In concluding it should be noted that emphasis is misplaced on the high percentage of offenders who test positive to drugs at the time of committing their offence, results in the omission of the fact that most offenders who engage in drug related crime were engaged in crime before their decision to use drugs. In fact it could be concluded that the only difference between crime without drug use and drug related crimes, is drug use is present in one crime and not in the other, however the same motivation and psychological patterns exist in both crimes.
Drawing a distinction between recreational users and dependant users emphasises the degree to which an artificial criminalisation of recreational users may cause drug related crime statistics to be distorted. This is because a large proportion of all drug related crime stems from the offence of possession , which serve only to distort the image presented by both the media and use of statistics by the governments. When drawing a distinction between crimes directly related to drug use and crimes caused by drug prohibition, it becomes evident that no distinction can be made between crimes, which are directly related to drug use, and crimes, which are directly related to drug prohibition. To make such a distinction would only be superficial as they are directly related to the dynamic effect of prohibition and reform. Both distinctions will retain the stigma of drug related crime due to the perpetuation of prohibition, the variable being the prohibition. Prohibition creates and produces all drug related crime, distinctions aside.
…
