Shops banned from importing legal highs
Tuesday 7th April 2009, 11:30AM BST.
Spice is one of the legal highs affected by the importation ban.
FROM today, shops will be banned from importing legal highs.
The products, often an unknown mixture of herbs and chemicals, are sold as alternatives to drugs such as cannabis.
The Home Department, in association with Health and Social Services, has agreed to ban the import and export of legal highs for commercial use.
Possession of them will still not be a criminal offence, although this is being kept under review.
Health professionals have warned about the problems with legal highs.
‘Two years ago I was aware of hardly any legal high-related problems,’ said consultant psychiatrist Dr Peter Turner.
‘Recently, I have seen mental health problems associated with the use of legal highs and have advised the people concerned not to use these substances.’
Director of public health Dr Stephen Bridgman had ‘significant concerns’ about the health effects of these substances.
- To read Guernsey Press stories in full click here for subscription details. Individual editions are now available online.
Campaigns
Voice For Victims
Voice for Victims is a campaign aimed at promoting the rights of those affected by child sexual abuse.
This is Guernsey
Guernsey Press
A step in the right direction no doubt but it doesn’t go far enough. We are constantly told that “legal highs” are dangerous to mental health, so why the half measures?
If importation (and therefore effectively selling) is illegal, why is possession not illegal also? What message does that send to the illicit drug dealers who overnight have now become the only source of “legal highs” and can therefore knock the price up, safe in the knowledge that as possession is not illegal the onus is on the courts to prove intent to distribute.
Then there is the mixed message it sends to impressionable users that it’s OK to mess up your mind with chemicals as long as you don’t get caught bringing them into the island or selling them to your mates.
If they are dangerous to mental health, they should be fully classified as an illegal drug the same as crack and LSD. That way the message is sent loud and clear that these substances are dangerous to health and well-being.
Report abuse
i think its wrong stopping legal highs from being imported and exported because while they are legal people don’t smuggle in as much illegal drugs such as heroin and cannabis which have a far worse effect on mental health issues.
Report abuse
I am so delighted that this herbal spice is banned its caused nothing but problems for friends of mine.there 17 year old started smoking it two years ago and he changed from a nice young man into a monster over night .The effects were very bad on family members and so much so that he was asked to leave the family home at 18.I think it has led onto taking even more drugs and his mental state is very bad aggressive all the time.no reasoning with him etc.Please god they will ban it everywhere…..
Report abuse
haven’t they just knocked people’s trade, if you still want them you can order them yourself and give them away to your mates. seems a waste of time, then i don’t take them. i can’t imagine they are more dangerous than booze and fags which are abused over here everyday and this is accepted as being just part of life. if they’re doing this then booze needs to be controlled more.perhaps up the legal age, certainly make it harder to buy. just the home department being tough on something that’s an easy target, why don’t they put more effort into recruiting more coppers, and build a skatepark so these youths can have something more to do.
Report abuse
I agree that these should be banned, if these are available how is it ment to help drug addicts to fight there adiction.
Report abuse
So more people will turn to ‘harder’ stuff to get a high. Or just import it illegally like cannabis etc.
Report abuse
Meanwhile, alcohol, which causes enormous health problems to a far greater number of people than ‘legal highs’ continues to be imported by the lorry load. It’s a funny old world, eh?
Report abuse
Why cant people be left to do what they want? I have children and believe that the more you hide things from them and make them illegal they will want to try them out, since legal highs have been about both my children dont bother because they can!
Report abuse
This is generally good news. The sight of young mothers with prams waiting outside these shops at 8.45am is extremely worrying. I do believe in freedom of choice but it does seem that easy access to these products is having a detrimental effect on many young people. I know on good authority that there are huge numbers of mental health problems arising from legal highs and this is probably due to availability as much as the products themselves.
It will be interesting to see what happens to some of the shops selling the products over the next few months.
Report abuse
Just shops banned from importing? Just “legal highs” banned?
Perhaps if a person were to import a plant fertilizer that may be legal? Think it through Guernsey.
Report abuse
Ban this ban that – some people really need to get lives instead of nannying the community!
Next they’ll ban the import of cigarettes!!
Report abuse
I wish they would ban all advertising of booze.
