Frequently Asked Questions

Evidence shows the opposite. Portugal decriminalized all drugs in 2001 – use didn't increase, and among youth it actually decreased. The Netherlands has lower cannabis use rates than many countries with strict prohibition despite coffeeshops. Use depends on social factors, not legal status.

Sources:

• EUDA Portugal Country Drug Report
• Transform Drug Policy Foundation

The current situation is the worst youth protection: dealers don't ask for ID. A regulated market with strict age verification, controlled sales points, and honest education protects youth better than a black market.

Important to know:

• Dealers don't ask for ID – regulated sales points do.
• Schools can educate openly and honestly – with clear facts instead of prohibition rhetoric.
• Youth in the Netherlands consume less cannabis than in Germany.

Addiction is a disease that depends on many factors – genetics, trauma, social situation. Legal status isn't decisive. But: in a regulated system, we reach affected people earlier, can offer help, and fund prevention.

Switzerland has been doing it since 1994. Severely addicted individuals receive pharmaceutically pure heroin under medical supervision. Result: acquisitive crime disappeared, health improved, social integration possible. People go to work instead of stealing. The program saves the state money and saves lives. That's not crazy – what we're doing now is crazy.

The Swiss Model:

• Operating since 1994
• Over a thousand patients in treatment
• Significant reduction in acquisitive crime
• Improved social integration

Source: Swiss Federal Office of Public Health

On the contrary: we're removing their business foundation. Prohibition is the best support program for cartels – it guarantees high prices and monopoly profits. Regulation destroys this model. Police can focus on real crime instead of chasing users.

There are black markets for alcohol and tobacco too – but they're marginal. Why? Because the legal market is more convenient, safer, and better quality.

Example Canada:

After cannabis legalization in 2018, the black market share has continuously declined according to Statistics Canada.

We're sending an honest message: drugs are risky, so we control them. This is more credible than the current hypocrisy where alcohol and tobacco – the most dangerous drugs – are legal while others remain banned. Young people see through contradictions. Honest education works better than prohibition propaganda.

The Tobacco Comparison:

Tobacco is legal but socially stigmatized. Smoking rates have been declining for decades – through education, not prohibition.

Source: WHO, Eurostat

Regulation pays for itself. Currently €31+ billion flows annually to cartels – with no quality control, no tax revenue. With regulation of all drugs: tax revenue for prevention, therapy, and education. Early experiences with legal markets show: black market shares decline, tax revenues rise.

There are working models: Portugal since 2001, Swiss heroin program since 1994, Canadian cannabis legalization since 2018. We don't have to reinvent the wheel – we can learn from experience.

Working Models:

• 🇵🇹 Portugal: Decriminalization since 2001
• 🇨🇭 Switzerland: Heroin program since 1994
• 🇳🇱 Netherlands: Coffeeshops since 1976
• 🇨🇦 Canada: Cannabis legalization since 2018

The state is already in the drug business – it sells alcohol and tobacco, which together cause over 200,000 deaths per year in the EU. The question is not whether the state regulates drugs, but which ones. Currently, it leaves the most dangerous substances to cartels who have no quality control, no youth protection, and no help services. Regulation is not "playing drug dealer" – it's taking responsibility instead of looking away.

Correct: drugs are dangerous. But people consume them anyway – 87 million Europeans have done so. The question is: Do they face unknown potency and adulterants on the street, or do they get pharmaceutical-grade substances with medical supervision? In 2021, 6,166 people died in the EU from drug overdoses; risks are driven by opioids, polydrug use, variable potency and adulteration. Regulation reduces these risks through standards and counselling.

Police unions and security agencies have an institutional interest in the status quo: budgets, positions, powers depend on the "war on drugs." This is not an accusation – it's systemic logic. But police officers on the ground often say the opposite: they're frustrated chasing the same small-time users while real crime goes unaddressed. Ask officers, not officials.