4 ms·
Proper legalization and regulation would mean it wouldn’t be sold as crack and wouldn’t have the potential to contain fentanyl, eliminating much of the physiolo
by chronofar 5y ago
Proper legalization and regulation would mean it wouldn’t be sold as crack and wouldn’t have the potential to contain fentanyl, eliminating much of the physiological risk. Proper drug legalization would also divert funds currently used for drug enforcement (swat teams, dea, private prisons, etc) to drug treatment facilities accessible to those who need it.
In general the negative effects of most any drug are best fought with education, regulation, and treatment, not prohibition. Cocaine and crack were illegal in the 80s and 90s when the crack epidemic raged, so obviously legal status was not preventing such crises in the first place. The important factors there were more around support of impoverished communities than tepid laws that serve only to further the cycle of social disruption caused by petty arrests and adversarial tension between police and downtrodden communities and the empowerment of gangs by creating a thriving black market.
The struggles we’re having related to crack or other drugs are related to a great many things aside from the drug itself, prohibition itself causing some of the largest problems on a global scale. What if Mexico could have cocaine as a legitimate export? Would we have violent cartels or legitimate businesses that improve the community (though surely they’d also leach as businesses are wont to do, but surely less violently than illegal organizations)? I’d posit the latter, though the transition from one to the other won’t be smooth.
- chrisjc 5y ago> Proper legalization and regulation would mean it wouldn’t be sold as crack I didn't mean to imply that it would. But from what I "know", crack is very easy to "cook" from cocaine, and is much more potent and addictive in this form. Throw cocaine in the microwave, something, something, and you have crack... So what's to stop anyone with a microwave from producing their own crack from legally regulated and obtained cocaine, and why would they want to do that instead of just using the cocaine as is? Were you suggesting that bc it's purer crack (nothing added to increase potency or mass), it's not an issue? I also understand how crack was weaponized against certain communities, minorities, vulnerable and "undesirable" groups of citizens... but again, I just wonder why and if individuals would start to synthesize their own crack if cocaine was legalized.
- chronofar 5y agoThe main motivator for doing so would be to sell it more cheaply to those who can’t afford the cocaine sold elsewhere as crack requires lower dosages for effect. You’ll find this in patterns of cocaine use already, the affluent use cocaine and the impoverished are more likely to use crack. I don’t think anything changes on that front with legalization except you trade arrests for outreach. I don’t see why we should expect demand for crack would suddenly grow and become more rampant with legalization, I’d expect the opposite, but in either case the solution is outreach not prohibition.
- chrisjc 5y agoThanks for taking the time to explain... I have no doubt that prohibition, after demonstrating years of failure on a catastrophic scale, will not continue to work. However I wanting to get an idea of some of the consequences we might expect to see if cocaine were to be legalized/regulated.