Report abuse
Herbal highs have only been banned commercially, this will not change alot in guernsey. Everyone will just order enough for there own personel use themselfs of the internet. I can say that i have smoked spice the mojority of the passed 2 years. It has had no effect on my mental health. I stopped smoking spice about 2 months now but still take the side of the people that continue to use such products. Some people drink, some people take drugs, and some herbal highs to relax. In my view we can all make our own choice’s what we choose to do with our hard earned money.
This really didnt surprise me though today when i heard the ban was in place out of the blue. Soon the states will be telling us when to go to bed!
Report abuse
Darren Rouget – if it were left uncontrolled, the abuse of “legal highs” could well have become a greater social/health problem then cannabis or heroin, simply because it would be legal, cheaper and consequently more easily available – meaning people who otherwise wouldn’t use illegal drugs would end up using it under the false assumption that because it’s legal it therefore must be safe.
There is evidence that heavy users of “legal highs” – some of whom don’t use illegal drugs have become confused, paranoid and mentally unstable after sustained usage over a period of time – sounds very similar to the long term effects of other illegal drugs.
Personally I take the view that sustained/heavy use of any substance that alters a person’s perception of reality (effectively messing with their brain) is bad news and asking for trouble in the mental health department – whether it be crack, alcohol or spice. It’s a fine line between civil liberties and acting in the best interests of the population – on this occasion I think the States have got it right.
Report abuse
I think this is a completely wrong decision. Legal highs are legal and shouldn’t be banned. Not only are most of them safe but there is no evidence to suggest that they are potentially harmful. This is ridiculous. If people want to be informed about legal highs they should go to The Legal Highs Resource. There is an excellent article there about the most common ingredients used in legal highs as well as their effects.
Report abuse
Anyone ever thought that these people suffering from “mental” problems supposedly from legal highs, probably suffer from these problems without taking the drug anyway??
And why haven’t I suffered from these so called mental problems from eating special brownies?
I know far more people who have suffered from alcohol poisoning, alcoholism, obesity, drunken attacks and depression (booze is a depressant ya know) all from alcohol AND it’s LEGAL!! Why? Because it’s a good source of revenue. Wow.
Report abuse
Comparing legal highs to crack and heroin is ridiculous! They are called legal for a reason, mostly meaning they are a lot weaker than the illegal drugs out there! By banning the import the states have just signed away a few people’s livelyhoods, it’s crazy!
Report abuse
Jane Patrick – I don’t think it is fair to state that ‘most of them safe’, as much as there is ‘no evidence’ of them doing harm, there is equally little evidence of them being safe. Legal Highs are a relatively new thing and no one can know at this stage what the long term effects are.
The reason for the States banning commercial imports is to stop them being so readily available, they have not stopped people using them which is good.
I know many people will feel that Spice etc is having no adverse effect on them which is fine but this is not the case for everyone. I know of people who have used cannabis for years with no problems but having switched to Spice their health has deteriorated, they also find it a lot harder to give up.
We need to remember this is not a ban on legal highs, it is in place to stop the many shops making huge amounts of money from essentially drug dealing.
Report abuse
It kills hundres of thousands of people,causes liver damage ,makes many people violent,destroys familys ,puts hundreds of thousands of people in hospital yearly,is avalible to youngsters(through irrisponsible adults)…not Spice but booze. Fags kill millions world wide and the cost to the taxpayer run into billions…so what should we do about them????.
Report abuse
I would also like to say SHAME ON YOU to the greedy shopkeepers who sell spice to the children of Guernsey,you are no better than the filth that sell harder drugs on the street.
Report abuse
I am with Kay Leggett on this one. You could spend Guernsey’s entire budget trying to control the import and supply of “legal highs” to say nothing of illegal drugs, booze and fags – but whatever you do people will always find a way to get hold of them.
In my view the answer lies in education not legislation.
Report abuse
There is no concrete evidence either way as to the detrimental effects of legal highs, there is speculation hearsay and small amounts of anecdotal evidence on both sides of the arguement.
When I was in University I studied drug (mis)use.
There is a generally held scholastic opinion that people of certain personality types will seek out highs regardless of their availabilty.
So these people will now attempt to obtain their highs through more nefarious methods.
Report abuse
Time and time again it is proven that prohibition does not work. All it does is encourage a black market and the associated criminal activity. As the years pass, more and more things are banned because of potential risks – I’m starting to wonder when they will ban crossing the road………since when did people cease to have a mind of their own and the ability to make their OWN decisions about what they put into their body?
