5 ms·

I find it hard to believe that there's some sort of conspiracy to keep police, lawyers, and prisons funded via laws against selling drugs. Have you considered

by skylark 10y ago

I find it hard to believe that there's some sort of conspiracy to keep police, lawyers, and prisons funded via laws against selling drugs. Have you considered that these laws are still in place simply because it's the status quo? Politicians voting on laws and drafting new ones must ultimately answer to their constituents. While the vast majority of things fly under the radar, "pro-drug" support is enough of a charged issue that supporting drug legalization is guaranteed to be used against you the next time you're running for office. Like it or not, logic be damned, drugs will continue to be illegal because the majority of Americans do not support drug legalization. The tides are starting to turn in some states on weed, but the average American outside of the most liberal states doesn't even support that. Good luck convincing them to legalize cocaine, ecstasy, LSD, or any "harder" drug.

delazeur 10y ago
It's not a smoky room conspiracy. A quick google search turned up many articles about private prison companies funding lobbying[1], and I expect you will find similar results if you search for police union donations. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/04/28/how-for-profit-prisons-have-become-the-biggest-lobby-no-one-is-talking-about/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/04/28/...
- skylark 10y ago
  While money in politics is certainly an issue which should be fixed, I still think it's disingenuous to say that drugs are illegal simply because parties profit from it. Overall I'd argue that the current state of drug laws is the will of the American people and that corporate efforts to lobby politicians actually falls in line with popular opinion. Again, I'm not necessarily supporting this point of view, I'm only trying to be reasonable.
  - mapt 10y ago
    This isn't much conjecture or point of view necessary here on the origin and initial implementation of this moral panic. " “You want to know what this was really all about?” he asked with the bluntness of a man who, after public disgrace and a stretch in federal prison, had little left to protect. “The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.” " - John Erlichman, on why he and his boss created The War On Drugs https://harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all/ https://harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all/ "Around 1910, the Mexican Revolution was starting to boil over, and many Mexicans immigrated to the U.S. to escape the conflict. This Mexican population had its own uses for cannabis, and they referred to it as “marihuana.” Not only did they use it for medicinal purposes, but they smoked it recreationally, which was a new concept for white Americans. Even the term, marihuana, was unfamiliar to them, as they called it cannabis. Southern states that were receiving the Mexican immigrants became concerned with this growing population. Newspapers ran headlines speaking of the “Mexican menace” or the “marijuana menace” and claimed Mexican men were going crazy from smoking marijuana and were killing people. El Paso, Texas became the first U.S. city to ban marijuana in 1915, and city officials started rounding up Mexicans who smoked marijuana and had them deported." http://www.salon.com/2015/07/02/the_real_reason_marijuana_is_illegal_in_the_united_states_partner/ http://www.salon.com/2015/07/02/the_real_reason_marijuana_is...
  - soundwave106 10y ago
    From my point of view, I do think that it's very possible that many if not most drugs that we are talking about still would be illegal today irregardless of the moral panic. So in a way, you are right about the "will of the people". However, what the moral panic (and its often racist / political dogma as mapt pointed out) created was drug policies that were overly punitive, and even from the user angle often treat rug addiction itself as a criminal problem, not a medical one. Unfortunately, too many "leaders" are too willing to exploit certain sentiments (ranging from outright racism to a mere desire to protect their kids from harm) and create reactive prohibitions that often do more harm then good. Ironically, one of the biggest and most lethal drug addiction epidemics right now in America concerns prescription opioids (such as Oxycontin or fentanyl). Because it is a legally prescribed substance, I find media on this much more sober than the moral panic hysteria articles I remember from 1980s and 1990s media on most illegal drugs. The "emotional bias" for illegal drugs definitely is still around though, and it unfortunately is not entirely rational. One fun example from the other angle: a few years ago, somebody created an overpriced brownie, added melatonin (the same melatonin you can buy at the herbal medicine isle for sleep, that has no LD50 that anyone has figured out yet), and marketed it with "head shop" type graphics for the "head shops" crowd. Cue moral panic here and elsewhere: http://www.nbc12.com/story/14168427/cg-3-linedangers-of-lazy-cakesrichmond12-on-your-side-alert http://www.nbc12.com/story/14168427/cg-3-linedangers-of-lazy...
