Eight task: Final version.

Minimum dose in Colombia?

     As we all know, in these day, there is a specific topic that is getting around Colombia. The topic is, if minimum dose should be or should not be allowed? Some says that yes, it has to be banned, others say that not, it should be allowed. This is not a new topic, but this has raise its interest again when the President Ivan Duque signed the decree that allow police to confiscate drugs from consumers, and sanction them; but there are more cons again this decree than pros, the question here is, the decree is going to be useful or not? Actually not, this decree is wrong in many aspects, that is why is not going to be useful at all; there are a lot of reasons, i.e. stereotyping, attempt against expression’s freedom, among others.

  

     On the one hand, the decree is not going to be useful because it goes against the constitution, we can not deny that in the Colombia's Constitution, there are some articles that talk about personal freedom, we have to highlighted that in the article sixteen, says that everyone has the right of free development of personality, (Titulo II, Capitulo 1, Articulo 16, (2016) in that order we have to spotlight, do not let people to have the minimum dose and let it to be confiscate, will be against their right of free development of personality, But, why it goes against the personal freedom? because inside the personal freedom, we have freedom of expression, free thinking, etc. Thus, if a person thinks that, for him or her, is good to have the minimum dose, and that is a way of express themselves, without harming others, it is valid.

     On the other hand, everyone at any time in their life has broken a rule, and in that moment we do not think in that rule, we think in ourselves. Thus, in that order, a consumer is not going to stop using drugs just because a decree say it, taking into account that consumers are thinking in themselves; if consumers decide to stop using drugs at all at any time of their life, is because they want to stop with it, because they know that it can be dangerous, and it can have consequences in a future; As Luvi Katherin Miranda says, representative to the Camara de Bogotá for the Alianza Verde, someone do not stop using drugs because it is forbidden, someone stop using drugs because that person understands that drugs are bad. (Colprensa, (October 6, 2018). We have to realize that consuming or not consuming the minimum dose, is a personal decision, and not a collective one, is not because someone or something say us, “hey you have to do this or you do not have to do this” Of course, here in Colombia, we have to follow some rules, but we have to take into account, we have our rights and duties, and if is our decision is to stop doing something, is because, we are aware that this is bad for us, not because a decree that says that.

  

   At the moment of implement this decree, what the government is doing is to go above the people, only thinking about the benefit of the governors and not in well-being in people, this even, brings exclusion problems instead of inclusion. Some people have raise their voice, i.e. Dejusticia & CEDD says "We consider that the measure is inefficient and expensive, it does not contribute to advance the solution of the drug problem and, on the contrary, it promotes discrimination and stigmatization of people who use them." (Di Salvo M. (2018, October 1).

     As we have seen, a decree is not going to stop someone of using the minimum dose, thus, a decree is not going to stop someone of getting drugs. Of course, it will be more difficult to get it, but it will not be an impediment, at the moment of prohibit the minimum dose, it makes a big problem, even bigger than the one that was before, because, drugs dealers are going to increase the price of the minimum dose, in that order, that business is going to increase, and it is going to be more profitable; it is assumed that the decree is made in order to combat this business, but in fact what it does is increase it. In a recent study carried out by the ATS Corporation, it was evidenced that more than 50% of the respondents testified that the price of the dose had increased after the decree (Vargas J.M. (October 4, 2018) In that order drugs dealers are going to be benefited, instead of harmed.

     In addition, this decree is not something that stops people from buying the minimum dose, of course, people will stop carrying it, with the purpose of do not get a fine, but that does not mean that they stop consuming it, maybe the decree stop people to consume the minimum dose in public places. But, in fact, people will search other ways to obtain it. In the same study mentioned before say “15.4% of the people consulted said that they have chosen to contact the drug dealer and request the minimum dose at home” (Vargas J.M. (October 4, 2018) Although, this is not a large number, this percentage clearly shows, how consumers have searched for other ways to get them, and how this decree has not been an impediment to keep getting it; the studied carry out by ATS corporation also show that of 100% of consumers in Colombia, 97% have not stopped using it.

     It is supposed that, this decree is made with the intention of protecting children and young people, persecuting jibaros, and one of its main purposes is ending with the business, but, actually what the government and police are doing, is that they are stereotyping people; it is known that “stereotyping in when an idea or set of people are continually linked to a small number of associations, such as adjectives, job roles or forms of behavior” (Cottrell, (2005). Taking into account that, what we can infer from this decree is that, the decree and the government is saying that every single one that consumes the minimum dose is someone that is a drug dealer, someone that has a business in this drug, and someone that does the wrong things. As we see, this decree generalizes to all the people who consume the minimum dose, and label them as sellers; maybe there are people who do consume and sell them, but that does not mean that consuming marijuana is synonymous of selling it; with this, the government is making a grave mistake, it is slandering.

