Home » Decriminalisation
Category Archives: Decriminalisation
Navigating the Realm of Harm Reduction in the Midst of Chaos
In recent years, Canada has emerged as a trailblazer in progressive drug policy by embracing a bold approach to decriminalization. This paradigm shift represents a departure from the traditional punitive stance toward drug offenses, instead prioritizing harm reduction strategies. As the nation navigates the complex terrain of drug policy reform, it becomes evident that this move holds the promise of addressing public health issues more effectively.
The decriminalization of drugs in Canada is rooted in a recognition of the failure of punitive measures to curb substance abuse. Rather than treating drug addiction as a criminal issue, the emphasis is now on approaching it as a public health concern. By lifting criminal penalties for possession of small amounts of drugs, the Canadian government aims to break the cycle of imprisonment and provide individuals struggling with addiction access to the help they need.
At the core harm reduction is a guiding principle in Canada’s evolving drug policy. Instead of focusing solely on preventing drug use, the emphasis has shifted to minimizing the negative consequences associated with it. This approach includes the distribution of clean needles, supervised injection sites, and access to overdose-reversing medications. By adopting harm reduction strategies, Canada aims to protect the well-being of both individuals using drugs and the broader community.
The decision to decriminalize drugs draws inspiration from the success of Portugal’s approach. In 2001, Portugal decriminalized the possession and use of all drugs, opting for a health-focused model. Over the years, Portugal has witnessed a decline in drug-related deaths, HIV infections, and problematic drug use. Canadian policymakers are eager to replicate these positive outcomes and shift the narrative around drug use from punishment to rehabilitation.
Despite the potential benefits, the decriminalization of drugs in Canada has sparked debates and concerns. Many people have argued that lenient drug policies may contribute to increased drug use, while others worry about the potential strain on public resources for addiction treatment. Furthermore, investigative reporter Tyler Oliveira has demonstrated the damaging effects of drug misuse and homelessness in Vancouver. From watching his investigation, I wonder whether the Canadian government could better use their resources to tackle issues pertaining to homelessness, rather than creating a wider problem of social ills. While there are calls to treat people with issues of addiction more humanely in Canada, Oliveira’s documentary is shocking and, in many ways, frightful. With images of large amounts of methamphetamine users unable to walk and becoming extremely violent to healthcare workers and the general public I wonder if this more towards progressive policy has gone too far (I don’t know how I would feel inhaling meth fumes on my way to my local shop).
Striking a balance between personal freedom and public welfare remains a challenge, but advocates believe that the emphasis on harm reduction will ultimately lead to better outcomes for everyone….
Decriminalization opens the door for more community involvement in addressing drug-related issues. Local initiatives, grassroots organizations, and community outreach programs gain significance as they become crucial players in the broader strategy of harm reduction. By empowering communities, Canada aims to foster a collaborative and compassionate approach to tackling the complex issue of drug addiction.
Canada’s journey toward the decriminalization of drugs represents a paradigm shift in the global war on drugs. By embracing harm reduction as a cornerstone of its strategy, the nation aims to prioritize the health and well-being of its citizens over punitive measures. The lessons learned from Portugal and other progressive models underpin the potential for positive change. As Canada continues to navigate the complexities of drug policy reform, the emphasis on harm reduction holds the promise of transforming the narrative around drug use and addiction. Only time will tell if this bold approach will lead to a healthier, more compassionate society.
Share this:
A Snapshot of My Dissertation: Portuguese Drug Decriminalisation and Some Other Things
I submitted my dissertation back in April, and now the dust has settled I thought it would be good to share the most interesting parts of my research, think of this blog post as an abridged version of my dissertation. Towards the end I’ve also included some tips for completing a dissertation, along with some reading you might like to do if you found this interesting.
What Was my Research About?
My research was about two main areas; Firstly, I wanted to assess the effects of Portugal’s 2001 drug policy whereby all illicit drugs were decriminalised, meaning drug offences relating to personal possession result in a civil punishment rather than a criminal punishment. I assessed key indicators within Portuguese society, gathering data from international, European and national databases which measured public health trends, criminal justice trends and economic trends. Some fields of data I looked at included prices of drugs at market level, drug seizure data, HIV/ AIDS rates among people who inject drugs and the Portuguese prison population.