  - ASalazarMX 10y ago
    USA is the country with the highest illegal drug consumption by far, obviously it's not the will of its people.
- benologist 10y ago
  It's not a conspiracy that people in support of X lobby for more X. That's what lobbying is for. That article you link claims the two biggest offenders have spent $35 million between 1989 and 2015. Google spent $10m in 6 months last year - http://www.wired.com/2015/07/google-facebook-amazon-lobbying/ http://www.wired.com/2015/07/google-facebook-amazon-lobbying.... You can't infer much other than it's not free to promote your ideas to your government.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- stcredzero 10y ago
  It's not a smoky room conspiracy It's a marble halls & suits non-conspiracy lobbying thing.
- random_upvoter 10y ago
  Likewise, a quick google search will show you that the pro-marijuana lobby is a thing. In the upcoming California Legalization ballot the side in favor is outfunding the opposition 45 to 1. The pot industry is already a billion dollar business. So if legalization becomes a fact, will you allow me to conclude that marijuana is legal just because of the lobbying powers of Big Marijuana?
  - delazeur 10y ago
    > marijuana is legal just because of the lobbying powers of Big Marijuana I am not making that claim about criminalization, and I would not make that claim about legalization. However: yes, if and when legalization happens I will likely be making cynical comments about marijuana lobbying.
themartorana 10y ago
A majority of Americans support marijuana legalization: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/03/25/support-for-marijuana-legalization-has-hit-an-all-time-high/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/03/25/suppo... The original banning of marijuana is ridiculous and riddled with racism and xenophobia: http://www.salon.com/2015/07/02/the_real_reason_marijuana_is_illegal_in_the_united_states_partner/ http://www.salon.com/2015/07/02/the_real_reason_marijuana_is... This is just marijuana. Drug legality and policy is mired in racism and money politics. It is just as conspiracy-theory as it sounds.
- at-fates-hands 10y ago
  >> This is just marijuana. I would hasten to say this. I totally support a lot of the legalization for medicinal purposes but there's still way too much of this happening: Driving while high on marijuana causing spike in fatal accidents - http://www.today.com/health/driving-while-high-marijuana-causing-spike-fatal-accidents-t91746 http://www.today.com/health/driving-while-high-marijuana-cau... Police: Driver Was High Before Crash That Killed Massachusetts State Trooper - http://www.necn.com/news/new-england/DA-Massachusetts-State-Police-News-Conference-Trooper-Thomas-Clardy-Driver-David-Njuguna-379980931.html http://www.necn.com/news/new-england/DA-Massachusetts-State-... Driver was high on marijuana when he killed NE Portland cyclist, police say - http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2015/12/driver_was_high_on_marijuana_w.html http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2015/12/driver_... Driver accused of crashing into marijuana dispensary while high on marijuana - http://www.oregonlive.com/happy-valley/index.ssf/2016/06/driver_accused_of_crashing_int.html http://www.oregonlive.com/happy-valley/index.ssf/2016/06/dri... Teen driver admits to smoking marijuana before crash killing 3 - http://www.kiro7.com/news/teen-driver-admits-smoking-marijuana-crash-killing/43501085 http://www.kiro7.com/news/teen-driver-admits-smoking-marijua... Sorry but that old adage that people who smoke weed just sit on the couch and eat potato chips and people who smoke don't hurt anybody is a load of BS. These are not simple accidents, these are people getting high, driving and killing people, and its happening a LOT more frequently. I do believe in legalization for medical purposes and feel there are huge benefits for people who need it - but clearly there are still issues that need to be worked out. And save your "Drunk drivers kill more people very year" and "Alcohol is way worse. . " arguments. Just because we already have one dangerous legal drug, does not make it right to legalize another one. Heroin and Cocaine are also schedule I and II drugs. Are they any less dangerous than weed?
kelvin0 10y ago
Never underestimate greed. In plain sight: http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/10/11/asset-seizures-fuel-police-spending/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/10/11/as... http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/09/06/stop-and-seize/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/09/06/st... http://www.forbes.com/sites/instituteforjustice/2014/03/12/cops-use-traffic-stops-to-seize-millions-from-drivers-never-charged-with-a-crime/#6dbe213046ae http://www.forbes.com/sites/instituteforjustice/2014/03/12/c... http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/08/12/taken http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/08/12/taken
