3 ms·

I was surprised to learn the prevalence of illegal substances in prisons [0]. If authorities are unable to curtail access to drugs in one of the most controlled

by bko 11y ago

I was surprised to learn the prevalence of illegal substances in prisons [0]. If authorities are unable to curtail access to drugs in one of the most controlled environments in the country, what hope do they have of removing them from the streets? Seems like a lost cause. [0] http://nakedlaw.avvo.com/crime/how-common-are-drugs-in-prison.html http://nakedlaw.avvo.com/crime/how-common-are-drugs-in-priso...

x0x0 11y ago
I believe you fundamentally misunderstand. In order to believe that the authorities really think they can remove drugs, you'd have to assume they continue to hold this belief in spite of 44 years of post war-on-drugs evidence. I mean, I think cops are authoritarian idiots, but they're not that stupid. As Bill Hicks said, we had a war on drugs, and the people on drugs won. They're more pure and often cheaper than ever. Rather, the war on drugs is a way to systematically deprive people of civil rights and transfer control to police. Not to mention all the private prison vendors who are making bank. And the military industrial complex selling weapons to the police. Seen from this angle, actions make sense. After all, we've never really had a war on drugs -- we've had a war on some classes (black, poor) of people who use some (crack bad! coke ok! heroin bad! adderall good! xanax good!) drugs.
- the_watcher 11y ago
  I don't think it's hopeless, it's just that focusing on removing the supply without solving the root cause (namely that there is major, lucrative demand) is a waste of resources.
the_watcher 11y ago
The prison example is one of the most illustrative of the endemic problems of regulation: in prison, both the buyers and the substances are regulated by law, yet the presence of buyers inevitably leads to sellers filling the demand.
- stephengillie 11y ago
  Humans see censorship, embargoes, and prohibitions as damage and route around them.

by bko 11y ago

x0x0 11y ago

I believe you fundamentally misunderstand. In order to believe that the authorities really think they can remove drugs, you'd have to assume they continue to hold this belief in spite of 44 years of post war-on-drugs evidence. I mean, I think cops are authoritarian idiots, but they're not that stupid. As Bill Hicks said, we had a war on drugs, and the people on drugs won. They're more pure and often cheaper than ever. Rather, the war on drugs is a way to systematically deprive people of civil rights and transfer control to police. Not to mention all the private prison vendors who are making bank. And the military industrial complex selling weapons to the police. Seen from this angle, actions make sense. After all, we've never really had a war on drugs -- we've had a war on some classes (black, poor) of people who use some (crack bad! coke ok! heroin bad! adderall good! xanax good!) drugs.

the_watcher 11y ago
I don't think it's hopeless, it's just that focusing on removing the supply without solving the root cause (namely that there is major, lucrative demand) is a waste of resources.

the_watcher 11y ago

The prison example is one of the most illustrative of the endemic problems of regulation: in prison, both the buyers and the substances are regulated by law, yet the presence of buyers inevitably leads to sellers filling the demand.

stephengillie 11y ago
Humans see censorship, embargoes, and prohibitions as damage and route around them.