Be aware of the dangers of drugs abroad

British nationals should take extra care not to get involved with drugs overseas Foreign and Commonwealth Office Minister Chris Bryant warns, as new detention figures reveal the extent of the problem across the globe.

New data released by the FCO reveals that 1057 of the 2,582 British nationals detained overseas at the end of September 2009 were held on drugs charges. [1]

• In South America, 99% of the British nationals detained by local authorities were held for drug crimes, with Brazil and Peru showing the highest figures in this continent
  
• In Asia, 50% of British national detentions were for drugs with the highest figures occurring in Thailand and Japan
  
• Spain detained the highest actual number of British nationals for drugs offences (207), followed by USA (141) and Thailand (79)
  
• With regard to overall detentions, the USA detained the highest number of British nationals (669) followed by Spain (357) and Australia (271)
  

Research shows that British nationals often have unrealistic expectations of what the FCO can do for them if they are arrested overseas. New figures reveal that a fifth of British nationals think a British embassy or high commission can get them out of prison if required and more than two thirds believe they can provide legal advice. [2]

Just over half of consular time is spent supporting British nationals arrested and detained overseas.

Chris Bryant said: "Britons should know the risks of taking drugs abroad – and they should also be extremely wary of being sucked into the drugs trade. New figures show that over 1,000 Brits are in prisons overseas for drugs. People often don't realise that they will be sentenced in that country, that sentencing can take many months, prison conditions can be very difficult to handle and that sentences can be very long. The message is clear - we can't get people out of jail in other countries, so if you don't want to waste your life away in a tough foreign jail, be sensible and keep clean."

To find out more about what the FCO can and can't do to help you if you are detained overseas, see our page on Arrest and detention.

You should also check the FCO travel advice for information on the laws and customs of any country before you travel.

Further information

• These figures are a snap shot of the number of people in prison on 30 September 2009
  
• Over 2000 British nationals surveyed by ICM research in January 2010
  

-- fco.gov.uk

2010-02-03

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

In the USA, detention is big business. Very profitable I guess. The judges get involved in the detention business as well. So that works out well.

Behave yourselves in the land of the free.

As for Thailand, I've never even drank alcohol in Thailand -let alone risk it ALL with drugs there. Foolish, there's soooo much more to do in Thailand.

And watch out for those Rave Drugs that make you

stand around in your boxers and pose for pictures.

And watch out for those Rave Drugs that make you

stand around in your boxers and pose for pictures.

Maybe that's what the Russian are taken and getting caught on the beach doing the hanky panky.

Oh those wacky Brits . . . . . no other Country has people incarcerated in foreign jails of course.

Isn't this common knowledge?

Well, so it safe in the rest of the world?

In the USA, detention is big business. Very profitable I guess. The judges get involved in the detention business as well. So that works out well.

Behave yourselves in the land of the free.

As for Thailand, I've never even drank alcohol in Thailand -let alone risk it ALL with drugs there. Foolish, there's soooo much more to do in Thailand.

You d'ont drink alcohol in Thailand ?

You would go down well in Loei where my Mrs comes from.

I thank this govt for having such foresight and wisdom as everyone i know wouldnt have been aware of this.

Oh those wacky Brits . . . . . no other Country has people incarcerated in foreign jails of course.

difference is that the english govement does nothing to help. in extraditio to the U.S for U.S citerzerns they serve hallf there time then 3 months in the U.S

.

other countries have smilar rules. up to a few years. where as the U.K they have to serve there full time. so they get 20 years they do 20 yers. american get 10 years 3 months.

Thailand's sentences arfe so long that sentence of about 7 years or 3 years seem small but they are not. tey are when u compare to 15 to 99 years. Yet no King's amernsty for drug affences. so warning for us Brits. Bring some of out brains out with us to this country. do get to relaxed and think u r invinsable beleive me i have been here for 7 years. i have seen so many people fall. 7 years is a long time. imagine doing that banged up. good luck!

In South America, 99% of the British nationals detained by local authorities were held for drug crimes, with Brazil and Peru showing the highest figures in this continent

In Asia, 50% of British national detentions were for drugs with the highest figures occurring in Thailand and Japan

Spain detained the highest actual number of British nationals for drugs offences (207), followed by USA (141) and Thailand (79)

With regard to overall detentions, the USA detained the highest number of British nationals (669) followed by Spain (357) and Australia (271)

Given that these figures are probably more or less duplicated for most nationalities, and that the consumption of these drugs is a victimless (apart from perhaps the consumer) "crime", shouldn't those that have appointed themselves to be the moral guardians of the world have a re-think about the situation? Is there anything to be gained by locking up / hanging people who want to take drugs? After all, it's only a recreational pursuit, same as alcohol.