The second part of my research involved understanding whether a drug decriminalisation policy similar to Portugal’s could currently happen in the UK. I researched this by performing a discourse analysis on drug related House of Commons debate occurring between the years 1970- 2023, selecting roughly one debate every two years. By doing this, I was able to analysis common themes across the years, understanding the political barriers which may mean drug decriminalisation is not a feasible policy idea at the moment given the political attitude and climate within the House of Commons when it comes to illicit drug policy.
What Did I Find Out?
Look through the slideshow below to view summaries of my findings.
Some Final Comments and Conclusions:
Generally, my research found that Portuguese drug decriminalisation correlated with effects that can be seen as positives. Of course, my research needs to be looked at critically, I don’t claim that all of the societal indicators are directly attributable to the drug decriminalisation policy, however, the correlations that were found are promising. Policy is always a really complex, multi-faceted topic and it would be simplistic to suggest otherwise.
So is a drug decriminalisation policy likely to happen in the UK? The short answer is probably not very likely at all. My discourse analysis pointed towards five decades of debate which was hyper focused on a law and order approach to drug use, a fixation on low level cannabis use and an insistence on the idea that deterrence measures and the war on drugs is actually working. The debates felt stagnant, with new and progressive approaches being hindered by penal populism and ‘tough on crime’ stances.
During my research I found some really interesting reads and different points of view that I hadn’t considered before. I’ve listed some of my favourite pieces below if you’d like to have a read further into this subject.
- Cebral T.S. (2017) “The 15th anniversary of the Portuguese Drug Policy: Its history, its success and its future,” Drug Science, Policy and Law, 3. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050324516683640
- Eastwood, N., Fox, E. and Rosmarin, A. (2016) “Portugal,” in A quiet revolution: Drug decriminalisation across the Globe. London, UK: Release drugs the law and human rights. https://www.release.org.uk/sites/default/files/pdf/publications/A%20Quiet%20Revolution%20-%20Decriminalisation%20Across%20the%20Globe.pdf
- Goldstein, P.J. (1985) “The drugs/violence nexus: A Tripartite Conceptual Framework,” Journal of Drug Issues, 15(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/002204268501500406
- Jacques, S. and Allen, A. (2015) “Drug market violence: Virtual anarchy, police pressure, predation, and retaliation,” Criminal Justice Review, 40(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/0734016814553266
All of the data used is available from The Hansard Archives, European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control and The World Prison Brief. Also, I used Taguette to analyse my qualitative data, it’s totally free and it was so useful.
Share this:
Do You Remember the Time? At the Lynching Memorial
On September 11, 2021 I visited the Lynching Memorial, which is near the newly expanded Equal Justice Initiative Museum, From Enslavement to Mass Incarceration.
At the heart of the “National Memorial for Peace and Justice” (Lynching memorial) is a vast collection of giant, rusty metal, rectangular pillars, hanging tightly together like a neatly planned and well-looked-after orchard.
Etched in each are the names of (known) lynching victims by date.
We can see that, at times, entire families were lynched.
The pillars are hung so cleverly that one has to experience this artistic installation in person.
Nonetheless, the subject of white terrorism in the deep south is heavy,
Which is perhaps why Guests are invited to visit the nearby museum before the Memorial.
One needs time to prepare.
Naturally, sandwiched between enslavement and mass incarceration exhibits,
The museum also has an array of material on lynching.
This included a giant mural of jars surrounded by videos, infographic murals, maps and
An interactive register of every known lynching by county, date, state, and name.
I’m still stuck on the mural of snapshots of actual lynching advertisements, and
Pictures of actual news reports of victims’ final words.
These were the actual final words of folks etched forever in these hanging, rusty pillars.
Ostensibly, written by war correspondents.
Standing in awe of the museum’s wall of jars, I chatted with a tall Black man about my age.
