5 ms·

The phenomenon of drug-smuggling submarines should be required study for anyone who preaches total prohibition of drugs. There is so much demand for this produ

The phenomenon of drug-smuggling submarines should be required study for anyone who preaches total prohibition of drugs. There is so much demand for this product that its suppliers were willing to build and travel in several homemade submersibles to smuggle it. And yet harsh jail-time and zero-tolerance are supposed to stop the trade?

adsr 16y ago
It's a difficult problem. The alternatives to prohibition isn't any better in my opinion. Edit: I'll add this, much of the root cause comes down to poverty as well. Edit: OK down voter, it's an easy problem. It has nothing to do with the poor conditions in the countries where the drugs are produced.
- jaysonelliot 16y ago
  That's a very sweeping and unsupported generalization. Legalizing drugs: -raises tax revenue -raises the quality of drugs (eliminating one of the greatest dangers--people ingesting unknown and even more deadly substances) -lowers costs, meaning addicts don't have to turn to a life of crime to support their habit -allows society to have responsible, adult discussions about the personal risks of different drugs -reduces prison crowding and eases the load on law enforcement, costing taxpayers less -destroys less young lives over stupid mistakes -lets the focus be on harm prevention rather than punishment Maintaining drug prohibition: -is safe and easy for politicians -makes people feel better when they moralize at others (I'd like to point out that I don't personally do any drugs, nor do I want to. That's my choice. It should be a choice.)
  - adsr 16y ago
    Yes, however free supply will drive down prices. The current street price that people are perfectly willing to pay for 1 gram of cocaine tells a lot about the demand, and just how addictive the drug is. There is no reason legal cocaine would cost more than say, coffee. Now, what would cocaine at that price level do to a population, families and to society? I've seen the argument before, mostly applied to lighter drugs like marijuana though. In my view it's your argument that is a sweeping generalization. It's also unsupported, where have cocaine legalization been applied successfully? >It should be a choice. That's so naive. We are talking about an addictive substance, if it is a choice then why don't crack/cocaine addicts just quit. Someone is down voting my comment, yet this person doesn't have counter argument, it just happens to not be in alignment with their view.
    - heed 16y ago
      Portugal has had much success with decriminalizing personal use of drugs. http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.ht... It's important to note that legalization doesn't mean there isn't regulation, or that users are resolved of all responsibility while under the influence.
      - adsr 16y ago
        Yes, and I can agree somewhat with the reasoning behind it. Instead of chasing the end users, they are focusing their resources on the dealers and smugglers. Similar programs have been tested in Great britain in some select cities where known heroin users get free heroin and fresh needles.
    - pstuart 16y ago
      I would downvote you if I could. Alcohol is plenty cheap -- use that as your model for what happens when a cheap and potentially addictive drug is available in society.
      - adsr 16y ago
        Well have you got any experience of hard drugs? If so have you seen the downside yet? It doesn't appear so. First of all, alcohol is not without problems, how much does alcohol cost society, how many violent crimes, divorces, lost jobs and so on is directly related to it? Cocaine is more addictive, much more likely to kill you from an overdose. It will take you from decent citizen to someone who hasn't slept for a week and thinks about nothing else than how to get hold of more at a much faster rate than alcohol. Now, increase availability, quality and reduce the price.
      - pstuart 16y ago
        Apparently the thread is too deep to reply to you directly: but yes, I have tried hard drugs and walked away. My brother was not so lucky -- he died of a heroin overdose. I have lost other friends to meth. My mother was an alcoholic who died homeless. Is that enough "cred"?
maw 16y ago
Indeed. And also consider the opportunity cost here: all the drive, creativity, and talent that is going into making subs (in just this case; the incentives are such that drug dealers high on the food chain surely do a lot of interesting, creative, and risky things) could be diverted to something else--anything else--more productive. We're all missing out.
- positr0n 16y ago
  Isn't this argument valid for all types of illegal activity?
  - maw 16y ago
    Hmm... I suppose so. However, selling drugs has two salient points that, I think, make it unique: it is lucrative and it shouldn't be illegal. I might put prostitution in this category, but I'm not sure how profitable it really is. I understand that some prostitutes can make lots of money, but I don't think selling sex compares to selling drugs in terms of the money changing hands. I'd be interested to learn otherwise, though.
nooneelse 16y ago
Not only have the profit levels been driven up so that the suppliers are willing to build and use submarines, they are ok scuttling them after a single use. Submarines are a disposable tool to the drug trade. And they can survive interception of very high ratios of their shipments by simply sending more shipments. I agree, this prohibition strategy seems to be fundamentally flawed. Truly mind-boggling amounts of money could be spent on harm-reduction strategies and still be cheaper than this.
- brk 16y ago
  For no particular reason other than the sheer illogic of it all, the anti-drug "war" was an interest of mine for a while. I read a book, maybe 18 years ago, about a DEA agent that managed to get so deeply embedded with one of the key cartels that he got to the point he was buying directly from the manufacturer (cocaine in this case). At that level, the price was also substantially lower than street price, or even higher-level middle man prices. His comment was that the US could buy ALL the cocaine they could possibly produce for something like 1/4 what they were spending on "enforcement". Of course, there was no interest in that. My personal opinion is that the whole "war on drugs" thing is nothing but a boondoggle perpetuated to give some people jobs and a distracting thing to fight against.

