4 ms·

I am strongly in favor of drug legalization, because I am from Mexico. Drug traffic is ruinous for the Mexican economy, even if you didn't care ethically about

I am strongly in favor of drug legalization, because I am from Mexico. Drug traffic is ruinous for the Mexican economy, even if you didn't care ethically about the human cost of a >250,000 death toll in the last 10 years (the drug war in Mexico is, depending how you count, the 3rd or 4th deadliest armed conflict in the world today, after Syria, Iraq, and Afganistan[1]). In purely economic terms, even though some money does flow into the country through the cartels, the lack of basic security caused by a weak state interacting with extraordinarily wealthy criminal organizations makes it very hard for industry to develop: investment doesn't want to come (and if it does, must hedge against extortion in its plans), there is a huge brain-drain of skilled talent, and no local wants to take any risk, specially not a business risk that might put them in the sight of organized crime. Mexico has some high-tech industry, and it has the potential to develop far more, but it is stunted by a climate of lack of human security and personal safety. Not all of it is because of the drug war (Mexico has a level of economic inequality that makes the divide in the US look quaint, and in practical terms is an incredibly young democracy, for example). Legalization in the US would not solve all of Mexico's problems, but it might give it enough breathing room to reverse what currently feels like a slow collapse... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ongoing_armed_conflicts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ongoing_armed_conflict... (note that the cumulative official death toll number shown there is extremely under-reported)

mjolk 10y ago
> I am strongly in favor of drug legalization, because I am from Mexico. Drug traffic is ruinous for the Mexican economy, even if you didn't care ethically about the human cost of a >250,000 death toll in the last 10 years... If the Mexican government is unable to keep its people from getting killed as a result of a neighboring country policing intoxicants, that's a failure of the Mexican government to control crime within its borders, not reason for another nation to change its laws -- you're asking not just for decriminalization, but also legal native manufacturing of addictive substances in the US, as otherwise the lucrative export market would continue to exist.
- witty_username 10y ago
  If drugs were legal to produce and distribute then it wouldn't be a black market and thus violence and criminality would reduce (people wouldn't buy from shady characters; they'd just go to the store and buy it like anything else). I don't know any ricelords or any significant criminal gangs that distribute rice. This is only a problem encountered with drugs and other illegal things. Also, (paraphrasing Milton Friedman), drug users don't report the crime unlike other crimes like burglary or murder because the victim is the offender.
  - mjolk 10y ago
    > If drugs were legal to produce and distribute then it wouldn't be a black market and thus violence and criminality would reduce (people wouldn't buy from shady characters; they'd just go to the store and buy it like anything else). Criminality _related to the import/export/sale of the drugs_. If you think this would be without side effects, you haven't spent much time in an area with methheads or heroin addicts. And, for what it's worth, it's very easy to purchase drugs from non-shady characters, especially in major US cities (a friend of mine used to text his dealer and a business-casual dressed woman would show up with a wheeling briefcase). > I don't know any ricelords or any significant criminal gangs that distribute rice. This is only a problem encountered with drugs and other illegal things. If you use the semantics of "criminal gangs", then you've framed the argument in a way that makes it impossible to debate. Of course "criminal gangs" do "illegal things" (prostitution, substances, etc), that's why they're called criminal gangs. In a country with a stronger rule of law, they're forced to at least have a front, such as sanitation, pay day loans, unions, etc. > Also, (paraphrasing Milton Friedman), drug users don't report the crime unlike other crimes like burglary or murder because the victim is the offender. Eh, for casual, functional users. The water gets murky when the users subsist on government services or become unemployed due to substance abuse. The case against legalizing all drugs isn't particularly concerned about a bank teller taking psilocybin mushrooms and sitting in her back yard on a Sunday afternoon.
- lazaroclapp 10y ago