- bduerst 10y ago
  How is that proof of conspiracy? Civil asset forfeiture laws could fall subject to the same "status quo" problem as drug laws. Even then there are states who are taking steps to change them (e.g. CA SB 443 revote in Aug 2016), which could also be said about marijuana decriminalization.
  - mindcrime 10y ago
    It's not so much a conspiracy per-se, as a case where people, who might otherwise support changing the system, don't do so out of self-interest. At the very least, a lot of people are incentivized to remain silent and accept the status quo as is, even if their personal feelings might lead them down a different path.
    - wamatt 10y ago
      Would be great if we had a word for this. The word 'conspiracy' tends to derail conversations because as you say, it doesn't quite fit.
      - bduerst 10y ago
        Tragedy of the commons maybe? It's rational actors who control a system and are not making it better because they alone stand to benefit.
duaneb 10y ago
You don't need a conspiracy to have systemic exploitation.
colemickens 10y ago
And many Americans believe that drugs being illegal means that: they're harder to get, they're used less than they would be if they were legal, and that the public is being saved from DANGEROUS HORRIBLE drugs. All of which is false, but is perpetuated by those in powers - both by outright propaganda, and by (selective) enforcement of these laws.
- colemickens 10y ago
  I'm really curious for those downvoting which part you disagree with. I don't bite. Decriminalization/legalization doesn't lead to an increase in use in any historical case I'm aware of at all. Prohibition doesn't work, by any measure, at all.
MichaelGG 10y ago
The US's war on drugs really pounds "developing" countries though. Guatemala, for instance, has basically no drug problem. People don't buy, they don't consume, addiction isn't really an issue. (Alcoholism, macho-ness, incompetence OTOH...) Yet Guatemala pays with blood. It enforces ridiculous money laws. It has to do all this and it's a total net negative for the country. They get no benefit, other than appeasing the US. Is this a conspiracy? Either way it massively benefits the US, which gets a way to keep these countries preoccupied with false issues, keep them rife with violence, an so on, preventing them from becoming a credible threat or competition. I'm willing to bet many other countries are in a similar position. Mexico would probably get cleaned up overnight if they gave Monsanto an exclusive license for pot and opium cultivation. (I'd bet on Monsanto corpsec over cartels any day.) Hell, these countries could even nationalize production if they weren't to bad at everything they do. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jan/19/otto-molina-war-drugs-guatemala https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jan/19/otto-molina-wa...
adrusi 10y ago
I don't know if the parent was so much suggesting a conspiracy as a feedback loop. It's the status quo because those groups keep perpetuating it. And they perpetuate it partly out of selfishness, but mostly becuase in the world that they're exposed to, they only see the worst stories of drug use. Police, lawyers and prison guards see drug users and dealers when they get caught, and one very easy way to get caught is to turn to violence. They see drug criminals in the same context as other criminals and develop intuitive associations between those groups. That doesn't mean they're off the hook though. They are biased, and unlike the general public, they have a professional responsibility to account for that before acting to influence public policy.
e40 10y ago
Have you considered that these laws are still in place simply because it's the status quo? It's more than that. The biggest opponents to the legal pot movement in CA this year are the police and prison guard unions. And the ads those orgs are running are just FUD. In some cases, they are outright lies. Actually, in most cases, they are outright lies. Those lies are seen by a lot of people are are the basis of Americans not supporting drug legalization.
powertower 10y ago
> I find it hard to believe that there's some sort of conspiracy to keep police, lawyers, and prisons funded via laws against selling drugs. The individual cells of an organism don't conspire to keep the organism alive and functioning - they simply do their individual job and the system maintains itself organically. There is no conspiracy, there is just a system that has an interest in staying alive, a system which is composed of millions of people, with trillions of dollars moving through it.
liveshops_ 10y ago
I totally agree with the status quo comment. Change and innovation are so hard with these huge issues.
andrei_says_ 10y ago
I posted this in the parent but will repeat it here as it is relevant to your question. http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/ http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richa... If we look at this prohibition as an initiative not for reducing drug use but an initiative for policing people, I would say that it does work as intended.