Has prohibition worked for ANY drug? NO! People still obtain and use them, except often these things are cut with other substances and there are no controls on that and other factors. Plus, you get the related crime to go with it and the gang mentality over control of the trade.
Stop treating people like mugs, if people want to do something they will find a way to do it whether it is legal or not.
It would be far better to legalise the lot, thereby effectively wiping out the need for a lot of the black market/illegal trade and reducing related crime. It would also heighten safety if they could be regulated, and guess what, the politicians would love this, they could TAX them!
Mental and physical health problems, crime and violence have been associated with alcohol for years yet it remains legal…….
Report abuse
Yes there will always be people who will seek out and misuse drugs but why should legislation support those who seek to profit from those persons misfortune?
In addition, i believe that anyone who is in possession of the “legal high” should be made to keep receipt of purchase as evidence that they bought it legitimately and not through a back alley “dealer”.
Report abuse
Starscream – they are called legal because they are legal to use at present….simple as that. Don’t forget, opiates and other drugs haven’t always been illegal either – just because something is presently legal doesn’t make it safer.
Just because the immediate effect of heroin or crack is a lot stronger and it’s chemical addictive properties are higher, doesn’t make comparisons with legal highs daft as the effect on the mind of all these substances is identical – they chemically alter a person’s perception of reality. Besides, as has been pointed out, the real long term effects of Spice and other “legal highs” are not yet known however it is clear from visible albeit anecdotal evidence that there are many cases of detrimental effects on mental health.
Personally I would rather these substances were banned now to play it safe rather than hold back and use this generation of youth as human guinea pigs to test what long term side effects there may be.
Report abuse
The Man,so do we just throw in the towel just because a small minority will still want to consume harmful substances ? “There is a generally held scholastic opinion that people of certain personality types will seek out highs regardless of their availabilty” …you dont need to go to university to know that!
Report abuse
P Hayes
You are spot on with your comments.
Cannabis use has become a lot more dangerous in the last 10 years due to more and more synthetic products appearing because of the difficulty importing it.
This has actually increased the detrimental health effects of cannabis use.
Cannabis use has if anything increased over the last couple of decades, except now youngsters are smoking a very dangerous combination of chemicals mixed with a tiny amount of THC.
This is happening with all illegal drugs, plus if it was all legal/ regulated there would be much more transparency regarding who was using and who wasnt and serious habits could be prevented, whereas the black market there is no regulation at all, and many drug dealers are happy to continue peddling evem though they are fully aware of the users habit.
Plus the tax implications could be huge.
Report abuse
P Hayes …and what if one of your Children was shot ,knifed or robbed by a drug addict to feed his habit ? or beaten by a drunken thug ? or develops a dependency on hard drugs?? or maybe run over by a drunk/drugged up driver?would you still have the the same views ? I live in a city where murder ,robbery,violence and many social ills take place .. drugs and booze are a major factor in most of them. Im sure the good people of Guernsey dont want this on their doorstep.
Report abuse
Neil
My point is that by banning sales of these substances in shops, you create the issue of more people attempting to obtain them by other methods, this is turn creates oppurtunities for the criminal element of society.
I never advocated throwing the towel in. Just advocating the use of a little common sense thats all. Maybe I learned that in University ;-).
Report abuse
Dont worry, shops cant sell it but feel free to buy it off the internet! Whats the point in banning it in the first places then?
Report abuse
This halfway house of banning the importation of the legal highs but continuing to permit the possession & supply of such substances is a legal dog’s breakfast.
Having said that, in reply to those libertarians on here, it is entirely legitimate for the States to restrain the liberty of the Shops (that profit from selling these substances) to youngsters (who are harmed by them) as there does seem to be significant evidence that they cause mental illness. Any individual will be free to continue to take the legal highs themselves until the stocks run out or until they order their own for personal use.
As John Stuart Mill said: “…the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilised community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.” This new prohibition is aimed at the shops who sell, not those whose use, the legal or herbal highs.
Report abuse
I understand the concerns expressed as to sale of these goods, and to their possible, but unproven, effects on physical and mental health, but I believe this to be an entirely backward approach.
The States have placed a burden on Customs to prohibit “trade”, and yet there is nothing to stop the producers endlessly rebranding their products and continuing to label them as “incense”. Surely you therefore cannot legislate unless you can isolate the active components of these products? To the best of my knowledge, there is no means available to do this.
So we have a law introduced entirely on anecdotal “evidence”, enforceable only by brand identification, implemented without democratic debate.
