6 ms·

What kind of drug crime are you referring to? If it entails dealing of drugs than I don't think ending the war on drugs will have a net effect. (Not that I don

What kind of drug crime are you referring to? If it entails dealing of drugs than I don't think ending the war on drugs will have a net effect. (Not that I don't think we shouldn't) Drugs are a lucrative business when made illegal, this can be seen a quick way to combat ones economic situation (created by major/historic societal imbalances). Legalize drugs and drugs would certainly not be the lucrative business, but something else criminal would take its place. IMO dealing with the economic imbalance is the priority, decriminalizing drugs only helps eliminate a portion of the chicken/egg variables. As an aside, even with decriminalized drug usage/possession there would still be laws against illegal manufacturing, distribution and tax avoidance.

carapace 6y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_involvement_in_Contra_cocaine_trafficking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_involvement_in_Contra_coca... > A number of writers have alleged that the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was involved in cocaine trafficking during the 1980s. ... The subject remains controversial. - - - - > something else criminal would take its place. A. Like what? B. Drugs are only criminal because we make laws. Theft, killing, etc.. are wrong but doing drugs is just stupid.
WarOnPrivacy 6y ago
> something else criminal would take its place Like what? Burglary? Insider trading? I'm not backhanding you here; I genuinely can't come up with any reasonably criminal activity that would blossom into that vacuum.
- quicklyfrozen 6y ago
  Protection, extortion, gambling, human trafficking, other contraband goods, and sure, burglary and robbery. Lots of things that could be more violent to the population at large then drug dealing (after all, you don't really want to kill your customers).
  - WarOnPrivacy 6y ago
    There weren't any surges in human trafficking, burglary & robbery recorded after prohibition was lifted. There was a steep decline in contraband goods, however.
    - dariusj18 6y ago
      I'd need to see the localized statistics on that. We're not talking about an overall effect, but a very specific effect on a very specific segment of the population.
    - quicklyfrozen 6y ago
      The point is the criminal organizations aren't going to simply disappear if/when drugs are legalized. They're going to pivot to some other illegal activity to preserve their livelihood. Perhaps more conventional crimes like money laundering, loan sharking, and political graft will be less violent. But they certainly survived the end of prohibition without going legitimate.
      - Volundr 6y ago
        Except... they kind of did. Prohibition created revenue opportunity for gangs and organized crime. Ending prohibition removed this revenue, replacing the speakeasy with legalized and regulated bars and liquor stores, effectively cutting off this revenue stream. Sure the Mob didn't magically disappear overnight, but it began a decline they never recovered from. Replacing that revenue stream isn't as easy as "just" finding another racket, there is a lot of difficulty hidden in that "just".
        dariusj18 6y ago
        I wonder, if we decriminalize drugs and give priority for licenses and rights to ex dealers and gangsters if that would be a good thing or a bad thing. In a way it kills two birds with one stone, 1. Eliminates the criminal element, 2. Offers a financial incentive towards legitimizing their enterprise. In another it might reward people who may have done a lot of bad things, and puts them in a legitimized position of power over people they may have been terrorizing for decades.
skoskie 6y ago
> decriminalizing drugs only helps eliminate a portion of the chicken/egg variables. If the last forty years of Southern Strategy has taught us anything it’s that you must seize every inch (portion) of ground you can.
pstuart 6y ago
> What kind of drug crime are you referring to? Having, using, and selling drugs. The first two should be considered personal liberties, and the commerce should be taxed/regulated but not criminalized.

carapace 6y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_involvement_in_Contra_cocaine_trafficking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_involvement_in_Contra_coca... > A number of writers have alleged that the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was involved in cocaine trafficking during the 1980s. ... The subject remains controversial. - - - - > something else criminal would take its place. A. Like what? B. Drugs are only criminal because we make laws. Theft, killing, etc.. are wrong but doing drugs is just stupid.

WarOnPrivacy 6y ago

> something else criminal would take its place Like what? Burglary? Insider trading? I'm not backhanding you here; I genuinely can't come up with any reasonably criminal activity that would blossom into that vacuum.

quicklyfrozen 6y ago
Protection, extortion, gambling, human trafficking, other contraband goods, and sure, burglary and robbery. Lots of things that could be more violent to the population at large then drug dealing (after all, you don't really want to kill your customers).
- WarOnPrivacy 6y ago
  There weren't any surges in human trafficking, burglary & robbery recorded after prohibition was lifted. There was a steep decline in contraband goods, however.
  - dariusj18 6y ago
    I'd need to see the localized statistics on that. We're not talking about an overall effect, but a very specific effect on a very specific segment of the population.
  - quicklyfrozen 6y ago
    The point is the criminal organizations aren't going to simply disappear if/when drugs are legalized. They're going to pivot to some other illegal activity to preserve their livelihood. Perhaps more conventional crimes like money laundering, loan sharking, and political graft will be less violent. But they certainly survived the end of prohibition without going legitimate.
    - Volundr 6y ago
      Except... they kind of did. Prohibition created revenue opportunity for gangs and organized crime. Ending prohibition removed this revenue, replacing the speakeasy with legalized and regulated bars and liquor stores, effectively cutting off this revenue stream. Sure the Mob didn't magically disappear overnight, but it began a decline they never recovered from. Replacing that revenue stream isn't as easy as "just" finding another racket, there is a lot of difficulty hidden in that "just".
      - dariusj18 6y ago
        I wonder, if we decriminalize drugs and give priority for licenses and rights to ex dealers and gangsters if that would be a good thing or a bad thing. In a way it kills two birds with one stone, 1. Eliminates the criminal element, 2. Offers a financial incentive towards legitimizing their enterprise. In another it might reward people who may have done a lot of bad things, and puts them in a legitimized position of power over people they may have been terrorizing for decades.

skoskie 6y ago

> decriminalizing drugs only helps eliminate a portion of the chicken/egg variables. If the last forty years of Southern Strategy has taught us anything it’s that you must seize every inch (portion) of ground you can.

pstuart 6y ago

> What kind of drug crime are you referring to? Having, using, and selling drugs. The first two should be considered personal liberties, and the commerce should be taxed/regulated but not criminalized.