by skylark 10y ago

delazeur 10y ago

It's not a smoky room conspiracy. A quick google search turned up many articles about private prison companies funding lobbying[1], and I expect you will find similar results if you search for police union donations. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/04/28/how-for-profit-prisons-have-become-the-biggest-lobby-no-one-is-talking-about/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/04/28/...

skylark 10y ago
While money in politics is certainly an issue which should be fixed, I still think it's disingenuous to say that drugs are illegal simply because parties profit from it. Overall I'd argue that the current state of drug laws is the will of the American people and that corporate efforts to lobby politicians actually falls in line with popular opinion. Again, I'm not necessarily supporting this point of view, I'm only trying to be reasonable.
- mapt 10y ago
  This isn't much conjecture or point of view necessary here on the origin and initial implementation of this moral panic. " “You want to know what this was really all about?” he asked with the bluntness of a man who, after public disgrace and a stretch in federal prison, had little left to protect. “The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.” " - John Erlichman, on why he and his boss created The War On Drugs https://harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all/ https://harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all/ "Around 1910, the Mexican Revolution was starting to boil over, and many Mexicans immigrated to the U.S. to escape the conflict. This Mexican population had its own uses for cannabis, and they referred to it as “marihuana.” Not only did they use it for medicinal purposes, but they smoked it recreationally, which was a new concept for white Americans. Even the term, marihuana, was unfamiliar to them, as they called it cannabis. Southern states that were receiving the Mexican immigrants became concerned with this growing population. Newspapers ran headlines speaking of the “Mexican menace” or the “marijuana menace” and claimed Mexican men were going crazy from smoking marijuana and were killing people. El Paso, Texas became the first U.S. city to ban marijuana in 1915, and city officials started rounding up Mexicans who smoked marijuana and had them deported." http://www.salon.com/2015/07/02/the_real_reason_marijuana_is_illegal_in_the_united_states_partner/ http://www.salon.com/2015/07/02/the_real_reason_marijuana_is...
- soundwave106 10y ago
  From my point of view, I do think that it's very possible that many if not most drugs that we are talking about still would be illegal today irregardless of the moral panic. So in a way, you are right about the "will of the people". However, what the moral panic (and its often racist / political dogma as mapt pointed out) created was drug policies that were overly punitive, and even from the user angle often treat rug addiction itself as a criminal problem, not a medical one. Unfortunately, too many "leaders" are too willing to exploit certain sentiments (ranging from outright racism to a mere desire to protect their kids from harm) and create reactive prohibitions that often do more harm then good. Ironically, one of the biggest and most lethal drug addiction epidemics right now in America concerns prescription opioids (such as Oxycontin or fentanyl). Because it is a legally prescribed substance, I find media on this much more sober than the moral panic hysteria articles I remember from 1980s and 1990s media on most illegal drugs. The "emotional bias" for illegal drugs definitely is still around though, and it unfortunately is not entirely rational. One fun example from the other angle: a few years ago, somebody created an overpriced brownie, added melatonin (the same melatonin you can buy at the herbal medicine isle for sleep, that has no LD50 that anyone has figured out yet), and marketed it with "head shop" type graphics for the "head shops" crowd. Cue moral panic here and elsewhere: http://www.nbc12.com/story/14168427/cg-3-linedangers-of-lazy-cakesrichmond12-on-your-side-alert http://www.nbc12.com/story/14168427/cg-3-linedangers-of-lazy...
- ASalazarMX 10y ago
  USA is the country with the highest illegal drug consumption by far, obviously it's not the will of its people.
benologist 10y ago
It's not a conspiracy that people in support of X lobby for more X. That's what lobbying is for. That article you link claims the two biggest offenders have spent $35 million between 1989 and 2015. Google spent $10m in 6 months last year - http://www.wired.com/2015/07/google-facebook-amazon-lobbying/ http://www.wired.com/2015/07/google-facebook-amazon-lobbying.... You can't infer much other than it's not free to promote your ideas to your government.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
stcredzero 10y ago
It's not a smoky room conspiracy It's a marble halls & suits non-conspiracy lobbying thing.
random_upvoter 10y ago
Likewise, a quick google search will show you that the pro-marijuana lobby is a thing. In the upcoming California Legalization ballot the side in favor is outfunding the opposition 45 to 1. The pot industry is already a billion dollar business. So if legalization becomes a fact, will you allow me to conclude that marijuana is legal just because of the lobbying powers of Big Marijuana?
- delazeur 10y ago
  > marijuana is legal just because of the lobbying powers of Big Marijuana I am not making that claim about criminalization, and I would not make that claim about legalization. However: yes, if and when legalization happens I will likely be making cynical comments about marijuana lobbying.