     We have to say, that here in Colombia there are a lot of corruption, and one that can be involved in this decree is police corruption. We do not say that all the police are corrupt, but some of the has shown authority abuse, although, there are some good polices, as bad; but if we think for a while, there will be some who wants to take advantage of this decree. But how? I think many of us, have ever heard cases where the police ask for money, in order not to impose a fine; well, this decree was not going to make the exception, I have asked to some people and they accepted that they had to give money in order to do not get a fine, and “59.3% of people had to give money to the police to let them go” (RCN Radio. (October 24, 2018) thus, is not only to give a certain control in the minimum dose or to the ones that are consuming it, is to give a control to every part of the ones that are involve in this decree, even at the ones that are in charge of confiscate the minimum dose, they also could be doing a wrong work.   

     Marijuana, is not something bad for all the people; we have to take into account that in Colombia there are a lot of different people, and that is something, that actually the decree, do not take into account at the moment of have been published. this decree forgot about our indigenous people, also this decree goes against the indigenous traditions. In these days, indigenous people have been affecting by the decree because, in their traditions, they have the use of marijuana as something normal, good, and spitirual. They have found abuse of authority by the police, wanting to take away the "ambil" something made of marijuana or coca; for their part, Fiagama, an indigenous leader said, All this abuse of authority can generate a confrontation because we are not going to let go of the 'ambile' because it is part of our culture, of our ancestry (Morales C. (October 14, 2018) In that order Fiagama want to raise his voice in name of all the indigenous people, and say that this decree has little understanding and pedagogy with people like indigenous people; as we know, our ancestors used cannabis or marijuana for medicinal terms, and even it is still use for medicinal purposes, but it used to has a big impact, a good one, compared with the impact that had now

     We have to see that the solution of the problem of the drug trafficking of marijuana, it is not just attacking consumers, and do not allowed them from using the minimum dose, we have to realize that the problem is not in consumption; the problem is in the lack of education, disinformation and pedagogy that there are regarding the topic. Everything can be better is we teach how to use the minimum dose in a good way, without overuse; informing each person about the good and bad of the substance, and making them understand that consumption is a personal issue, giving lectures, going to classrooms to talk about the topic, doing pedagogical campaigns in shopping centers, in summary, using education and pedagogy as a path to good information.

Actually, we have to use the most powerful ace under the sleeve, education. why do not teach how to give a good use to minimum dose? Education is an enormous key, and it is the solution to many problems, in that order, we have to teach our children, parents, etc., that the minimum dose can be allowed if we give it a good use, taking into account others and also us, without hurting others, knowing that, the use of marijuana is something that depends on us, on oneself, that is a topic in which we must take responsibility.

And to conclude, we have to say that we can not turn something small into something very big; if we stop for a while, and think, there are some harmful drugs that are permitted here in Colombia, for example: tobacco, and alcohol, even marijuana can be considered less dangerous than coffee; thus, if we have accepted these things that are considered as drugs, why do we have to do a big problem with the topic of the minimum dose? This is something of dialogue and communication, although this is a very controversial topic, and that needs a lot of education, in the way that we are going accepting it, we will have a great progress.

REFERENCES

·       -  Members of the National Constituent Assembly, (1996). Colombia’s constitution, Retrieve from: http://www.corteconstitucional.gov.co/inicio/Constitucion%20politica%20de%20Colombia.pdf 
- Is Colombia’s renewed ban on marijuana possession even constitutional? Colombia. Colombia Reports. Retrieve from: https://colombiareports.com/is-colombias-renewed-ban-on-marijuana-possession-even-constitutional/

·        -Las razones por las que demandaron el decreto de la dosis mínima. Colombia. El espectador. Retrieve from: http://www.eluniversal.com.co/colombia/las-razones-por-las-que-demandaron-el-decreto-de-la-dosis-minima-289275

·        -Decreto de dosis mínima no ha disminuido el consumo de drogas. Colombia. La Fm. Retrieve From: https://www.lafm.com.co/colombia/decreto-de-dosis-minima-no-ha-disminuido-el-consumo-de-drogas

·        -Decreto de dosis mínima no ha disminuido el consumo de drogas. Colombia. La Fm. Retrieve From: https://www.lafm.com.co/colombia/decreto-de-dosis-minima-no-ha-disminuido-el-consumo-de-drogas

·        -Dennoted and connoted meanings. EE. UU. Palgreve Macmillan Ltd.

·        -Decreto contra dosis mínima de drogas no ha afectado el consumo, según encuesta. Colombia. Rcn radio. Retrieve from: https://www.rcnradio.com/colombia/decreto-contra-dosis-minima-de-drogas-no-ha-afectado-el-consumo-segun-encuesta

·        -Decreto de dosis mínima, ¿violatorio de prácticas ancestrales de indígenas?. Colombia. LA Fm. Retrieve from: https://www.lafm.com.co/colombia/decreto-de-dosis-minima-violatorio-de-practicas-ancestrales-de-indigenas