Commentary: Legalize drugs to stop violence

misshestermoffitt

New Member
CAMBRIDGE, Massachusetts (CNN) -- Over the past two years, drug violence in Mexico has become a fixture of the daily news. Some of this violence pits drug cartels against one another; some involves confrontations between law enforcement and traffickers.


Recent estimates suggest thousands have lost their lives in this "war on drugs."

The U.S. and Mexican responses to this violence have been predictable: more troops and police, greater border controls and expanded enforcement of every kind. Escalation is the wrong response, however; drug prohibition is the cause of the violence.
Prohibition creates violence because it drives the drug market underground. This means buyers and sellers cannot resolve their disputes with lawsuits, arbitration or advertising, so they resort to violence instead.

Violence was common in the alcohol industry when it was banned during Prohibition, but not before or after.

Violence is the norm in illicit gambling markets but not in legal ones. Violence is routine when prostitution is banned but not when it's permitted. Violence results from policies that create black markets, not from the characteristics of the good or activity in question.

The only way to reduce violence, therefore, is to legalize drugs. Fortuitously, legalization is the right policy for a slew of other reasons.

Prohibition of drugs corrupts politicians and law enforcement by putting police, prosecutors, judges and politicians in the position to threaten the profits of an illicit trade. This is why bribery, threats and kidnapping are common for prohibited industries but rare otherwise. Mexico's recent history illustrates this dramatically.

Prohibition erodes protections against unreasonable search and seizure because neither party to a drug transaction has an incentive to report the activity to the police. Thus, enforcement requires intrusive tactics such as warrantless searches or undercover buys. The victimless nature of this so-called crime also encourages police to engage in racial profiling.

Prohibition has disastrous implications for national security. By eradicating coca plants in Colombia or poppy fields in Afghanistan, prohibition breeds resentment of the United States. By enriching those who produce and supply drugs, prohibition supports terrorists who sell protection services to drug traffickers.

Prohibition harms the public health. Patients suffering from cancer, glaucoma and other conditions cannot use marijuana under the laws of most states or the federal government despite abundant evidence of its efficacy. Terminally ill patients cannot always get adequate pain medication because doctors may fear prosecution by the Drug Enforcement Administration.
Drug users face restrictions on clean syringes that cause them to share contaminated needles, thereby spreading HIV, hepatitis and other blood-borne diseases.

Prohibitions breed disrespect for the law because despite draconian penalties and extensive enforcement, huge numbers of people still violate prohibition. This means those who break the law, and those who do not, learn that obeying laws is for suckers.

Prohibition is a drain on the public purse. Federal, state and local governments spend roughly $44 billion per year to enforce drug prohibition. These same governments forego roughly $33 billion per year in tax revenue they could collect from legalized drugs, assuming these were taxed at rates similar to those on alcohol and tobacco. Under prohibition, these revenues accrue to traffickers as increased profits.

The right policy, therefore, is to legalize drugs while using regulation and taxation to dampen irresponsible behavior related to drug use, such as driving under the influence. This makes more sense than prohibition because it avoids creation of a black market. This approach also allows those who believe they benefit from drug use to do so, as long as they do not harm others.
Legalization is desirable for all drugs, not just marijuana. The health risks of marijuana are lower than those of many other drugs, but that is not the crucial issue. Much of the traffic from Mexico or Colombia is for cocaine, heroin and other drugs, while marijuana production is increasingly domestic. Legalizing only marijuana would therefore fail to achieve many benefits of broader legalization.

It is impossible to reconcile respect for individual liberty with drug prohibition. The U.S. has been at the forefront of this puritanical policy for almost a century, with disastrous consequences at home and abroad.

The U.S. repealed Prohibition of alcohol at the height of the Great Depression, in part because of increasing violence and in part because of diminishing tax revenues. Similar concerns apply today, and Attorney General Eric Holder's recent announcement that the Drug Enforcement Administration will not raid medical marijuana distributors in California suggests an openness in the Obama administration to rethinking current practice.