themartorana 10y ago

A majority of Americans support marijuana legalization: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/03/25/support-for-marijuana-legalization-has-hit-an-all-time-high/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/03/25/suppo... The original banning of marijuana is ridiculous and riddled with racism and xenophobia: http://www.salon.com/2015/07/02/the_real_reason_marijuana_is_illegal_in_the_united_states_partner/ http://www.salon.com/2015/07/02/the_real_reason_marijuana_is... This is just marijuana. Drug legality and policy is mired in racism and money politics. It is just as conspiracy-theory as it sounds.

at-fates-hands 10y ago
>> This is just marijuana. I would hasten to say this. I totally support a lot of the legalization for medicinal purposes but there's still way too much of this happening: Driving while high on marijuana causing spike in fatal accidents - http://www.today.com/health/driving-while-high-marijuana-causing-spike-fatal-accidents-t91746 http://www.today.com/health/driving-while-high-marijuana-cau... Police: Driver Was High Before Crash That Killed Massachusetts State Trooper - http://www.necn.com/news/new-england/DA-Massachusetts-State-Police-News-Conference-Trooper-Thomas-Clardy-Driver-David-Njuguna-379980931.html http://www.necn.com/news/new-england/DA-Massachusetts-State-... Driver was high on marijuana when he killed NE Portland cyclist, police say - http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2015/12/driver_was_high_on_marijuana_w.html http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2015/12/driver_... Driver accused of crashing into marijuana dispensary while high on marijuana - http://www.oregonlive.com/happy-valley/index.ssf/2016/06/driver_accused_of_crashing_int.html http://www.oregonlive.com/happy-valley/index.ssf/2016/06/dri... Teen driver admits to smoking marijuana before crash killing 3 - http://www.kiro7.com/news/teen-driver-admits-smoking-marijuana-crash-killing/43501085 http://www.kiro7.com/news/teen-driver-admits-smoking-marijua... Sorry but that old adage that people who smoke weed just sit on the couch and eat potato chips and people who smoke don't hurt anybody is a load of BS. These are not simple accidents, these are people getting high, driving and killing people, and its happening a LOT more frequently. I do believe in legalization for medical purposes and feel there are huge benefits for people who need it - but clearly there are still issues that need to be worked out. And save your "Drunk drivers kill more people very year" and "Alcohol is way worse. . " arguments. Just because we already have one dangerous legal drug, does not make it right to legalize another one. Heroin and Cocaine are also schedule I and II drugs. Are they any less dangerous than weed?

