[Curtman]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Curtman Curtman:

No thanks. Go read a different topic and take your own advice.

Doesn't bother me....you're only hurting your own cause. Do as you see fit to damage any credibility the topic may have.

Good then. You'll do whatever Steven Harper says anyway. Nice chatting with you again.

[Freakinoldguy]

Curtman Curtman:

Thanks for the feedback I guess. I still find it strange when people care enough to stop in and mention that they don't care about violence and street gangs.

Since it would appear that you advocates are the only ones know what's gonna happen in the future I thought it might fun to post someone else's prognostication for once.


Drug Legalization: Why It Wouldn't Work in the United States

$1:

Drugs and Crime
There are two schools of thought on the issue of drug legalization and crime. Do drugs cause crime? Does drug use inevitably lead to crime? If drugs were made legal, would there be less crime? If the government subsidized addicts, would they still engage in criminal conduct? What would happen to drug dealers and drug gangs if drugs were legalized? Although the issue is complex, both groups agree that drugs and crime are inexorably linked.

Many legalization supporters believe that property crime, particularly burglary, larceny from persons (purse snatchers, chain snatchers, and pickpockets), auto theft, theft from autos, and shoplifting would decrease by 40-50 percent if drugs were made legal. Similarly, many believe that the terms “drug-related murder” and “drive-by shooting” would become outdated once drugs were legalized. In their view, turf wars would be eliminated because there would no longer be a need to fight for one’s turf.

Additionally, there are those who point out that drug enforcement is a waste of valuable law enforcement resources since statistically most drug users do not get caught. Thus, the deterrent effect of criminalization is lost. Todd Brenner uses the example of marijuana arrests. In 1987 approximately 25 million people in the United States used marijuana, the most easily detectable drug, yet only 378,000 arrests were made; roughly one arrest for every 63 users.3 His point is that the public would be better served if the police targeted crimes in which they had a better success rate. Also, legalization supporters believe that once drugs were legalized, the government could pay less attention to drug-related crime and spend more time and money on treatment, rehabilitation, education, and job training programs. Other benefits cited would be reduced prison populations, more manageable caseloads for judges and attorneys, and better relations between the public and the police.

Many believe that traditional organized crime would be seriously affected by legalization. Benjamin and Miller write: “The Mafia would not disappear, because organized crime would be able to survive on other criminal activities, such as loan sharking, gambling, prostitution, and child pornography. But drug legalization would remove the backbone of organized crime’s profits, causing it to diminish in importance.”4

Opponents to legalization obviously do not see legalization as a panacea that will make crime go away. They see a clear connection between drug use and crime and, perhaps more importantly, between drug use and violence. Joseph Califano, the author and a member of President Johnson’s cabinet, stated: “Drugs like marijuana and cocaine are not dangerous because they are illegal; they are illegal because they are dangerous.”5 The DEA reports that six times as many homicides are committed by persons under the influence of drugs than those looking for money to buy drugs and that most arrestees for violent crimes test positive for drugs at time of arrest.6 Speaking to a Congressional subcommittee on drug policy in 1999, Donnie Marshall, then deputy administrator of DEA, spoke of drug use, crime, and violence. He said that there is “a misconception that most drug-related crimes involve people who are looking for money to buy drugs. The fact is that most drug-related crimes are committed by people whose brains have been messed up with mood-altering drugs.”7

Legalization opponents are convinced that the violence caused by drug use “will not magically stop because the drugs are legal. Legal PCP isn’t going to make a person less violent than illegally purchased PCP.”8 Susan Neiberg Terkel echoes these sentiments by saying that legalizing drugs “cannot change human nature. It cannot improve the social conditions that compel people to engage in crime, nor can it stop people from using drugs as an excuse to be violent.”9 The belief is that drugs, legal or not, often lead to violence. Erich Goode, a SUNY professor and a proponent of harm reduction, writes: “It is extremely unlikely that legalization will transform the violent nature of the world of heavy, chronic drug abuse very much. That violence is a part of the way that frequent, heavy drug users live their lives; it is systemic to their subculture.”10

It is interesting to note that the federal approach to drugs and crime is not solely linked to arrest and incarceration. In Congressional testimony in 1999, Barry McCaffrey, then-director of the U.S. Office of National Drug Control Policy, stated: “We cannot arrest our way out of our nation’s drug problem. We need to break the cycle of addiction, crime, and prison through treatment and other diversion programs. Breaking the cycle is not soft
on drugs; it is smart on defeating drugs and crime.”11

http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/maga ... e_id=32005

It's really an interesting read and refutes a lot of the claims from the pro legalization side but what it really points out is that NO ONE not even the Pro or anti legalization people, can say for certain what will happen in they legalize drugs or even marijuana.

[andyt]

Holy shit, what a spin. Marijuana makes you violent, or so they try to assert by mixing it in with other drugs. What fucking bullshit.

And, I guess the person writing that is dense as can be. The violence talked about is the gang violence that goes along with trying to control an illegal product. The same violence we saw in prohibition, that came way down with the repeal of prohibition.