He’d traveled here from a neighboring state with his teen son to, as he said,
“See how this stuff we go through today ain’t new.”
I recounted to him what a young man at the EJI memorial had showed me a few years ago:
A man’s name who’d been lynched early last century for selling loose cigarettes –
Just like Eric Garner!
Yet, even since then,
We’ve gotten the police murders of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor,
Or even Michael Brown, Walter Scott and Philando Castile.
Amadou Diallo was shot 19 times in 1999, standing on his own stoop
And while Jayland Walker got 46 bullets this year while fleeing on foot.
Tamir Rice!
Tamir Rice was a little boy.
A little boy playing in the park. But his mere presence terrified a white man.
So he called 9-1-1 and the police showed up and shot Tamir within seconds!
We can watch the tape.
All of these martyrs are included in the museum’s growing timelines (sigh).
After their own legal work in representing the wrongfully imprisoned for damn near life,
EJI began collecting jars of dirt near every known lynching, and
If invited by local officials, EJI would offer a memorial plaque and ceremony commemorating that community’s recognition of historic injustice(s).
An open field sits next to the suspended pillars, filled with a duplicate of each pillar.
These duplicates sit, having yet to be collected and properly dedicated by each county.
These communities are denied healing, and we know wounds fester.
The field of lame duplicates effectively memorializes the festering denial in our body politic.
There are far too many unrecorded victims and versions of white mob violence, and intimidation, not just barbarous torture and heinous murder.
Outside of these few sorts of memorials,
We do have to wonder how else this rich history has stayed in our collective memories.
Too many Black families were too traumatized to talk and didn’t want to pass it to their kids.
We know many fled after any minor incursion,
Just as someone had advised Emmet Till to do,
And there’s no accounting for them and the victims’ families who fled and
Even hid or discarded any news clippings they’d seen of the events.
Yet, whites must have kept record.
Did whites collect the newspaper ads or reports of a lynching they’d attended or hoped to?
They made and sold lynching postcards, curios, and other odd lynching souvenirs.
Where are the avid collectors?
Plus, apparently, terrorists don’t just kidnap and hang someone to death,
So what did they do with all the ears, noses, fingers, and genitals they cut off?
Or eyes they plucked out?
Or scalps they shaved?
Many victims pass out from the immense pain of being tortured and burned alive, but still
I doubt all those pieces and parts got thrown in the fire, because, of course,
Plenty of pictures show entire white families there to celebrate the lynching like (a) V-day.
And in many ways, it was, and
The whites looked as if they would’ve wanted to remember.
Looks can be deceiving, but the ways whites were also bullied into compliance is real.
Still, my mother swears that some white families’ heirlooms must include
Prized, preserved pieces of Nat Turner.
Ooh, wouldn’t that be a treasure that would be.
Plus, given the spate and state of anti-Black policing and violence,
Our democracy, nay, our Constitution itself, is as rusty as these pillars.
The pillars resting in the field remind us not only the work left to do, but also, it’s urgency.
How many more pillars may we still need?
How many amendments did will freedom take?
It goes to show how great thou art now!
See: Slave Ads at the EJI Museum
Share this:
“A small case of injustice”
Pride as a movement in the UK but also across the world signals a history of struggles for LGBTQ+ community and their recognition of their civil rights. A long journey fraught with difficulties from decriminalisation to legalisation and the eventual acceptance of equal civil rights. The movement is generational, and in its long history revealed the way social reactions mark our relationship to morality, prejudice, criminalisation and the recognition of individual rights. In the midst of this struggle, which is ongoing, some people lost their lives, others fell compelled to end theirs whilst others suffer social humiliation, given one of the many colourful pejoratives the English language reserved for whose accused or suspected for being homosexuals.
This blog will focus on one of the elements that demonstrates the relationship between the group of people identified homosexual and the law. In sociological terms, marginalised groups, has a meaning and signals how social exclusion operates against some groups of people, in these case homosexuals but it does apply to any group. These groups face a “sharper end” of the law, that presumably is equal to all. This is the fallacy of the law; that there are no inherent unfairness or injustice in laws. The contention for marginalised groups is that there are presumptions in the law on purported normality that disallows them to engage fully with the wider community in some cases forced to live a life that leads all the way to segregation.
