Search

Background: Variations in drug laws, as well as variations in enforcement practice, exist across jurisdictions. This study explored the feasibility of categorising drug laws "on the books" in terms of their punitiveness, and the extent of their concordance with "laws in practice" in a cross-national comparison.Methods: "Law on the books", classified with respect to both cannabis and other drug offences in the Czech Republic, NSW (AU) and Florida (USA) were analysed in order to establish an ordinal relationship between the three states. Indicators to assess the "laws in practice" covered both police (arrests) and court (sentencing) activity between 2002 and 2013. Parametric and non-parametric tests of equality of means, tests of stationarity and correlation analysis were used to examine the concordance between the ordinal categorisation of "laws on the books" and "laws in practice", as well as trends over time.Results: The Czech Republic had the most lenient drug laws; Florida had the most punitive and NSW was in-between. Examining the indicators of "laws in practice", we found that the population adjusted number of individuals sentenced to prison ranked across the three states was concordant with categorisation of "laws on the books", but the average sentence length and percentage of court cases sentenced to prison were not. Also, the de jure decriminalisation of drug possession in the Czech Republic yielded a far greater share of administrative offenses than the de facto decriminalisation of cannabis use / possession in NSW. Finally, the mean value of most "laws in practice" indicators changed significantly over time although the "laws on the books" didn't change.Conclusions: While some indicators of "laws in practice" were concordant with the ordinal categorisation of drug laws, several indicators of "laws in practice" appeared to operate independently from the drug laws as stated. This has significant implications for drug policy analysis and means that research should not assume they are interchangeable and should consider each separately when designing research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Providing information about substances injected can reduce the negative impact of illicit drug consumption and support people who inject drugs to make informed decisions. In Australia, information about drugs injected relies largely on periodic self-report surveys. For the first time, the analysis of the residual content of used injecting equipment was conducted in a supervised injecting facility (SIF) located in Sydney, Australia. The aim was to gain a better understanding of the substances injected by clients through: (1) chemical analyses of the content of used syringes; (2) comparison of these results with clients' self-reported drug use; and (3) assessing the usefulness of analysing other injecting equipment to detect substances used. During one week in February 2019, syringes and other injecting equipment were collected at the Sydney SIF. Their residual content was analysed by gas-chromatography/mass-spectrometry. Heroin was the most commonly detected substance (present in 51% of syringes), followed by methamphetamine (22%) and oxycodone (10%). In addition to the main psychoactive substance, cutting agents reported in the literature were also detected in used syringes. The main psychoactive substance identified by laboratory analysis reliably corresponded with users' self-reported drug type. Analytical confirmation of substances injected allows for the provision of better targeted harm reduction messaging based on timely and objective data. The approach used is amenable to clients and feasible in the Australian SIF context. Upscaling and wider implementation could be done through Needle and Syringe Programs, and would support the early detection of harmful substances entering drug markets and better inform harm reduction strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]