Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
(1990)
Relaxing the prohibition: etfects on supply and demand' p 11-16 in
(1991)
Feasibility Research into the Controlled Availability of Opioids. Canberra: National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health
(1991)
Drug policy and harm reduction: towards a unified policy for legal and illegal drugs
J. Polich, P. Ellickson, P. Reuter, J. Kahan (1984)
Strategies for Controlling Adolescent Drug Use
M. Krauss, E. Lazear (1993)
Searching for Alternatives: Drug-Control Policy in the United States
(1991)
Crime, excitement and modernity' paper presented to the American Society of Criminology
(1989)
Decriminalisation and the impact of the marijuana laws in Alaska' American Society of Criminology, Reno, Nevada, November
(1989)
DTUg Use, Social Relations and Commodity Consumption: A Study of CocaineUsers in Sydney, Canberra and Melboume. Areport to the Research into Drug Abuse Advisory Committee, NCADA
(1989)
Cannabis - the Expiation Notice Approach. Office of Crime Statistics, SA Attorney General's Dept, Adelaide
S. Mugford (1991)
Least bad solutions to the 'drugs problem'.Drug and alcohol review, 10 4
(1990)
The paradox of prohibition' p 7-10 in
A. Weil (1984)
Drug, Set, and Setting: The Basis for Controlled Intoxicant UseJournal of Psychoactive Drugs, 16
S. Mugford, P. O’Malley (1991)
Heroin policy and deficit modelsCrime, Law and Social Change, 15
(1991)
Heroin policy and the limits of Left Realism' Crime, Law and Social Change
(1991)
Estimatingthe Economic Costs ofDrugAbuse in Australia, National Campaign Against Drug Abuse Monograph #15
(1992)
Moral technology: the political agenda of random drug testing
(1990)
Policies unfit for heroin?
(1981)
The structure and history of the international trade in drugssome implications for social policy' in Man
(1991)
Drug legalization and the "Goldilocks" problem: thinking about the costs and control of drugs
AUST & NZ JOURNAL OF CRIMINOLOGY (March 1992) 25 (27-40) 27 CRIME AND THE PARTIAL LEGALISATION OF HEROIN: COMMENTS AND CAVEATS Stephen K Mugford' In Mark Anthony's speech to the Romans, Shakespeare provides us with the paradigm of how many academic debates are developed. Mark Anthony, you will recall, repeatedly characterises Brutus as 'an honourable man', but then demonstrates quite the opposite. Imitating this approach, academic writers begin by saying how pleased they are that Dr So-and-So has written in the area and then proceed to bucket everything the author has said. This academic tradition creates a problem for me here, since I want to start by saying how pleased I am to read Don Weatherburn's article - and mean it. Perhaps my excursus is sufficient to say that I do not intend to try to do to his article what Mark Anthony did to Brutus' reputation. The plan I propose is to break my article into two parts. In the first, I follow the outline of his article, identifying three types of point - those where he makes important criticisms of the position with which I am identified, those where he makes criticisms with which I disagree, with
Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology – SAGE
Published: Mar 1, 1992
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.