Take for example “entrapment”. Originally the practice was used by law enforcement officers to identify counterfeit money, later to investigate the sales of untaxed tobacco or the use of unlicensed taxis. The investigation in law allows for the protection of the public, non uniform officers to pose as customers in order to reveal criminalities that occur in the dark corners of society. The focus predominantly was to protect consumers and the treasury from unpaid tax. So, from that how did the law enforcement officers use it to arrest homosexuals? It is interesting to note we can separate the letter of the law as opposed to the spirit of the law. This distinction is an important one criminologically whilst for the law enforcement agencies evidently there is no such distinction.
The most recent celebrity case led to the arrest of George Michael in Los Angeles, US; the operation led to the outing of the artist and his conviction. As a practice across many years, entrapment played a significant part in the way numerous homosexuals found themselves arrested given a criminal record, loss of employment and in some cases ending up in prison. It is important to note that prior to the Sexual Offences Act of 1967, the biggest sexual crime in England and Wales was that of homosexuality (recorded as indecency or buggery). It took decades for that statistic to change, although historically remains still the highest category.
The practice of entrapment employed by the police demonstrates the uphill struggle the LGBTQ+ community faced. Not only they had to deal with social repulsion of the wider community that detested, both their practices and their existence, but also with public officials who used entrapment to criminalise them. This was happening whilst the professionals were divided about the origins of homosexual “anomaly” and how to deal with it, the practice of entrapment added new convictions and supplied more humiliation to those arrested. For the record, the criminological community was split along theoretical lines on this; the classicists such as Bentham argued for the decriminalisation of sodomy whilst the positivists namely Lombroso considered homosexuals to be in the class of moral criminals (one of the worst because they are undeterred) .
The issue however is neither theoretical, nor conceptual; for those who were aware of their sexuality it was real and pressing. During the post WWII civil rights movement, people started taking note of individual differences and how these should be protected by privacy laws allowing those who do not meet the prescribed “normal” lifestyles to be allowed to live. It emerged that people who were successful in their professional lives, like Alan Turing, John Forbes Nash Jr, John Gielgud etc etc, found themselves facing criminal procedures, following string operations from the police. This injustice became more and more evident raising the profile of the change in the law but also in the social attitudes.
In 2001 Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead addressed the issue of entrapment head on. In his judgement in Regina v Looseley:
“It is simply not acceptable that the state through its agents should lure its citizens into committing acts forbidden by the law and then seek to prosecute them for doing so. That would be entrapment. That would be a misuse of state power, and an abuse of the process of the courts. The unattractive consequences, frightening and sinister in extreme cases, which state conduct of this nature could have are obvious. The role of the courts is to stand between the state and its citizens and make sure this does not happen.”
This was the most damming condemnation of the practice of entrapment and a vindication for all those who faced prosecution as the unintended consequence of the practise. For the record, in 2017 under the Policing and Crime Act, included the “Alan Turing law” that pardoned men who were cautioned or convicted for historical homosexual acts. The amnesty received mixed reviews and some of those who could apply for denied doing so because that would require admission of wrongdoing. The struggle continues…
Regina v Looseley, 2001 https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200102/ldjudgmt/jd011025/loose-1.htm
Share this:
The Ho Stro’ (A quick peek at a little sex work) #BlackAsiaWithLove
The original, unofficial Ho Stro’ theme song. Play this while reading (see below).
Sitting on the curb of a busy road along the railroad track.
Wearing a mini skirt with your legs spread, bent over
Scratching your wig with one of your long fire-engine red fingernails, while
Reaching in your purse for the matching lipstick.
It’s half past midnight, the night is young.
4 women on the Ho Stro’ between the railroad track, a busy road, and a giant city park.
Hoes stroll day and night.
I’ve been on my way to work, or
Watching the sunrise on my way home from clubbing,
Rain or shine,
These hoes are inline
On time.
Scattered along the railroad track facing the park,
Sometimes 1 by 1, sometimes in twos;
And an elderly woman within eyeshot.