What I'm saying, basically, is "why are these people so blinkered, bigoted, 'holier-than-thou' and stupid".

Did they learn nothing from the era of prohibition in the USA?

Obviously not....

I despair.

bably more or less duplicated for most nationalities, and that the consumption of these drugs is a victimless (apart from perhaps the consumer) "crime", shouldn't those that have appointed themselves to be the moral guardians of the world have a re-think about the situation? Is there anything to be gained by locking up / hanging people who want to take drugs? After all, it's only a recreational pursuit, same as alcohol.

What I'm saying, basically, is "why are these people so blinkered, bigoted, 'holier-than-thou' and stupid".

Did they learn nothing from the era of prohibition in the USA?

Obviously not....

I despair.

Aye, but it isn't though is it... ("a victimless crime") I mean, I'm no prude when it comes to spliffs, and grew up in an environment that enabled me to learn plenty about the full range of effects (both direct and indirect) of more than one kind of drug. I've witnessed how Heroin destroys people and families, and how other drugs also have visible and tangible affects on people's health (e.g. collapsing noses, internal organs going kaput, deaths from indirect effects... like forgetting to turn the gas off, or people I hung out with contracting and dying of meningitis, as well as seeing full on paranoia and other wacky and scary things etc), calling it victimless is naive, and perhaps belies your youth. I don't believe much of the flimsy medical evidence, but I do know from years of experience that drugs are a symptom of underlying problems: ways for people to repress their anger about some abuse or neglect in their families; more to the point, they sap the energy of the young, when they most need it, to set up their lives as independent young adults... the crap about mental health is basically government-sponsored BS to evade tackling more complex difficult social issues that don't get solved in time for a next election; nor yield an obvious harvest of votes.

Nevetheless, drugs are not about a celebration of hippy values, it's a big, and ruthless business once you get beyond the domain of your local smalltime dealer... although I don't really approve of the sort of hardline rhetoric you hear from many "conservative Americans", it is actually true that there is a human cost to the drugs you are partaking of, even the mild ones... human trafficking, abuse, and exploitation in all it's unpleasant forms; murder - albeit often between similarly unpleasant people; and robbery of usually hardworking and helpless people.

Then there's always the other selfish angle - that there are no "trading standards" or "health and safety" regs for your suppliers to follow, they can tamper with your brown or your green, and certainly your assorted powders in all kinds of ways you just wouldn't imagine... and some of which you wouldn't understand (without at least a Chemistry degree).

I don't object to anyone having the odd spliff now and again (discreetly, and in a responsible context), but I think if you are going to truly apply the "ethical" ideal that you would probably like it to be connected to, then you probably want to go organic, because whatever you pay for... someone else has had to pay for, and not with money... usually with some irreparable suffering inflicted upon their already blighted lives.

So when you say "why are these people so blinkered, bigoted, 'holier-than-thou' and stupid"... I might politely suggest you "check yo' self befo' you wreck yo' self" etc... when it comes to trying to present such a simplistic and fallacious moral case; "good" does not equate to "what I want to do now", unless you are a child (or have the mind of one). Obviously if you are not a bigot, you will be open to reassessing your views.

At the end of the day, it all comes down to the state having the resources: guns, manpower, legal bureaucracy, technology, etc... to inflict whatever sanctions it wants on you, and you have bugger all chance of being able to stand up to them - even in the freest and most "democratic" of societies; plus that the case has yet to be successfully made that liberalised drugs will help rather than harm the economy. This is not my point of view (I'm neutral on the issue), just an observation.

The message that the govt is really trying to send out is that they are skint, and have no balls to dictate to other countries about repatriating our citizens, unlike other, more patriotic countries. The Labour Party is frankly a bit weird on the issue of drugs (and on many other social issues really), so you're best bet is to stop whining and try and vote for a party that will leave you alone when in the UK; but come to your aid when you're not! Some sort of peculiar Lib-Dem-BNP-Green Party-Libertarian coalition perhaps?!

Best of luck with that one!

(PS I'm not sure any country actually hangs people for consumption... a few do for smuggling pathetic amounts, it's true, and I agree, that's an outrage).

In the USA, detention is big business. Very profitable I guess. The judges get involved in the detention business as well. So that works out well.

'profitable? - on my taxes' who are you kidding? yeah, profitable for the lawyers only.