  > If the Mexican government is unable to keep its people from getting killed as a result of a neighboring country policing intoxicants, that's a failure of the Mexican government to control crime within its borders Sure. But: a) it is reality, the Mexican state is not strong enough to solve that problem given the economics of the huge market for drugs in the US, b) my hypothesis is that the US would also benefit from legalizing drugs, producing them, taxing them and treating the problem as a healthcare matter (similar to what it does for alcohol, tobacco, and better than it currently does about prescription opiates). I do not think harmful consumption would increase in the US after legalization, and I think better quality controls and openness would make it harder for people to overdose and easier for them to get treated. This is of course not tested, but my sincere belief is that it would help both the US and Mexico, and at this point it would be a lot quicker than what needs to happen in Mexico for the trade to end on our end.
justinpombrio 10y ago
Crazy question: why doesn't Mexico legalize all drugs and drug trade? The US would have a fit, but is the good will of the US worth the damage the drug war does in Mexico?
- wu-ikkyu 10y ago
  >Crazy question: why doesn't Mexico legalize all drugs and drug trade? The government is run by the cartels.
- WildUtah 10y ago
  Mexico's economy is deeply invested in trade with the USA. Simply declaring that the drug gangs will be openly allowed to use Mexican territory to try to deliver drugs to the USA however they want would lead the USA to retaliate. The most likely response is a closed border and an end to trade. Mexico is a prosperous country now, in spite of gang problems, and that will continue only as long as trade is open. But small personal use amounts of drugs are already decriminalized in Mexico. I see plenty of people buy, sell, and smoke mariguana in front of cops in broad daylight. To stop the cartels, you need to allow major companies to compete and the USA politicians can't ignore that. And for all the trouble drug gangs cause in Mexico, they kill fewer people than car crashes. The federal legislature isn't making it the top national priority or overriding all other concerns for that level of violence. And, to make a final note, the Supreme Court of Justice keeps threatening to make mariguana legal nationally as a matter of human rights. The USA probably wouldn't go as crazy if it happens through a judicial process.
  - lazaroclapp 10y ago
    > And for all the trouble drug gangs cause in Mexico, they kill fewer people than car crashes. Debatable, actually. War on drugs related deaths are >250,000 in 10 years by some counts. Car crash related deaths average 24,000 a year in Mexico. But the thing is that violence related deaths are worse than car accidents in one significant way: they erode people's trust in others and the feeling of safety. They lead to more conservative risk-taking behavior and have far reaching consequences on people's mental state (would you react the same if you hear that a university classmate died in a crash than if you learn he was killed by armed cartel members or the army as collateral damage in a clash?). Also, beyond the deaths: large-scale organized crime exacerbates corruption, imposes costs on businesses (extortion), harms free press, etc, etc. Drug trade in Mexico is definitely a national crisis, in a way I don't think people who don't live there quite understand (no, is not a Mad Max-like hellhole, no, not everything looks like in the movie "El Infierno"[1], but that doesn't mean is just a "localized" crime problem in the sense that gang violence in certain cities of the US is, is an entirely different beast when parts of the country are known to be primarily under organized crime control). In terms of the original comment, Mexico can't easily go against the US in these matters. But even if it did, the US market would still be both lucrative and illegal, which means the drug cartels would continue operating much as they do now. It would still not be worth it for them to obey Mexican law and it would still be worth it to them to fight for control of drug routes. Legalization in the US would mean competition from Pfizer, GSK and the like, which might actually hurt the cartels. Legalization in Mexico would be pretty much meaningless on its own. [1] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1692190/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1692190/
HillaryBriss 10y ago
How can we be confident about what would happen in Mexico if drugs were legalized? A counter argument: if the US legalized these drugs, the cartels would just shift their focus to other countries where the drugs are still illegal and profitable. They'd also shift their focus from drug trafficking to human trafficking, kidnapping, extortion, etc How can the Mexican voter be assured that drug legalization would succeed at improving the economy significantly?
- lazaroclapp 10y ago
  None of the other countries Mexican drug trade supplies are even close to the size of the US in terms of the market. Europe and Asia have other (competing) providers. Also, the US legalizing drugs would have an effect on worldwide policy that say, Mexico or Brazil embracing legalization would not have.