I’ve seen a crack head or two, too,
Trying to push herself up to any mens passing by.
Crack or smack,
I’m not sure what these hoes do,
But I know it’s whack.
Frail, emaciated, veins popping and tattered.
They rarely cross the road and venture along the train track.
Over here it’s wide open,
The hoes along the track roam in packs…
Whereas the park side of the stroll provides the crack heads some cover.
For a while, I resisted knowing that these women were hoes.
But one evening,
A couple of hoes showed up at my favorite Beef Noodle joint as I sat for dinner.
All cheery and bubbly,
Dressed for a night out.
Greeting everyone that comes in as you do in your neighborhood joint*
One of the ladies came over towards me, all bubbly and cheery,
Stretched out and unfolded her hands as if she were about to offer me something,
Then jabbed her index finger in-and-out of… you get it.
Yes, THAT universal gesture,
Though it didn’t seem lude coming from her, over a bowl of Pho.
I politely declined, they placed their orders and sat down.
Hoes gotta eat, too.
In my after-dinner walks around the lake,
I have to watch out when I reach the long, straight, tree-lined stretch along the track.
There, there’s nothing but cars parked,
And tea stalls at both ends.
Hoes tend to congregate right in the middle.
Pulling tricks.
No man gets by unsolicited.
It’s as if the bright fire-red were their signal.
Fire-engine red lipstick and false nails to match.
Sometimes a matching skirt, purse and shoes, too.
It’s loitering, but
Soliciting men, too.
The men know where to find them, these hoes are always there.
Street crawlers know where to find them.
Rush hour or late-night,
Early morning, and absolutely at high noon…
Women can’t loiter.
Just look at how we treat women who are not even in the trade.
Meanwhile, men and boys in most parts of the world can hang out anywhere, anytime.
Men are much freer at this level of corporeal control and bodily integrity –
In public and private space.
Although I’d argue that we teach boys to disintegrate into the night.
This is exactly the breach that’s reached here.
These hoes stroll.
There is a Ho Stro’ in every city I know!
Pimps, hookers, hoes, tricks, johns and everybody in between can see.
Who do the law-keepers claim are the criminals?
Hey mister, have you got a dime?
Mister: Voulez-vous coucher avec moi ce soir?
—
*I’ve only lived here a half a year, so I’m sure this is their hood; I’m new to the party.
NB: Ho Stro’ or whore stroll is an American southern vernacular term – the first term I learned as a kid – for a red-light district. PLEASE, do not look up Ho Stroll on YouTube but if you must this one from LA is HILARIOUS And please, seriously, don’t bother looking up words for the clients of female sex workers.
Share this:
Empathy Amid the “Fake Tales of San Francisco”*
This time last week, @manosdaskalou and I were in San Francisco at the American Society of Criminology’s conference. This four-day meeting takes place once a year and encompasses a huge range of talkers and subjects, demonstrating the diversity of the discipline. Each day there are multiple sessions scheduled, making it incredibly difficult to choose which ones you want to attend.
Fortunately, this year both of our two papers were presented on the first day of the conference, which took some of the pressure off. We were then able to concentrate on other presenters’ work. Throughout discussions around teaching in prison, gun violence and many other matters of criminological importance, there was a sense of camaraderie, a shared passion to understand and in turn, change the world for the better. All of these discussions took place in a grand hotel, with cafes, bars and restaurants, to enable the conversation to continue long after the scheduled sessions had finished.
Outside of the hotel, there is plenty to see. San Francisco is an interesting city, famous for its Golden Gate Bridge, the cable cars which run up and down extraordinarily steep roads and of course, criminologically speaking, Alcatraz prison. In addition, it is renowned for its expensive designer shops, restaurants, bars and hotels. But as @haleysread has noted before, this is a city where you do not have to look far to find real deprivation.
