Many of the respondents felt that the governmentÕs role was to inform its citizens rather than directly regulate their actions and choices, and thus they suggested that education regarding the consequences of drug use was the most important thing.
ÒThen I think that hash should be legalised. And then there should be information campaign.Ó
Denmark/male/45-60/married/children/standard education/non-smoker
In some cases respondents who were against legalising cannabis expressed the view that if it were to be legalised, it should follow the Dutch system with similar restrictions. These respondents voiced the option that this would allow greater education and information, while also tightening certain restrictions (i.e. age restrictions). Thus the legalisation of cannabis was also seen by some respondents as allowing an open discussion and greater information could be given to cannabis users.
ÒAt least when I look in France (É) itÕs completely hidden under the carpet and yeah, I donÕt think thatÕs a solution either. In any case, what I see happening in the Netherlands slowly, is that an open discussion is now slowly possible, where a couple of experts try to do research, to get a clearer picture of what the effects are.Ó
7.4.7 Discussion
Cannabis is by far the most commonly used illegal substance in Europe. In Belgium, Estonia, Hungary and Portugal between 5Ð10 % of the population has used cannabis, and this rises to 24Ð31 % in Denmark, Spain, France and the UK.178
In recent years there has been increasing public debates as to the advantages and liabilities of the legalisation or decriminalisation of cannabis. Cannabis is progressively viewed as a lifestyle drug which is harmless in moderation, however, there is growing evidence that heavy and abusive use of cannabis may have multiple adverse consequences for personal function and health.179180
While national drug polices across the European Union seek to create a drug-free society their precise mechanism for achieving this varies. Some are based on limiting consumption behaviour while others focus on reducing the negative consequences of drugs for both the individual and society.181 With regard to cannabis, the major negative consequence is considered itÕs potential to act as a gateway drug particularly in reference to misuses of other illicit drugs.182 While the actual causal mechanisms underlying such a gateway are unclear183, some countries, such as the Netherlands, have sought to separate soft and hard drug markets. In theory, by tolerating the sale of cannabis young people who experiment with cannabis are kept away from other illegal hard drugs.181 Indeed there is a growing movement within Europe to decriminalising personal purchase, possession and consumption of cannabis to focus on harm reduction.
It is often argued by pro-cannabis lobby groups that public opinion supports changes in legislation for cannabis use in the general population.184 185 186 Public attitudes towards legalisation of cannabis has been explored in Australia187, the United States188, Norway189, and in Europe through the 2004 Eurobarometer.190 National drug agencies collate drug related statistics but these are not focused on public attitudes.191 192 General attitudes towards legalisation between socio-economic demographics have been explored; however the majority of research has been based upon youngsters and risk groups. 179193
Due to the variations between national drug legalisation the topic of decriminalisation of cannabis was raised in general terms, without specific reference to how the law could be changed. This is a concern as it has been shown that respondents can vary their support depending on the extent of legalisation.187 It should also be noted that cannabis possession and use is not only illegal but also socially taboo in many countries and this was a concern when moderators sought to establish the experiences and attitudes of the respondents.
The legalisation of cannabis for use in the general population was met with mixed responses. Respondents were typically either in favour or against it depending on their view of cannabis as a drug. Those against legalisation generally saw cannabis as a hard drug and were concerned with the major mental health impacts and addiction. By contrast, those respondents who saw cannabis as a soft drug argued that when used in moderation it had few health effects and other licit drugs caused comparable harm (i.e. alcohol and tobacco). Research carried out for the popular media in the UK indicates this is a well supported view; 48% agree that using cannabis is no worse than drinking or smoking, while 34% disagreed, and 17% did not know.194 The research reported here indicates that in similarity with alcohol and tobacco, cannabis use is seen by some as a personal choice which can be consumed in moderation as long as it does not harm others.
The increased normalisation of recreational drug use, including cannabis,195 is likely to be linked to greater exposure of populations to recreational drugs. Throughout the European
Union cannabis use is concentrated among young adults; highest in 15 to 34 year olds (between 11-44% depending on country), predominantly male and more common in urban areas.196 This study did not observe any strong socio-economic or gender variations between the perceptions and arguments of the focus groups. One possible reason for this is that cannabis as a licit drug is normalised not only in users but also in non-users.
The question of legalisation of cannabis was introduced to the focus groups in general terms, and in many cases respondents themselves argued that cannabis should remain illegal but that policing priorities should be changed. This is supported by the research carried out for the popular media in the UK which found that 66% of those surveyed supported legalisation of cannabis or that it should remain illegal but for the police to not prioritise prosecutions.197 Thus 65% felt cannabis possession should be the lowest priority for the police, compared to other crimes such as street robbery, burglary, heroin use and car theft.198 This is consistent with regard to the changes in several EU countries which have recently ratified laws liberalising the personal possession and use of cannabis.199 In this study we found slight variations between age groups, with older groups expressing stronger opposition to legalisation. A similar age variation has been seen in the UK were 45% of 25 to 34 year olds agree with the legalisation of cannabis while only 27% of over 65Õs support this.200
This research also suggested that there was widespread support, by both those in favour of legalisation and those against, for greater drug information campaigns. Respondents called for these to include both information concerning health risks of cannabis and current laws related to possession and consumption. While the legalisation of cannabis or the toleration of personal cannabis use by police would be a step towards separation of hard and soft drug consumption, information campaigns would necessarily have an important role to play. This is especially true within the social environments which exposes youngsters to drugs and where licit and illegal drug use is normalised.
The normalisation of licit and illegal drugs is a growing problem throughout Europe which is unlikely to be successfully tackled through increased regulation and policing.182,183 The EuroPHEN data suggests that some respondents saw moderate recreational use of cannabis as comparable to the use of licit drugs such as alcohol, both in terms of health problems and anti- social behaviour. Respondents supported efforts to separate and regulate soft and hard drug markets to combat cannabis acting as a gateway to the unhealthy use of drugs (either excessive use of soft drugs or progression to hard drugs). While some people rejected the suggestion that cannabis was a hard drug, these tended to be within groups of older people in countries where exposure to cannabis is lower. It is possible that those who see cannabis as a harder drug may be less well informed or have less personal experience of usage themselves or among friends.
The research presented here raises the possibility that individuals are not primarily concerned with the safety of cannabis use itself, but rather with which policy is more effective in preventing progression onto drugs such as heroin or crack cocaine where there are clearer risks to individual and public health. Due to constraints in this project it remains to be explored whether pro-legalisation supporters see legalisation as the best way of stopping people progressing onto harder drugs or if opponents believe that for some, any softer drug use may inevitably place them on the slippery slope to destruction, and therefore all drug use (including alcohol) may be dangerous in this respect. If this is correct then opponents may argue the interests of adults who make autonomous choices, and are able to use cannabis
vulnerable groups such as children, or those with more addictive personalities. However, this hypothesis is speculative and the focus groups did not discuss this specifically.
While it is possible to de-normalise drugs, as illustrated by the current change in social views of tobacco and smoking201, such a policy would require massive resources and relies on a clear evidence basis that smoking moderate amounts of cannabis causes considerable harm. This research indicates that to counter cannabis acting as a gateway, it may be more effective to exploit the existing view that cannabis is a soft drug in contrast to other highly addictive and damaging hard drugs.