Perhaps history will repeat itself, and the U.S. will abandon one of its most disastrous policy experiments.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/24/miron.legalization.drugs/index.html
 

Sgt. Floyd

Well-Known Member
I love how there have been so many news stories like this popping up all over the country. I just hope that people will realize that the safest and cheapest way to put an end to the Mexican drug problem is to remove their profits by ending prohibition. Then again common sense isn't one of the American public's best traits.
 

joepro

Well-Known Member
Then again common sense isn't one of the American public's best traits.
I'm against cannabis laws, not drug laws.
I could see companies racing to put the best high on the shelves.
plus facter in that we, americans, are flat out dope feens.
my god it would get ugly quick.
new& improved, big glup slurpee!
now with 99% amphetamine and 100% fruit juice.

the wacky wild freebase tool kit!
(pick one of 4 colors)
comes with 10 free hits!
get yours...... NOW!

can't sleep? are you feeling all tweaked out? been up for days?
Try are mainline supply. we hand pick only the finest poppy pants.
guaranteed or your money back!
 

GrowTech

stays relevant.
I think you're asking a lot in legalizing all drugs, especially considering the government will have to own the responsibility when millions of people end up addicted to heroin, and crack, and meth.

I can see the logic behind ending the prohibition of cannabis, but to ask for more is ridiculous IMO.
 

Sgt. Floyd

Well-Known Member
I'm against cannabis laws, not drug laws.
I could see companies racing to put the best high on the shelves.
plus facter in that we, americans, are flat out dope feens.
my god it would get ugly quick.
new& improved, big glup slurpee!
now with 99% amphetamine and 100% fruit juice.

the wacky wild freebase tool kit!
(pick one of 4 colors)
comes with 10 free hits!
get yours...... NOW!

can't sleep? are you feeling all tweaked out? been up for days?
Try are mainline supply. we hand pick only the finest poppy pants.
guaranteed or your money back!
I understand. I don't think there will ever be a workable system that could legalize and regulate hard drugs. I've seen several news stories that claim the cartels make over half of their profits from pot. And pots simplicity to grow and create a finished process(as opposed to cocaine and heroin) makes it a good starting point for drug businesses. If you take away the profit from pot through legalization, then concentrate on taking out the hard drug producers, I think the cartels would loose their influence pretty quickly.
 

joepro

Well-Known Member
thats one bigg issue I have with liberals.
its never enough.
you give in just one inch and they want a foot outright.
if cannabis was up for review on the federal level, and it was for cannabis only.
I'm willing to bet a liberal lawyer will sue for other drug rights.
likely derailing congress into any decisions.
 

GrowTech

stays relevant.
thats one bigg issue I have with liberals.
its never enough.
you give in just one inch and they want a foot outright.
if cannabis was up for review on the federal level, and it was for cannabis only.
I'm willing to bet a liberal lawyer will sue for other drug rights.
likely derailing congress into any decisions.
I just think people should be happy with what they get... of course it's the nature of the dope fiend to beg for more. Some people don't know that people lose their homes to drug addiction, and this isn't a problem the government wants to own. Also, some people treat arrest and conviction as an incentive to stay clean and sober, lets not fuck things up for them.

All I can say is that if pot were to become legal, I would fully endorse the DEA, and their crusade against REAL drugs. I would also rally against the logic and arguments of anyone who attempts to screw up a good thing by making hilarious requests like 'legalize all drugs'

"We thought this guy had a good idea about legalizing pot... and now everyone wants everything legalized."

Some people just dont know when to stop :roll:
 

Sgt. Floyd

Well-Known Member
Legalizing all drugs looks good only in the aspect that it would remove production and sale from criminals. But LEAP, Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, one of the bigger groups that advocates legalizing all drugs doesn't have an idea for how legalizing the hard drugs would work.

I think that pot should be legal, the DEA should be left with the same budget(maybe a little lower) to combat hard drugs, and there should be a concentrated campaign to honestly inform people, mainly youth, on the dangers of hard drugs.
 

TheBrutalTruth

Well-Known Member
I think that all drug laws are unethical, immoral and repulsive.

On top of being Tools of Repression.

Of course, the problem is that the government insists on trying to take care of everyone. If the government would get the hell out of the way then there would be no issue. People who make stupid decisions should reap what they have sown.

This includes the idiots at Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers, and people that did not read all the details of their loan agreements.

A failure to PLAN ON THEIR PART, does not constitute a crisis on my part.
 

ilkhan

Well-Known Member
How would it be the governments fault if they got adictied to herroin? Because they washed their hands of the mess? Let people choose their own path. Sell Hard drugs from pharmases make them sign a waiver saying they know the danger and accept responsability. I don't see it as a government problem at all. Big pharma could make a killing and use the money to cure freakin' cancer.

However, I will be very happy with Pot Decriminalization.
I don't touch the other stuff I've seen what it does to you.
I have noticed all the shows on too, gearing people up, testing the waters maybe?
Their making a big production out of what would only be a one line change to the drug code.
 
Top