source="post: 34380" data-attributes="member: 5540"><p>As someone who is interested in this, here’s a few points I would consider.</p><p></p><p>1) Drugs are already illegal. To what extent is your idea ‘introducing a new law’.</p><p></p><p>2) Legislative prohibition has never worked. From Alcohol in 1920s America, to governments literally murdering drug users/dealers, when demand for narcotics exists, it’s very difficult for policy makers to reduce consumption rates. Furthermore, how would legislation serve to make drugs harder to obtain? Given the inherent legal status of drugs, the entire supply chain is operated by criminal enterprises who, obviously, have no regard for the law. What’s would an addition to preexisting legislation actually do about that? Even more so in a western country where certain personal liberties cannot be infringed upon - if this is the jurisdiction you wish for this new law to be implemented in.</p><p></p><p>3) Worth considering wether more legislation would be counter-intuitive. Drugs in the black market aren’t subject to quality control, resulting in more dangerous product being available (either incredible potent or cut with types of poison) - unlike the legal alternative where drugs would be regulated and “safer”. Also, in some countries where have relaxed the war on drugs (e.g Portugal) and treated drug addiction as an illness rather than a criminal act, consumption rates have decreased. Also takes away a lucrative trade from the hands of criminal organisations. This could certainly be a point raised by an interviewer!</p><p></p><p>Don’t be afraid to go with controversial though. If it’s something you believe strongly about, and you feel you have an air tight argument then go with it!</p><p></p><p>Edit- Thought this was under the post regarding the question “introduce a new law”. Some of my points still stand though haha</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jason S, post: 34380, member: 5540"] As someone who is interested in this, here’s a few points I would consider. 1) Drugs are already illegal. To what extent is your idea ‘introducing a new law’. 2) Legislative prohibition has never worked. From Alcohol in 1920s America, to governments literally murdering drug users/dealers, when demand for narcotics exists, it’s very difficult for policy makers to reduce consumption rates. Furthermore, how would legislation serve to make drugs harder to obtain? Given the inherent legal status of drugs, the entire supply chain is operated by criminal enterprises who, obviously, have no regard for the law. What’s would an addition to preexisting legislation actually do about that? Even more so in a western country where certain personal liberties cannot be infringed upon - if this is the jurisdiction you wish for this new law to be implemented in. 3) Worth considering wether more legislation would be counter-intuitive. Drugs in the black market aren’t subject to quality control, resulting in more dangerous product being available (either incredible potent or cut with types of poison) - unlike the legal alternative where drugs would be regulated and “safer”. Also, in some countries where have relaxed the war on drugs (e.g Portugal) and treated drug addiction as an illness rather than a criminal act, consumption rates have decreased. Also takes away a lucrative trade from the hands of criminal organisations. This could certainly be a point raised by an interviewer! Don’t be afraid to go with controversial though. If it’s something you believe strongly about, and you feel you have an air tight argument then go with it! Edit- Thought this was under the post regarding the question “introduce a new law”. Some of my points still stand though haha [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Our company is called, "The Corporate ___ Academy". What is the missing word here?
Post reply
Forums
Aspiring Lawyers - Applications & General Advice
Applications Discussion
Herbert Smith Freehills App
Top
Bottom
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…