Behave yourselves in the land of the free.

As for Thailand, I've never even drank alcohol in Thailand -let alone risk it ALL with drugs there. Foolish, there's soooo much more to do in Thailand.

I guess this may make me unpopular.The truth often does.

Drugs?

A few facts;

1- Taking any sort of drug is a human need according to maslow himself. Try to stop a human need and you will fail.Every anti drug policy has.

2- The vast majority of all drug users will never incur any sort of negative action. Most drug dealers/smugglers/etc will make vast profits, at our expense. Most will not see a single day in any sort of prison, let alone spend any significant time in there.For those with no moral compass,it is an extremely attractive endeavor.

Its a myth to think otherwise.

In Thailand all one really has to do is-pay! Its as simple as that. Making Thailand an extremely attractive place to indulge in whatever one does.

3- Many so called dangerous drugs are not really dangerous at all and the negative effects can be avoided with a little knowledge. Making them illegal does nothing other than to prevent damage limitation information limited to those who want to. exercise their born right to do as they please with their own body's . And make the drug bosses rich.And us, the tax payer's are paying for that.

4- Taking any sort of drug should be a personal choice for adults. Places to test these drugs to check they contain no real harmful mix should be assessable. Doctors should be allowed to freely prescribe supplements to those who take whatever,thus reducing the negative effects.

Who has the right to tell us what to do with our own body? Should we really respect all law's simple because we are told to do so? If we did this women would still not have the vote and blacks would have to sit on special places on bus's? How about when they are made by a country known for it wholesale sex industry and corruption?

Doesn't it seem so hypocritical to you all?

I have yet to hear of any drug dealer forcing anyone to take anything with the exception of the horrendous way some working lady's are encouraged to take things to make them preform better. This is another myth.

Most people willingly choose to do so and no law, no policy has really ever prevented them from finding what they want nor deterring the drug cartels.

Right now, we have a hypocritical mess that is not working, costing a fortune and making the cartels very rich.

bably more or less duplicated for most nationalities, and that the consumption of these drugs is a victimless (apart from perhaps the consumer) "crime", shouldn't those that have appointed themselves to be the moral guardians of the world have a re-think about the situation? Is there anything to be gained by locking up / hanging people who want to take drugs? After all, it's only a recreational pursuit, same as alcohol.

What I'm saying, basically, is "why are these people so blinkered, bigoted, 'holier-than-thou' and stupid".

Did they learn nothing from the era of prohibition in the USA?

Obviously not....

I despair.

Aye, but it isn't though is it... ("a victimless crime") I mean, I'm no prude when it comes to spliffs, and grew up in an environment that enabled me to learn plenty about the full range of effects (both direct and indirect) of more than one kind of drug. I've witnessed how Heroin destroys people and families, and how other drugs also have visible and tangible affects on people's health (e.g. collapsing noses, internal organs going kaput, deaths from indirect effects... like forgetting to turn the gas off, or people I hung out with contracting and dying of meningitis, as well as seeing full on paranoia and other wacky and scary things etc), calling it victimless is naive, and perhaps belies your youth. I don't believe much of the flimsy medical evidence, but I do know from years of experience that drugs are a symptom of underlying problems: ways for people to repress their anger about some abuse or neglect in their families; more to the point, they sap the energy of the young, when they most need it, to set up their lives as independent young adults... the crap about mental health is basically government-sponsored BS to evade tackling more complex difficult social issues that don't get solved in time for a next election; nor yield an obvious harvest of votes.

Nevetheless, drugs are not about a celebration of hippy values, it's a big, and ruthless business once you get beyond the domain of your local smalltime dealer... although I don't really approve of the sort of hardline rhetoric you hear from many "conservative Americans", it is actually true that there is a human cost to the drugs you are partaking of, even the mild ones... human trafficking, abuse, and exploitation in all it's unpleasant forms; murder - albeit often between similarly unpleasant people; and robbery of usually hardworking and helpless people.

Then there's always the other selfish angle - that there are no "trading standards" or "health and safety" regs for your suppliers to follow, they can tamper with your brown or your green, and certainly your assorted powders in all kinds of ways you just wouldn't imagine... and some of which you wouldn't understand (without at least a Chemistry degree).

I don't object to anyone having the odd spliff now and again (discreetly, and in a responsible context), but I think if you are going to truly apply the "ethical" ideal that you would probably like it to be connected to, then you probably want to go organic, because whatever you pay for... someone else has had to pay for, and not with money... usually with some irreparable suffering inflicted upon their already blighted lives.