I was last in San Francisco in 2014. At that point cannabis had been declassified from a misdemeanour to an infraction, making the use of the drug similar to a traffic offence. In 2016, cannabis was completely decriminalised for recreational use. For many criminologists, such decriminalisation is a positive step, marking a change from viewing drug use as a criminal justice problem, to one of public health. Certainly, it’s a position that I would generally subscribe to, not least as part of a process necessary to prison abolition. However, what do we really know about the effects of cannabis? I am sure my colleague @michellejolleynorthamptonacuk could offer some insight into the latest research around cannabis use.
When a substance is illegal, it is exceedingly challenging to research either its harms or its benefits. What we know, in the main, is based upon problematic drug use, those individuals who come to the attention of either the CJS or the NHS. Those with the means to sustain a drug habit need not buy their supplies openly on the street, where the risk of being caught is far higher. Thus our research population are selected by bad luck, either they are caught or they suffer ill-effects either with their physical or mental health.
The smell of cannabis in San Francisco is a constant, but there is also another aroma, which wasn’t present five years ago. That smell is urine. Furthermore, it has been well documented, that not only are the streets and highways of San Francisco becoming public urinals, there are also many reports that public defecation is an increasing issue for the city. Now I don’t want to be so bold as to say that the decriminalisation of cannabis is the cause of this public effluence, however, San Francisco does raise some questions.
- Does cannabis cause or exacerbate mental health problems?
- Does cannabis lead to a loss of inhibition, so much so that the social conventions around urination and defecation are abandoned?
- Does cannabis lead to an increase in homelessness?
- Does cannabis increase the likelihood of social problems?
- Does the decriminalisation of cannabis, lead to less tolerance of social problems?
I don’t have any of the answers, but it is extremely difficult to ignore these problems. The juxtaposition of expensive shops such as Rolex and Tiffany just round the corner from large groups of confused, homeless people, make it impossible to avoid seeing the social problems confronted by this city. Of course, poor mental health and homelessness are not unique to San Francisco or even the USA, we have similar issues in our own town, regardless of the legal status of cannabis. Certainly the issue of access to bathroom facilities is pressing; should access to public toilets be a right or a privilege? This, also appears to be a public health, rather than CJS problem, although those observing or policing such behaviour, may argue differently.
Ultimately, as @haleysread found, San Francisco remains a City of Contrast, where the very rich and the very poor rub shoulders. Unless, society begins to think a little more about people and a little less about business, it seems inevitable that individuals will continue to live, eat, urinate and defection and ultimately, die upon the streets. It is not enough to discuss empathy in a conference, no matter how important that might be, if we don’t also empathise with people whose lives are in tatters.
*Turner, Alex, (2006), Fake Tales of San Francisco, [CD]. Recorded by Arctic Monkeys in Whatever People Say I Am, That’s What I’m Not, The Chapel: Domino Records
Share this:
Surviving in a changing environment: the use of illicit drugs
Recent months have seen a rebirth in drug related news stories, often linked to the death of young people or babies or the dealing of drugs by youth and gangs. This led me to consider the place of drugs in British Society, not in terms of their distribution, production, cost, but the reasons why illicit drug use continues to be prominent in UK society. There is plenty of research on this topic and considerable political commentary on the problem, however is drug use really a problem or are we simply more aware of illicit drug use and more open to discussing it? There are certainly arguments for both sides but neither address the reason why drugs are in our society and this led me to consider the speculative argument that cocaine use is increasing, or at least shifting to a newer market.
Cocaine, historically the drug of choice for celebrities and the wealthy is now spreading across society to a wider social demographic by why? The main argument produced by the ACMD is that there is a two-tier market based on purity, the more pure and thus more expensive continues to be used by celebrities and the wealthy but a less pure, cheaper version is now available for those less affluent. I don’t doubt the validity of this argument but I think there is more to this than simply price and purity. Historically, drugs that are now illegal were widely available and staple part of people’s daily lives helping to mask the harshness of life or facilitate their functionality within working and social environments. Has much changed? The political drive to make us do more for less is certainly evident in modern society as is the harsh effects of poverty and deprivation, both of which can lead to drug use, albeit these once legal substances are now illegal.