Furthermore, with no clear definition of what is considered “personal use”, any person taking advantage of discounted prices for larger orders via the internet or by phone can now be considered to be breaking the law. What exactly constitutes (I’m paraphrasing Customs here) “evidence that it is intended for resale”?
I’m certainly not defending reported commercial bad practice, i.e. the resale of these goods to minors, but this is an entirely unfair law, which is so flawed as to be worthless. As many have already indicated, alcohol is THE biggest cause of damage to physical and mental health. And as CD opines above, education is a better solution.
Report abuse
Quote The Man: “if it was all legal/ regulated there would be much more transparency regarding who was using and who wasnt and serious habits could be prevented, whereas the black market there is no regulation at all, and many drug dealers are happy to continue peddling evem though they are fully aware of the users habit.”
Regulation doesn’t prevent addiction – just look at alcohol.
The sale of alcohol is regulated yet there are alcoholics around, many of whom are well known to the public. Regulated sale hasn’t prevented them from having problems. The same alcoholics continue to buy booze from commercial outlets who are content to keep peddling to them despite being aware of the users habits.
Banning these substances won’t prevent their use – that is an unfortunate fact of life. Like Neil says however, that doesn’t mean we just throw in the towel. Legal measures are necessary as part of a holistic framework to tackle substance abuse, alongside the equally important measures of education and rehabilitation.
Report abuse
I would tell anyone to avoid legal highs and that they are far more dangerous than they appear. However, these drugs are readily available on the internet and cannot be practically banned. All the states have done here is make a political move to appear to be doing something about the problem and in doing so destroyed the income of a few targeted individuals (the sellers). This is an unjust use of the law, does nothing for the island and is completely ineffectual yet seems typical of the short-sightedness of those who make the rules here.
Give those who are turning to legal highs something else to do with their time instead. If you don’t know what it is THEN ASK THEM.
Report abuse
Now I’ve been thinking about it, prohibition tobacco would be a great idea as well.. How many family and children are affected by smoking related illness. How many kids are damaged by smoking parents..
How many smokers wish they could give up. Every one single of them if the truth was known.
Come on poeple of Guernsey, Come Customs let do tobacco and alcohol as well for the health of the Islanders..
Yours a sruggling ex smoker
Report abuse
Paul L P
I understand your stance even if I dont agree, but on this subject my opinion will not change.
Addiction is a sad fact of life, and people will become addicted regardless of the difficulties in obtaining their chosen fix.
I’m not suggesting a free for all which is essentially how Alcohol is sold, technically, its regulated, but the sad reality of it, is that its not.
I would have propsed a well regulated metered supply aimed at improving the mental and physical well being of the addicts, which would have the side effect of rendering drug dealers obsolete and removing most of the drug related crime, most of which is related to the high prices of street drugs and the lenghths addicts will go to in order to get the money to pay for their habit.
Idealistic- Yes
Impossible- No
1930′s Chicago is a case in point, all prohibition did was make the criminal underworld dangerously powerful, and its a sad fact that a lot of underworld gangs get proceeds for their guns and other assorted weaponry from drug sales.
Like I said, I’m not proposing a free for all, but if done with some intelligence and thorough planning, it could work to everyones benefits.
Report abuse
The most dangerous “legal highs” are alcohol and tobacco. As with recent hysteria over cannabis being linked to mental problems, I do accept that in some cases the herbal legal highs can exacerbate pre-existing conditions, but I do not accept there is any causal link to the condition in the first place. Claims that (shock horror) they may not be totally 100% safe for everyone on every occasion is no reason for banning them completely. Almost everything can be harmful if abused to excess (it wouldn’t surprise me if excess use of Marmite can be harmful!). And of course there are KNOWN and PROVEN and LIFE-THREATENING dangers associated with alcohol and tobacco (not only to the consumer, but to third parties as well…passive smoking, innocent bystanders being beaten up by drunks in Town). What’s the difference? Well, of course, the vast majority of “the establishment” see nothing wrong with a pint or a bottle of wine. Some kids sharing a Spice cigarette however is seen as a threat to Civilization as We Know It.
Also, as mentioned elsewhere in the comments, trying to suppress drugs/alcohol etc by banning the supply is a pointless strategy. Prohibition in the 1920s just pushed money to the criminals, and does anybody think that the global “war on drugs” is really being won, when entire nations are now under the thrall of drug cartels?