mjolk 10y ago

> I am strongly in favor of drug legalization, because I am from Mexico. Drug traffic is ruinous for the Mexican economy, even if you didn't care ethically about the human cost of a >250,000 death toll in the last 10 years... If the Mexican government is unable to keep its people from getting killed as a result of a neighboring country policing intoxicants, that's a failure of the Mexican government to control crime within its borders, not reason for another nation to change its laws -- you're asking not just for decriminalization, but also legal native manufacturing of addictive substances in the US, as otherwise the lucrative export market would continue to exist.

witty_username 10y ago
If drugs were legal to produce and distribute then it wouldn't be a black market and thus violence and criminality would reduce (people wouldn't buy from shady characters; they'd just go to the store and buy it like anything else). I don't know any ricelords or any significant criminal gangs that distribute rice. This is only a problem encountered with drugs and other illegal things. Also, (paraphrasing Milton Friedman), drug users don't report the crime unlike other crimes like burglary or murder because the victim is the offender.
- mjolk 10y ago
  > If drugs were legal to produce and distribute then it wouldn't be a black market and thus violence and criminality would reduce (people wouldn't buy from shady characters; they'd just go to the store and buy it like anything else). Criminality _related to the import/export/sale of the drugs_. If you think this would be without side effects, you haven't spent much time in an area with methheads or heroin addicts. And, for what it's worth, it's very easy to purchase drugs from non-shady characters, especially in major US cities (a friend of mine used to text his dealer and a business-casual dressed woman would show up with a wheeling briefcase). > I don't know any ricelords or any significant criminal gangs that distribute rice. This is only a problem encountered with drugs and other illegal things. If you use the semantics of "criminal gangs", then you've framed the argument in a way that makes it impossible to debate. Of course "criminal gangs" do "illegal things" (prostitution, substances, etc), that's why they're called criminal gangs. In a country with a stronger rule of law, they're forced to at least have a front, such as sanitation, pay day loans, unions, etc. > Also, (paraphrasing Milton Friedman), drug users don't report the crime unlike other crimes like burglary or murder because the victim is the offender. Eh, for casual, functional users. The water gets murky when the users subsist on government services or become unemployed due to substance abuse. The case against legalizing all drugs isn't particularly concerned about a bank teller taking psilocybin mushrooms and sitting in her back yard on a Sunday afternoon.
lazaroclapp 10y ago
> If the Mexican government is unable to keep its people from getting killed as a result of a neighboring country policing intoxicants, that's a failure of the Mexican government to control crime within its borders Sure. But: a) it is reality, the Mexican state is not strong enough to solve that problem given the economics of the huge market for drugs in the US, b) my hypothesis is that the US would also benefit from legalizing drugs, producing them, taxing them and treating the problem as a healthcare matter (similar to what it does for alcohol, tobacco, and better than it currently does about prescription opiates). I do not think harmful consumption would increase in the US after legalization, and I think better quality controls and openness would make it harder for people to overdose and easier for them to get treated. This is of course not tested, but my sincere belief is that it would help both the US and Mexico, and at this point it would be a lot quicker than what needs to happen in Mexico for the trade to end on our end.

justinpombrio 10y ago

Crazy question: why doesn't Mexico legalize all drugs and drug trade? The US would have a fit, but is the good will of the US worth the damage the drug war does in Mexico?

wu-ikkyu 10y ago
>Crazy question: why doesn't Mexico legalize all drugs and drug trade? The government is run by the cartels.
WildUtah 10y ago
Mexico's economy is deeply invested in trade with the USA. Simply declaring that the drug gangs will be openly allowed to use Mexican territory to try to deliver drugs to the USA however they want would lead the USA to retaliate. The most likely response is a closed border and an end to trade. Mexico is a prosperous country now, in spite of gang problems, and that will continue only as long as trade is open. But small personal use amounts of drugs are already decriminalized in Mexico. I see plenty of people buy, sell, and smoke mariguana in front of cops in broad daylight. To stop the cartels, you need to allow major companies to compete and the USA politicians can't ignore that. And for all the trouble drug gangs cause in Mexico, they kill fewer people than car crashes. The federal legislature isn't making it the top national priority or overriding all other concerns for that level of violence. And, to make a final note, the Supreme Court of Justice keeps threatening to make mariguana legal nationally as a matter of human rights. The USA probably wouldn't go as crazy if it happens through a judicial process.
- lazaroclapp 10y ago
  > And for all the trouble drug gangs cause in Mexico, they kill fewer people than car crashes. Debatable, actually. War on drugs related deaths are >250,000 in 10 years by some counts. Car crash related deaths average 24,000 a year in Mexico. But the thing is that violence related deaths are worse than car accidents in one significant way: they erode people's trust in others and the feeling of safety. They lead to more conservative risk-taking behavior and have far reaching consequences on people's mental state (would you react the same if you hear that a university classmate died in a crash than if you learn he was killed by armed cartel members or the army as collateral damage in a clash?). Also, beyond the deaths: large-scale organized crime exacerbates corruption, imposes costs on businesses (extortion), harms free press, etc, etc. Drug trade in Mexico is definitely a national crisis, in a way I don't think people who don't live there quite understand (no, is not a Mad Max-like hellhole, no, not everything looks like in the movie "El Infierno"[1], but that doesn't mean is just a "localized" crime problem in the sense that gang violence in certain cities of the US is, is an entirely different beast when parts of the country are known to be primarily under organized crime control). In terms of the original comment, Mexico can't easily go against the US in these matters. But even if it did, the US market would still be both lucrative and illegal, which means the drug cartels would continue operating much as they do now. It would still not be worth it for them to obey Mexican law and it would still be worth it to them to fight for control of drug routes. Legalization in the US would mean competition from Pfizer, GSK and the like, which might actually hurt the cartels. Legalization in Mexico would be pretty much meaningless on its own. [1] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1692190/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1692190/

HillaryBriss 10y ago

How can we be confident about what would happen in Mexico if drugs were legalized? A counter argument: if the US legalized these drugs, the cartels would just shift their focus to other countries where the drugs are still illegal and profitable. They'd also shift their focus from drug trafficking to human trafficking, kidnapping, extortion, etc How can the Mexican voter be assured that drug legalization would succeed at improving the economy significantly?

lazaroclapp 10y ago
None of the other countries Mexican drug trade supplies are even close to the size of the US in terms of the market. Europe and Asia have other (competing) providers. Also, the US legalizing drugs would have an effect on worldwide policy that say, Mexico or Brazil embracing legalization would not have.