5 ms·

The biggest barrier to legalizing drugs are the millions of jobs that are created for, solely exist for, and are wholly dedicated to: fighting drugs, drug relat

The biggest barrier to legalizing drugs are the millions of jobs that are created for, solely exist for, and are wholly dedicated to: fighting drugs, drug related crimes, and dealing with drug offenders (police, private prisons, etc). And the 100s of billions (if not several trillion) of dollars that get consumed every year by that industry. They will fight tooth and nail to prevent any type of drug legalization. We've already seen how powerful the private prison industry is and how much lobbying power they have.

hnnewguy 12y ago
>And the 100s of billions (if not several trillion) of dollars that get consumed every year by that industry. Not that it's a good reason against decriminalizing drug use, but you're right. And if they can't send millions of young men away for drugs, they'll find another reason to do so, and maintain that spending. Hacking, spying, piracy, perhaps?
wozniacki 12y ago
Very much true. But the same has been said about defense spending and the current administration has cut back on Pentagon budget and has signaled that more cuts are on the way. Of course those military suppliers - who have vastly outsized lobbying might, compared to anyone outside of energy and pharmaceutical companies - won't go down without a fight. Case in point: One of those companies: Raytheon RTN +0.74%, maker of Tomahawk [1] missiles and other military gadgets. In January, the Navy proposed the company end production of new Tomahawks in 2017 . Its stockpile of about 3,000 of the missiles is more than the 2,300 that have been fired in all combat operations combined. Raytheon is warning that if it shuts down production of the Tomahawk and the U.S. finds itself in a situation where it needs more of them, it will be complicated and expensive to get production going again. "Raytheon contends that halting its Tomahawk production line in Tucson, Ariz., ahead of the 2019 upgrades would drive some suppliers out of business, and push engineers to other sectors, eroding the military’s ability to field an important weapon. The company sent the Pentagon a list of a dozen companies that Raytheon executives believe could close or be forced to leave the defense sector, according to people familiar with the situation."[2] If defense suppliers can be tamed, so can be prison guard unions and law enforcement unions. The criminal justice system and the incarceration complex are no longer in the purview of reasonable actors and decision makers. Watch Bill Maher's monologue on the increased militarization of local law enforcement( I know he can be hyperbolic sometimes, but not here. ) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8qBTy0HWWI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8qBTy0HWWI NYPD officers just choked dead a Staten Island man who was allegedly selling tax-free contraband cigarettes, for resisting arrest. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/19/nyregion/staten-island-man-dies-after-he-is-put-in-chokehold-during-arrest.html http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/19/nyregion/staten-island-man... Video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZEYOSRiQno https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZEYOSRiQno [1] Tomahawk component suppliers and sites where the missiles were fired: http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/MK-CN552_TOMAHA_G_20140702165704.jpg http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/MK-CN552_TOMAHA_G_... [2] Defense Companies Warn: Cutting Military Spending Can Be Expensive http://blogs.wsj.com/corporate-intelligence/2014/07/03/defense-companies-warn-cutting-military-spending-can-be-expensive/ http://blogs.wsj.com/corporate-intelligence/2014/07/03/defen...
- lilsunnybee 12y ago
  The military-industrial complex is still alive and well, and still exercises very strong control in crafting agendas. What makes you think otherwise? Plenty of war operations still going on, air support being given, forward bases maintained, weapons purchase agreements from allies.
melling 12y ago
If that were the case, we wouldn't be on our way to legalizing marijuana. I'm sure it feels really great to rage against the "system" but it doesn't seem right in this case.
- oldmanjay 12y ago
  It's important to note the in the strictest sense, marijuana is still 100% illegal everywhere in the United States. The federal gov't is currently taking a watch-and-wait stance, but that can change in a single election.
  - chc 12y ago
    Not exactly. There is a lot of movement in the direction of rescheduling marijuana, which would have some pretty lasting effects.
- rpgmaker 12y ago
  No, it's not about "raging against the system", that is actually the reason why drugs won't be decriminalized in the US anytime soon. It's a lot of money that no one will let go of easily. And that's without mentioning all the civil liberties that we've lost where the war on drugs was used as the reason.
  - nocman 12y ago
    "that is actually the reason why drugs won't be decriminalized in the US anytime soon" (emphasis mine). Well, I think you could say that it is a reason, but I don't think you can say it is the reason. There are still a lot of people in the United States who believe that doing these illegal drugs is morally wrong, and that making them legal would increase, not decrease the damage. I'd bet that this is driving the resistance to decriminalization/legalization much more than people trying to keep their jobs (and no, I'm not denying that there are people who resist it for that reason).
    - oneeyedpigeon 12y ago
icantthinkofone 12y ago
That would cause a shift in jobs, not necessarily a loss of jobs. How much of a shift, I wouldn't know.
libria 12y ago
Banking, auto and pharmaceutical industries I can see lobbying their agendas as they're largely private. Are there significant privatized anti-drug agencies with capital (comparable to the 3 above)? The US has a large conservative (often Christian) mindset that I think would reflexively fight this without thinking about it. Don't think it's necessary to jump straight into the conspiracy theories yet.
- lilsunnybee 12y ago
  Prisons, law-enforcement. Any conservative lobbies. And what makes you think banks, auto makers, and pharmaceutical companies are going to be in favor of drug legalization? They aren't trying to advance that agenda already and don't have very strong incentives to push for it either. Or did i misunderstand?
- PeterisP 12y ago
  For lobbying purposes, large unions (such as law enforcement) are just as effective as capital - both are simply means for obtaining votes.

