# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Harvard economist explains why legalizing all drugs-including cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamine-would be a better policy than the current prohibition. Question: Why should we legalize all drugs? Jeffrey Miron: My dangerous idea is that we should legalize all of the currently illegal drugs. Not just marijuana but cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, LSD...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The row over the use of medical cannabis has split the government and reignited the wider debate over drug legalisation in the UK.

It follows last week's intervention by Home Secretary Sajid Javid who issued an emergency licence to allow the cannabis oil treatment of a severely epileptic 12-year-old boy whose medication had been confiscated by customs officers.

Despite this, the New Statesman says Javid "is taking a tough line", while Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt has called for cannabis oil to be made freely available on the NHS.

Writing in The Daily Telegraph, former Tory leader William Hague has gone one further and called for cannabis to be legalised for both medicinal and recreational purposes.

Hague said the war on cannabis had "failed utterly" and used his weekly column to attack "deluded" policy-making in Whitehall.

"Everyone sitting in a Whitehall conference room needs to recognise that, out there, cannabis is ubiquitous, and issuing orders to the police to defeat its use is about as up to date and relevant as asking the army to recover the Empire," he writes. "This battle is effectively over."

While the Home Office has set up an expert panel to review medicinal cannabis use, a spokesman today insisted that government would not consider any change in law for its recreational use. Javid later echoed that message.

Canada, meanwhile, is preparing to become the first G7 country to fully legalise marijuana for medicinal and recreational purposes.

So what are the pros and cons of legalising drugs in the UK?

Pro: the war on drugs creates addicts

Russell Brand, Sir Richard Branson, Sting and Michael Mansfield QC were among high-profile signatories to an open letter asking the government to consider decriminalising possession of cannabis in 2014, The Independent reported. Cannabis has been classified as a Class B drug in the UK since 2008 and carries a prison sentence of up to five years for possession.

Release, the drugs charity which organised the letter, says arresting users "creates more harm for individuals, their families and society". It says that if users are not "caught up in the criminal justice system" they have a better chance of escaping addiction and argues that evidence from other countries supports this view. According to Release, users of 'soft' drugs like cannabis are more likely to try something harder, including heroin, when both are illegal.

Con: legalising drugs would create addicts

Kevin Sabet, a leading US academic and opponent of drug liberalisation, told The Guardian: "Legal regulation has been a disaster for drugs like alcohol and tobacco. Both of those drugs are now sold by highly commercialised industries who thrive off addiction for profit."

He concluded: "What we need is much smarter law-enforcement, coupled with real demand reduction in places like Europe and the US." At a time when governments are uniting to stop people smoking, should they really be becoming more laissez-faire about drug use?

Pro: if you can't beat them, regulate them

Sir William Patey, the former UK ambassador to Afghanistan, ruffled feathers when he came out in favour of legalising the trade in opium poppies, from which heroin is derived. Writing in The Guardian, Patey said it was impossible to stop Afghan farmers from growing and exporting opium illegally, and concluded that "if we cannot deal effectively with supply" the only alternative is to "limit the demand for illicit drugs by making a licit supply of them available from a legally regulated market". This would create stability and peace in drug-producing nations.

Con: sending out the 'wrong' message

Prohibitionists argue that legalising drugs would suggest to the public that they are safe to take, flying in the face of evidence showing that even cannabis can damage people's mental and physical health. This is the view of the Home Office, which said in May: "The legalisation of cannabis would send the wrong message to the vast majority of people who do not take drugs, especially young and vulnerable people, with the potential grave risk of increased misuse of drugs."

Pro: regulated drugs are safer

One of the strongest arguments for legalisation and regulation is that it ensures the quality of drugs being consumed.

Drugs sold by dealers are often cut with harmful substances, increasing the risk of suffering adverse effects.

The result is that current UK drug policy has led to the highest ever rate of deaths from overdose. Deaths from heroin more than doubled from 2012 to 2015 while in 2016, 63 people died from ecstasy-related incidents in England and Wales - "deaths that could have been prevented if they'd known better what they were taking" says the Adam Smith Institute's Matt Kilcoyne in City A.M.

Con: the Pope wouldn't like it

Pope Francis has tarnished his glowing liberal credentials as the tweeting pontiff who spoke inclusively about gay people, denounced "unbridled capitalism" and reached out to Muslims, by speaking out against decriminalisation. Francis is a native of Argentina, which borders Uruguay, where cannabis is now legally grown and smoked. He said legalising recreational drugs was "highly questionable" and would "fail to produce the desired effects", reported the Daily Mail. He added that legalisation was "a veiled means of surrendering to the problem".

Pro: big savings for the taxpayer

Legalising cannabis could earn the Treasury up to £3.5bn a year in tax revenues, according to a new report from Health Poverty Action. The international development organisation says the money could be used to plug the gap in the NHS budget.