So when you say "why are these people so blinkered, bigoted, 'holier-than-thou' and stupid"... I might politely suggest you "check yo' self befo' you wreck yo' self" etc... when it comes to trying to present such a simplistic and fallacious moral case; "good" does not equate to "what I want to do now", unless you are a child (or have the mind of one). Obviously if you are not a bigot, you will be open to reassessing your views.

At the end of the day, it all comes down to the state having the resources: guns, manpower, legal bureaucracy, technology, etc... to inflict whatever sanctions it wants on you, and you have bugger all chance of being able to stand up to them - even in the freest and most "democratic" of societies; plus that the case has yet to be successfully made that liberalised drugs will help rather than harm the economy. This is not my point of view (I'm neutral on the issue), just an observation.

The message that the govt is really trying to send out is that they are skint, and have no balls to dictate to other countries about repatriating our citizens, unlike other, more patriotic countries. The Labour Party is frankly a bit weird on the issue of drugs (and on many other social issues really), so you're best bet is to stop whining and try and vote for a party that will leave you alone when in the UK; but come to your aid when you're not! Some sort of peculiar Lib-Dem-BNP-Green Party-Libertarian coalition perhaps?!

Best of luck with that one!

(PS I'm not sure any country actually hangs people for consumption... a few do for smuggling pathetic amounts, it's true, and I agree, that's an outrage).

There is indeed some truth in your observations about the damage drugs can do to family etc., however that applies equally to alcohol. It can wreck lives and wreck families and cause many health problems. Some people are susceptible, most are not.

All those negatives you correctly point out about the "big and ruthless business" in the drugs trafficking world exist for one reason and one reason only. Because the drugs are illegal. Were they not illegal, there could be government control over quality, price and distribution. The massive amount of crime associated with drugs would evaporate. The billions wasted on the futile "war on drugs" could be turned into tax revenue instead.

Also, within a generation or two, usage would drop dramatically. One big reason that people take drugs is because they are told that they are forbidden to do so. It is,always has been, and always will be human nature to be drawn to forbidden fruit. It started with Adam and Eve, and nothing has changed.

When you accuse me of being young and naive, you really have no idea how wide of the mark you are. I was heavily involved in the dark and violent underbelly of the drugs trade (and I'm not talking about "a bit of green or brown") back in the 60s and 70s. I know, and have seen stuff you couldn't even dream of. I'm not saying that as some kind of perverse boast, merely as a fact. I'm not proud of it. It's the way it was.

I know what motivates people in this business. I speak from an intimate knowledge of the trade and the human condition that drives it.  

No my friend, I'm afraid it is you who have the simplistic outlook on this subject. I have formed my opinions from knowledge and experience. And I can tell you now that as long as drugs remain illegal, nothing will change. People will continue to die. People will continue to resort to desperate measures to get what they want (need). Lives will continue to be wrecked. Billions will continue to be completely wasted on a war that can't be won.

The futility of it all beggars belief.

The answer is so obvious that it's become the elephant in the room. The politicians ignore it because to accept the obvious truth would turn upside-down all those things for which they were elected by an ignorant, tabloid - reading public. It's become a vicious circle. Through the media, they've convinced Joe Public that the merest sniff of a narcotic will turn him into a desperate, slavering, violent junkie. So to do an about face now would see them metaphorically torn to shreds by a marauding electorate. Political suicide.

And so the misery is perpetuated by the very laws that were supposed to stop it.

Yes, the lawmakers are blinkered, bigoted, 'holier-than-thou' and stupid. And that is neither fallacious nor simplistic. It is the truth.

Oh those wacky Brits . . . . . no other Country has people incarcerated in foreign jails of course.

difference is that the english govement does nothing to help. in extraditio to the U.S for U.S citerzerns they serve hallf there time then 3 months in the U.S

.

other countries have smilar rules. up to a few years. where as the U.K they have to serve there full time. so they get 20 years they do 20 yers. american get 10 years 3 months.

Thailand's sentences arfe so long that sentence of about 7 years or 3 years seem small but they are not. tey are when u compare to 15 to 99 years. Yet no King's amernsty for drug affences. so warning for us Brits. Bring some of out brains out with us to this country. do get to relaxed and think u r invinsable beleive me i have been here for 7 years. i have seen so many people fall. 7 years is a long time. imagine doing that banged up. good luck!

Not quite true, there has been several high profile drug mules that have served a part sentence in Thailand and a few years back in the UK to finish the Thai sentence.