kelvin0 10y ago

Never underestimate greed. In plain sight: http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/10/11/asset-seizures-fuel-police-spending/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/10/11/as... http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/09/06/stop-and-seize/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/09/06/st... http://www.forbes.com/sites/instituteforjustice/2014/03/12/cops-use-traffic-stops-to-seize-millions-from-drivers-never-charged-with-a-crime/#6dbe213046ae http://www.forbes.com/sites/instituteforjustice/2014/03/12/c... http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/08/12/taken http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/08/12/taken

bduerst 10y ago
How is that proof of conspiracy? Civil asset forfeiture laws could fall subject to the same "status quo" problem as drug laws. Even then there are states who are taking steps to change them (e.g. CA SB 443 revote in Aug 2016), which could also be said about marijuana decriminalization.
- mindcrime 10y ago
  It's not so much a conspiracy per-se, as a case where people, who might otherwise support changing the system, don't do so out of self-interest. At the very least, a lot of people are incentivized to remain silent and accept the status quo as is, even if their personal feelings might lead them down a different path.
  - wamatt 10y ago
    Would be great if we had a word for this. The word 'conspiracy' tends to derail conversations because as you say, it doesn't quite fit.
    - bduerst 10y ago
      Tragedy of the commons maybe? It's rational actors who control a system and are not making it better because they alone stand to benefit.

duaneb 10y ago

You don't need a conspiracy to have systemic exploitation.

colemickens 10y ago

And many Americans believe that drugs being illegal means that: they're harder to get, they're used less than they would be if they were legal, and that the public is being saved from DANGEROUS HORRIBLE drugs. All of which is false, but is perpetuated by those in powers - both by outright propaganda, and by (selective) enforcement of these laws.

colemickens 10y ago
I'm really curious for those downvoting which part you disagree with. I don't bite. Decriminalization/legalization doesn't lead to an increase in use in any historical case I'm aware of at all. Prohibition doesn't work, by any measure, at all.

MichaelGG 10y ago

The US's war on drugs really pounds "developing" countries though. Guatemala, for instance, has basically no drug problem. People don't buy, they don't consume, addiction isn't really an issue. (Alcoholism, macho-ness, incompetence OTOH...) Yet Guatemala pays with blood. It enforces ridiculous money laws. It has to do all this and it's a total net negative for the country. They get no benefit, other than appeasing the US. Is this a conspiracy? Either way it massively benefits the US, which gets a way to keep these countries preoccupied with false issues, keep them rife with violence, an so on, preventing them from becoming a credible threat or competition. I'm willing to bet many other countries are in a similar position. Mexico would probably get cleaned up overnight if they gave Monsanto an exclusive license for pot and opium cultivation. (I'd bet on Monsanto corpsec over cartels any day.) Hell, these countries could even nationalize production if they weren't to bad at everything they do. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jan/19/otto-molina-war-drugs-guatemala https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jan/19/otto-molina-wa...

adrusi 10y ago

I don't know if the parent was so much suggesting a conspiracy as a feedback loop. It's the status quo because those groups keep perpetuating it. And they perpetuate it partly out of selfishness, but mostly becuase in the world that they're exposed to, they only see the worst stories of drug use. Police, lawyers and prison guards see drug users and dealers when they get caught, and one very easy way to get caught is to turn to violence. They see drug criminals in the same context as other criminals and develop intuitive associations between those groups. That doesn't mean they're off the hook though. They are biased, and unlike the general public, they have a professional responsibility to account for that before acting to influence public policy.

e40 10y ago

Have you considered that these laws are still in place simply because it's the status quo? It's more than that. The biggest opponents to the legal pot movement in CA this year are the police and prison guard unions. And the ads those orgs are running are just FUD. In some cases, they are outright lies. Actually, in most cases, they are outright lies. Those lies are seen by a lot of people are are the basis of Americans not supporting drug legalization.

powertower 10y ago

> I find it hard to believe that there's some sort of conspiracy to keep police, lawyers, and prisons funded via laws against selling drugs. The individual cells of an organism don't conspire to keep the organism alive and functioning - they simply do their individual job and the system maintains itself organically. There is no conspiracy, there is just a system that has an interest in staying alive, a system which is composed of millions of people, with trillions of dollars moving through it.

liveshops_ 10y ago

I totally agree with the status quo comment. Change and innovation are so hard with these huge issues.

andrei_says_ 10y ago

I posted this in the parent but will repeat it here as it is relevant to your question. http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/ http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richa... If we look at this prohibition as an initiative not for reducing drug use but an initiative for policing people, I would say that it does work as intended.