hnnewguy 12y ago

>And the 100s of billions (if not several trillion) of dollars that get consumed every year by that industry. Not that it's a good reason against decriminalizing drug use, but you're right. And if they can't send millions of young men away for drugs, they'll find another reason to do so, and maintain that spending. Hacking, spying, piracy, perhaps?

wozniacki 12y ago

Very much true. But the same has been said about defense spending and the current administration has cut back on Pentagon budget and has signaled that more cuts are on the way. Of course those military suppliers - who have vastly outsized lobbying might, compared to anyone outside of energy and pharmaceutical companies - won't go down without a fight. Case in point: One of those companies: Raytheon RTN +0.74%, maker of Tomahawk [1] missiles and other military gadgets. In January, the Navy proposed the company end production of new Tomahawks in 2017 . Its stockpile of about 3,000 of the missiles is more than the 2,300 that have been fired in all combat operations combined. Raytheon is warning that if it shuts down production of the Tomahawk and the U.S. finds itself in a situation where it needs more of them, it will be complicated and expensive to get production going again. "Raytheon contends that halting its Tomahawk production line in Tucson, Ariz., ahead of the 2019 upgrades would drive some suppliers out of business, and push engineers to other sectors, eroding the military’s ability to field an important weapon. The company sent the Pentagon a list of a dozen companies that Raytheon executives believe could close or be forced to leave the defense sector, according to people familiar with the situation."[2] If defense suppliers can be tamed, so can be prison guard unions and law enforcement unions. The criminal justice system and the incarceration complex are no longer in the purview of reasonable actors and decision makers. Watch Bill Maher's monologue on the increased militarization of local law enforcement( I know he can be hyperbolic sometimes, but not here. ) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8qBTy0HWWI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8qBTy0HWWI NYPD officers just choked dead a Staten Island man who was allegedly selling tax-free contraband cigarettes, for resisting arrest. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/19/nyregion/staten-island-man-dies-after-he-is-put-in-chokehold-during-arrest.html http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/19/nyregion/staten-island-man... Video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZEYOSRiQno https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZEYOSRiQno [1] Tomahawk component suppliers and sites where the missiles were fired: http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/MK-CN552_TOMAHA_G_20140702165704.jpg http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/MK-CN552_TOMAHA_G_... [2] Defense Companies Warn: Cutting Military Spending Can Be Expensive http://blogs.wsj.com/corporate-intelligence/2014/07/03/defense-companies-warn-cutting-military-spending-can-be-expensive/ http://blogs.wsj.com/corporate-intelligence/2014/07/03/defen...

lilsunnybee 12y ago
The military-industrial complex is still alive and well, and still exercises very strong control in crafting agendas. What makes you think otherwise? Plenty of war operations still going on, air support being given, forward bases maintained, weapons purchase agreements from allies.

melling 12y ago

If that were the case, we wouldn't be on our way to legalizing marijuana. I'm sure it feels really great to rage against the "system" but it doesn't seem right in this case.

oldmanjay 12y ago
It's important to note the in the strictest sense, marijuana is still 100% illegal everywhere in the United States. The federal gov't is currently taking a watch-and-wait stance, but that can change in a single election.
- chc 12y ago
  Not exactly. There is a lot of movement in the direction of rescheduling marijuana, which would have some pretty lasting effects.
rpgmaker 12y ago
No, it's not about "raging against the system", that is actually the reason why drugs won't be decriminalized in the US anytime soon. It's a lot of money that no one will let go of easily. And that's without mentioning all the civil liberties that we've lost where the war on drugs was used as the reason.
- nocman 12y ago
  "that is actually the reason why drugs won't be decriminalized in the US anytime soon" (emphasis mine). Well, I think you could say that it is a reason, but I don't think you can say it is the reason. There are still a lot of people in the United States who believe that doing these illegal drugs is morally wrong, and that making them legal would increase, not decrease the damage. I'd bet that this is driving the resistance to decriminalization/legalization much more than people trying to keep their jobs (and no, I'm not denying that there are people who resist it for that reason).
  - oneeyedpigeon 12y ago

icantthinkofone 12y ago

That would cause a shift in jobs, not necessarily a loss of jobs. How much of a shift, I wouldn't know.

libria 12y ago

Banking, auto and pharmaceutical industries I can see lobbying their agendas as they're largely private. Are there significant privatized anti-drug agencies with capital (comparable to the 3 above)? The US has a large conservative (often Christian) mindset that I think would reflexively fight this without thinking about it. Don't think it's necessary to jump straight into the conspiracy theories yet.

lilsunnybee 12y ago
Prisons, law-enforcement. Any conservative lobbies. And what makes you think banks, auto makers, and pharmaceutical companies are going to be in favor of drug legalization? They aren't trying to advance that agenda already and don't have very strong incentives to push for it either. Or did i misunderstand?
PeterisP 12y ago
For lobbying purposes, large unions (such as law enforcement) are just as effective as capital - both are simply means for obtaining votes.