4 ms·
I'm in favor of drug legalization, but it's not going to happen any time soon, and I don't think it would reduce crime even if it did It's hard enough to get p
by jlarocco 14y ago
I'm in favor of drug legalization, but it's not going to happen any time soon, and I don't think it would reduce crime even if it did
It's hard enough to get pot legalized in most states - the "harder" drugs don't stand a chance.
And even if they were legalized, it's not even possible for a big illegal drug operation to "go legit". All of the drug cartels will still have long histories of violence, piles of cash, boatloads of weapons, and a ton of smuggling expertise. They'll probably just "pivot" to smuggling the next most profitable thing. Or smuggle untaxed and unregulated drugs.
- InclinedPlane 14y agoPeople stop giving huge wads of money to violent criminals. Drug users stop being legal pariahs and are able to be a part of the criminal justice system other than as just a defendant. The courts stop being crammed full of drug users. Police departments stop being preoccupied by "dope on the table" drug busts and concentrate on things like homicide and violent crimes. No, gangs aren't going to go away, but they will be reduced in capability and law enforcement will be far more effective. Crime will go down. Not instantly, but over a fairly short amount of time.
- dllthomas 14y agoIt would be hard to accomplish, yes. With regards to effect, though, I'm sure it wouldn't magically fix everything. It would, however, mean that the cartels would face competition without the overhead of smuggling, which would drop the profit available substantially. They might well move on to smuggling the next most profitable thing, but obviously the next most profitable thing is not as profitable. The power and wealth of the cartels would thus not be growing as fast as it is, which is a much better situation long-run.
- flatline 14y agoI'm reasonably sure that suitable mechanism design could be performed to make full legalization not only possible but much more desirable than the current scenario. It would require extensive reworking of legal and economic regulations and public policy. The first hurdle is legitimizing this type of research. From casual reading on the subject, I haven't seen any serious research like this in regards to the US, though admittedly I haven't looked very hard, but for obvious reasons the public coffers are not exactly overflowing to fund serious investigation into the matter.
- rwmj 14y agoYou might want to take a look at: http://www.tdpf.org.uk/blueprint%20download.htm http://www.tdpf.org.uk/blueprint%20download.htm "After the War on Drugs: Blueprint for Regulation"
- btilly 14y agoThe fact that bad people will be bad people does not change the fact that taking away a major revenue source of theirs will lessen how much bad they will do. For a historical analog, look at the Mafia. When Prohibition ended, the Mafia didn't become nice people. They continued a life of crime. However they had diminished power, and we had fewer open gun battles in the streets. On the whole this was a good thing.
- vlisivka 14y agoNext most profitable thing is prostitution. IMHO, we should let strangers ^k your girl for free to drop street prices.
- r0s 14y agoCompare to alcohol prohibition.
- tluyben2 14y agoYes, they will pivot. But if you legalize pot (easy income) and some harddrugs, there is not much to pivot to. The market will be too small to sustain. I mean ; if cocaine/heroine is legal, other drug users would swarm to that as it will be cheap (it is cheap to make anyway), so what do you pivot to?