adsr 16y ago

It's a difficult problem. The alternatives to prohibition isn't any better in my opinion. Edit: I'll add this, much of the root cause comes down to poverty as well. Edit: OK down voter, it's an easy problem. It has nothing to do with the poor conditions in the countries where the drugs are produced.

jaysonelliot 16y ago
That's a very sweeping and unsupported generalization. Legalizing drugs: -raises tax revenue -raises the quality of drugs (eliminating one of the greatest dangers--people ingesting unknown and even more deadly substances) -lowers costs, meaning addicts don't have to turn to a life of crime to support their habit -allows society to have responsible, adult discussions about the personal risks of different drugs -reduces prison crowding and eases the load on law enforcement, costing taxpayers less -destroys less young lives over stupid mistakes -lets the focus be on harm prevention rather than punishment Maintaining drug prohibition: -is safe and easy for politicians -makes people feel better when they moralize at others (I'd like to point out that I don't personally do any drugs, nor do I want to. That's my choice. It should be a choice.)
- adsr 16y ago
  Yes, however free supply will drive down prices. The current street price that people are perfectly willing to pay for 1 gram of cocaine tells a lot about the demand, and just how addictive the drug is. There is no reason legal cocaine would cost more than say, coffee. Now, what would cocaine at that price level do to a population, families and to society? I've seen the argument before, mostly applied to lighter drugs like marijuana though. In my view it's your argument that is a sweeping generalization. It's also unsupported, where have cocaine legalization been applied successfully? >It should be a choice. That's so naive. We are talking about an addictive substance, if it is a choice then why don't crack/cocaine addicts just quit. Someone is down voting my comment, yet this person doesn't have counter argument, it just happens to not be in alignment with their view.
  - heed 16y ago
    Portugal has had much success with decriminalizing personal use of drugs. http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.ht... It's important to note that legalization doesn't mean there isn't regulation, or that users are resolved of all responsibility while under the influence.
    - adsr 16y ago
      Yes, and I can agree somewhat with the reasoning behind it. Instead of chasing the end users, they are focusing their resources on the dealers and smugglers. Similar programs have been tested in Great britain in some select cities where known heroin users get free heroin and fresh needles.
  - pstuart 16y ago
    I would downvote you if I could. Alcohol is plenty cheap -- use that as your model for what happens when a cheap and potentially addictive drug is available in society.
    - adsr 16y ago
      Well have you got any experience of hard drugs? If so have you seen the downside yet? It doesn't appear so. First of all, alcohol is not without problems, how much does alcohol cost society, how many violent crimes, divorces, lost jobs and so on is directly related to it? Cocaine is more addictive, much more likely to kill you from an overdose. It will take you from decent citizen to someone who hasn't slept for a week and thinks about nothing else than how to get hold of more at a much faster rate than alcohol. Now, increase availability, quality and reduce the price.
    - pstuart 16y ago
      Apparently the thread is too deep to reply to you directly: but yes, I have tried hard drugs and walked away. My brother was not so lucky -- he died of a heroin overdose. I have lost other friends to meth. My mother was an alcoholic who died homeless. Is that enough "cred"?

maw 16y ago

Indeed. And also consider the opportunity cost here: all the drive, creativity, and talent that is going into making subs (in just this case; the incentives are such that drug dealers high on the food chain surely do a lot of interesting, creative, and risky things) could be diverted to something else--anything else--more productive. We're all missing out.

positr0n 16y ago
Isn't this argument valid for all types of illegal activity?
- maw 16y ago
  Hmm... I suppose so. However, selling drugs has two salient points that, I think, make it unique: it is lucrative and it shouldn't be illegal. I might put prostitution in this category, but I'm not sure how profitable it really is. I understand that some prostitutes can make lots of money, but I don't think selling sex compares to selling drugs in terms of the money changing hands. I'd be interested to learn otherwise, though.

nooneelse 16y ago

Not only have the profit levels been driven up so that the suppliers are willing to build and use submarines, they are ok scuttling them after a single use. Submarines are a disposable tool to the drug trade. And they can survive interception of very high ratios of their shipments by simply sending more shipments. I agree, this prohibition strategy seems to be fundamentally flawed. Truly mind-boggling amounts of money could be spent on harm-reduction strategies and still be cheaper than this.

brk 16y ago
For no particular reason other than the sheer illogic of it all, the anti-drug "war" was an interest of mine for a while. I read a book, maybe 18 years ago, about a DEA agent that managed to get so deeply embedded with one of the key cartels that he got to the point he was buying directly from the manufacturer (cocaine in this case). At that level, the price was also substantially lower than street price, or even higher-level middle man prices. His comment was that the US could buy ALL the cocaine they could possibly produce for something like 1/4 what they were spending on "enforcement". Of course, there was no interest in that. My personal opinion is that the whole "war on drugs" thing is nothing but a boondoggle perpetuated to give some people jobs and a distracting thing to fight against.