Report abuse
Neil:
You’ve missed the point. None of those things you listed (and I did like the daily mail/sun like theme ;) )have been stopped nor would be by those things being illegal. You said yourself that you live in a city where those are rife – but surely drugs are illegal there as well so what’s your point?
The majority of gang culture exists because of the illegal status of drugs and control over the illegal trade. Drug related crime would drop considerably if these things were decriminalised and controlled properly. Also removing the stigma attached to drug problems would alleivate a lot of the problems I feel. Prohibiting things does NOT stop people from doing them. The very nature of the human being is that when we are told we can’t do something we find that very difficult to swallow and some will just try all the harder to do it. The ‘drug war’ has been going on for decades and yet still there is a huge problem – can you honestly say that prohibition is working??
I’ve lived in East London and Reading so I’m fully aware of those things.
People who resort to crime to feed their habits are generally from a poor background and the reasons for them turning to drugs would be the focal point for me rather than why they do crimes to support that habit. A separate issue I think. In the Netherlands the entire population is covered by unemployment insurance which pays 70% of the last earned wage – this makes crime a less attractive option in the long run and has been proven to work in the reduction of crime.
I would like to quote legislation info from the Netherlands where I believe drug related crime and deaths are nowhere near as bad:
“Dutch law make a clear distinction between hard drugs (drugs with unacceptable risks involved) and soft drugs (drugs with limited risks). Hard drugs are illegal and sentences run up to 12 years imprisonment. Strictly speaking the sale and use of soft drugs is illegal too, but use and possession for personal use (up to 30 grams) a blind eye is turned and you will not be prosecuted. The Dutch government believe by keeping soft drugs separate from other drugs it makes it possible to control it more and therefore stop people turning to harder drugs and hopefully away from crime and addiction. There are also more resources available for tackling hard drugs.
Does it work? – The statistics say so, there were 2.4 drug-related deaths per million inhabitants in the Netherlands in 1996. In France this figure was 9.5, in Germany 20, in Sweden 23.5 and in Spain 27.1. According to the 1995 report of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction in Lisbon, the Dutch figures are the lowest in Europe. (source: Justice Department)
I could discuss this matter until the cows come home but those with such dogmatic views are never likely to listen to the more enlightened view.
The Man: I think we are of the same mind ;)
Report abuse
I would like to add this very good discussion link on the subject of drug policies.
http://www.cedro-uva.org/lib/cohen.tackling.html
Report abuse
We can’t drink in the sunken gardens, we can’t enjoy legal highs: which freedom is the States going to take away next? Will we all have to sew yellow stars on to our clothes?
Responsible adults should be allowed to choose what they put into their bodies and vulnerable people such as children should be protected adequately; the latter will never happen if substances like legal highs are driven underground by the States’ lazy, reactionary law-making.
Report abuse
I don’t know why the powers that be are under the impression that passing a law stops these things. Drugs have been illegal for decades but has this stopped them? If anything they are more easily obtainable than ever. And I do hate this ‘good people of Guernsey’ nonsense. People are people, wherever they are from, and you cannot hide from the problems of the world simply by being separated by a bit of sea. Nor should you.
Report abuse
” and you cannot hide from the problems of the world simply by being separated by a bit of sea. Nor should you.”
It’s not hiding its mitigating. And thankfully that stretch of water has stopped many of the English sins. Gun crimes, child killings, illegal immigrants and general transient strangers that blight many englishman’s towns.
Thank god for the sea.
Report abuse
Royston vasey eat your heart out! ;)
Report abuse
i disagree with the ban, because more people will be importing, or purchasing the ‘real stuff’ which means more of them on the island.
there is nothing wrong with having a smoke, and having a good time!
it was obviously made legal in the first place for a reason!
Report abuse
LOL@ P Hayes – “You’re my wife now.”
Report abuse
Seems simple enough to me.
Doctor who sees people who get ill, and who works in the medical profession and is therefore privvy to expert testament and documentation such as the BMJ passes his opinion in writing with a recommendation which is then put as law.
Nothing wrong with protecting the public (users and non).
Illegal means that, legal means its legal.
A number of people have suggested they would like to see alcohol banned and I can hardly argue with that – I believe alcohol causes more injuries, fights, illness and work for the Police / social services etc than any other drug; the problem is that it tastes rather nice and is enjoyable in a moderate amount.
LOL Jackie – there are 66 million people in the UK saying the same thing as you.
Report abuse