"Prohibition has failed," said Natasha Horsfield, the group's advocacy officer. "From our perspective, it's about regulating the market to improve public health outcomes and create a safer environment. But we can see the potential benefits from a taxation perspective if we were to regulate it."

A report from the Institute for Social and Economic Research suggests legalisation would save up to £300m in policing, criminal justice and drug treatment services in England and Wales. Health Poverty Action says it would free up the police and judicial systems to address more serious or violent crime and reduce the overall prison burden.

What countries have legalised drugs?

Portugal has led the way in decriminalising the possession of small quantities of any drug since 2001, in a radical experiment that has become the test case for many countries looking to reform their drug laws.

Across Europe, 14 countries have brought in various decriminalisation models for the medical or recreational sale of cannabis.

In December 2013, Uruguay became the first nation to make it legal to grow, consume and sell cannabis. That said, all sales must pass through a government-run marketplace.

Twenty-three US states and the District of Columbia allow marijuana for medical purposes and Washington became the first to permit the recreational use of the plant in 2012, despite a federal ban. Colorado, Oregon, Alaska and the District of Columbia have since followed suit. Cannabis went on sale in Washington in July 2014.

Canada has also joined the marijuana gold rush and is set to become the first G7 country to fully legalise cannabis after lawmakers this week passed a bill that would allow the growing, selling and consumption of cannabis for medical and recreational use. The legislation must still pass the Senate - which could delay, but not block it - and receive royal assent by the governor general before becoming law, likely by September, says MedicalXpress.

By comparison, the UK "has become increasingly isolated in its approach to drugs policy", says P eter Reynolds, president of CLEAR Cannabis Law Reform.

"We are unique among modern democracies in maintaining an approach based on nothing but prohibition. In fact, we now stand closer to countries such as Russia, China, Indonesia and Singapore. The only thing that separates us from countries with such medieval policies is our lack of the death penalty for drug offences," he says.

What happens when drugs are decriminalised?

Multiple studies of what happened in Portugal show the hugely positive impact decriminalisation has had over the past 15 or so years. The country has an extremely low rate of overdose deaths and has reduced the number of HIV-positive people addicted to drugs.

It has also saved millions of euros in prison expenses while the level of drug use has not gone up.

The legalisation of cannabis in some US states has not led to a rise in adolescent use, a US study found. It revealed that while cannabis use was generally higher in the states that had passed medical marijuana legislation before 2014, the passage of such laws did not affect the rate of marijuana use in those states.

British experts pushing for medicinal and research use of the drug welcomed the news. "Patients with... severe health problems are currently being denied effective treatment in the UK," Professor Val Curran, the UK's foremost expert on medical marijuana.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Legalising drugs: what are the pros and cons?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The row over the use of medical cannabis has split the government and reignited the wider debate over drug legalisation in the UK. It follows last week's intervention by Home Secretary Sajid Javid who issued an emergency licence to allow the cannabis oil treatment of a severely epileptic 12-year-old boy whose medication had been confiscated by customs officers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Top 10 Pro & Con Arguments - Death Penalty - ProCon.org

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Should the death penalty be allowed? Morality Constitutionality Deterrence Retribution Irrevocable Mistakes Cost of Death vs. Life in Prison Race Closure for Victims' Families Attorney Quality Physicians at Execution 1. Morality "[W]e reserve the death penalty in the United States for the most heinous murders and the most brutal and conscienceless murderers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Pros and Cons of Euthanasia The Right to Die or Kill

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Pros and Cons of Euthanasia The Right to Die or Kill

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Arguments For and Against Euthanasia | CARE

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
CARE is a company limited by guarantee, registered in England and Wales (No 3481417) Registered as a Charity in England and Wales (No: 1066963) and in Scotland (SC038911) Registered office: 53 Romney Street, London, SW1P 3RF. CARE has no involvement with CARE International.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Arguments For and Against Euthanasia | CARE

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
CARE is a company limited by guarantee, registered in England and Wales (No 3481417) Registered as a Charity in England and Wales (No: 1066963) and in Scotland (SC038911) Registered office: 53 Romney Street, London, SW1P 3RF. CARE has no involvement with CARE International.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Major Pros and Cons of Animal Testing That You Should Know

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Animal testing is making use of animals in experiments carried out for the betterment of human lives. There are many arguments regarding the pros and cons of animal testing. It helps save human lives, but in turn, thousands of animals are injured or killed. There are many animal rights groups that claim killing animals is inhumane.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Animal Testing | Pros & Cons | ProCon.org

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Proponents say animal testing contributes to life-saving cures and treatments. Opponents say animal testing is cruel and inhumane.