In addition, developments in technology and globalisation have significantly increased the pace of life for most people; we work longer hours to survive or because it is demanded of us, we juggle more commitments than ever before, we are expected to absorb and process huge amounts of information instantaneously all of which has sped up our lives to the point of sensory overload but are our bodies and minds really designed to cope with this long-term? When I was at university I studied during the day and worked nights so the maximum amount of sleep I would get in any 24 hour period was about 4 hours and this was broken sleep, usually between 4pm and 8pm. At that time the drug of choice was pro plus and without it, I would not have been able to sustain this lifestyle for three years. I’d like to say this was just a small period in my life that such actions were needed to follow my dream but the reality is that as the work-life balance blurs and demands on our time increase, time to sleep erodes and our bodies are not designed to operate well on minimal sleep. This naturally leads to the inclusion of stimulants in our daily lives to help us to function, whether that be caffeine or cocaine is a personal choice but potentially a necessary evil if we wish to survive.
That is not say that I condone the use of illicit drugs but that does not mean that I can’t see the potential benefits of such substances. There are numerous documentaries highlighting the use of uppers to stay awake and downers to sleep amongst the celebrity population whose lifestyles can be chaotic. The question is, has this chaos now spread to wider society as the cost of living increases and the political momentum for us to ‘do more’ continues to grow? If it has, then illicit drugs will remain a staple part of societies coping mechanism, whether that be too dull the harshness of daily life or enable us to survive in a changing environment.
Share this:
“Sticks and stones will break my bones, but names will never hurt me”
The academic year is almost over and it offers the time and space to think. It’s easy to become focused on what needs to be done – for staff; teaching and marking assessments, for students; studying and writing assessments – which leaves little time to stop and contemplate the bigger questions. But without contemplation, academic life becomes less vibrant and runs the risk of becoming procedural and task oriented, rather than the pursuit of knowledge. Reading becomes a chore instead of a pleasure, mindlessly trying to make sense of words, without actually taking time out to think what does this actually mean. We’re all guilty of trying to fill every minute with activity; some meaningful, some meaningless that we forget to stop, relax and let our minds wander. Similarly, writing becomes a barrier because we focus on doing rather than thinking. With this in mind what follows is not a reasoned academic argument but rather a stream of thought
As some of you will remember, a while ago Manos and I had a discussion around words in Criminology (Facebook Live: 24.10.16). In particular, whether words can, or should, be banned and if there is a way of reclaiming, or rehabilitating language. Differing views have emerged, with some strongly on the side of leaving words deemed offensive to die out, whilst others have argued for reclamation of the very same terms. Others still have argued for the reclamation of language, but only by those who the language was targeted toward.
All this talk made me think about the way we use language in crime and justice and the impact this has on the individuals involved. This can be seen in everyday life with the depiction of criminals and victims, the innocents and the guilty, recidivists and those deemed rehabilitated, but we rarely consider the long-lasting effects of these words on individuals.
The recent commemoration (27.07.17) of the fiftieth anniversary of the Sexual Offences Act 1967 brought some of these thoughts to the forefront of my mind. This legislation partially decriminalised sex between men (aged 21 or over) but only in private, meaning that homosexual relationship were confined and any public expression of affection was still liable to criminal prosecution. This anniversary, coming six months after the passing of “Turing’s Law” (officially, the Policing and Crime Act 2017) made me think about the way in which we recompense these men; historically identified as criminals but contemporaneously viewed in a very different light.
I view the gist of “Turing’s Law” as generally positive, offering the opportunity for both the living and dead, to clear their names and expunge their criminal records. After all it allows society to recognise the wrongs done in the name of the law to a not unsubstantial group of citizens. For me, where this legal righting of wrongs falls down, is in the wording. To offer someone a pardon suggests they are forgiven for their “sins” rather than acknowledging that the law (and society) got it wrong. It does not recognise the harm suffered by these men over the course of their lifetimes; a conviction for sexual offending cannot be shrugged off or easily explained away and leaves an indelible mark. Furthermore, whilst the dead are to be pardoned posthumously, the onus is on the men still living, to seek out their own disregard and pardon.
Thoughts from the criminology team 