$1:

Roughly speaking, therefore, there have been two periods with high homicide rates in U.S. history, the 1920-1934 period and the 1970-1990 period (Friedman 1991). Both before the first episode and between these two episodes, homicide rates were relatively low or clearly declining. Prima facie, this pattern is consistent with the hypothesis that alcohol prohibition increased violent crime: homicide rates are high in the 1920-1933 period, when constitutional prohibition of alcohol was in effect; the homicide rate drops quickly after 1933, when Prohibition was repealed; and the homicide rate remains low for a substantial period thereafter. Further, the homicide rate is low during the 1950s and early 1960s, when drug prohibition was in existence but not vigorously enforced, but high in the 1970-1990 period, when drug prohibition was enforced to a relatively stringent degree (Miron 1999).

http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/miro ... on.alcohol

Yes, some drugs can make a user violent. Pot and CNS depressants like heroin certainly aren't among those. And compare stories about the frequency and lethality of violence from gangs fighting for turf vs some guy on Angel dust or what have you.

What is of concern is the brain damage caused by some drugs like Crystal Meth - you know, the stuff, that, in another form, is given to US military and I bet our pilots etc probably are given it too. A lot of the violent,random, attacks in Vancouver are blamed on it. But these attacks are already happening now, while the drug is illegal. Just keeping on with current policy is nuts.

Funny how the anti-drug crusaders always lump all drugs in together. PCP might cause violence, so that's a good reason to ban marijuana.

But wait, there's one drug they never mention - booze. Talk about making people violent and being responsible for so much damage in society. So come on drug warriors, step up, time to go to war on the drug doing the biggest harm to society. Outlaw booze.

[Curtman]

$1:

Many legalization supporters believe that property crime, particularly burglary, larceny from persons (purse snatchers, chain snatchers, and pickpockets), auto theft, theft from autos, and shoplifting would decrease by 40-50 percent if drugs were made legal. Similarly, many believe that the terms “drug-related murder” and “drive-by shooting” would become outdated once drugs were legalized. In their view, turf wars would be eliminated because there would no longer be a need to fight for one’s turf.

I wonder where the author of this got that statistic. What does auto theft have to do with black market drugs? The author doesn't understand the problem.

This is the type of crimes that prohibition causes:





The gangs do this when they hear about a party that they weren't invited to sell drugs at, or if a rival gang is at. The kids wearing their colours are safe, the other ones are targets. Kids join the gangs because they believe it will keep them safe.

This type of violence is about turf in the drug market, and it will go away when the profit from selling illegal drugs does.

[andyt]

Theft, robbery, will go down if addictive drugs are legalized. As will street prostitution. A lot of our property crime and street prostitution is driven by addicts need to come up with the money to buy their drugs. It's the hardcore junkies that legal heroin would help (since it would only be available to them), it's those hardcore junkies doing a lot of the property crime. It won't reduce young punks stealing cars or what have you, but it would have an impact (downwards) on property crime.

[andyt]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

it really points out is that NO ONE not even the Pro or anti legalization people, can say for certain what will happen in they legalize drugs or even marijuana.

But EVERY ONE can see what is happening with criminalization, it's not working. Time to try something else and find out what happens. The only way to change direction is if you're moving - as a sailor you should know that.

[Curtman]

News about the conference that the DPA photos are from...

Drug Policy Reform Conference Highlights Colorado Pot Industry

$1:

DENVER (AP) — Dignitaries from three nations sniffed marijuana, walked through greenhouses full of tagged marijuana plants and learned about video pot surveillance on a three-day Weed 101 tour in Colorado, which has a regulated marijuana market and is planning to expand sales to all adults in a few weeks.

More than two dozen visiting officials from Canada, Mexico and Uruguay made the trip this week. Colorado is preparing to play host for 1,000 drug policy experts and legalization backers at the International Drug Policy Reform Conference.

"We see the hypocrisy of the American policy toward Latin America," said Julio Calzada, drug czar in Uruguay, which is expected to become the first country in the world to license and enforce rules for the production, distribution and sale of marijuana for adult consumers.

"We have thousands of deaths, simply a product of prohibition. And here you have a very regulated market, marijuana that is produced in a controlled fashion. That is where we are going."

Calzada and the other dignitaries toured marijuana dispensaries and growing sites. They also huddled with Colorado officials to learn about how the drug is taxed and sold.

Marijuana legalization will be a major topic at the conference. Colorado and Washington state have authorized pot possession for all adults over 21, with retail sales beginning next year. Conference attendees are all interested in rethinking drug policy, if not legalizing pot outright. The dignitaries scribbled in notebooks, took pictures with their phones and huddled with interpreters to learn the nuances of the legal drug market in the U.S.

Visitors from Mexico, where nationwide legalization isn't under serious consideration, said their country is watching closely to see how Colorado and Washington policies play out.

"I think we need to see this as an opportunity," said Fernando Belaunzaran, a Mexico City congressman who supports marijuana legalization.

"We've had 100 years of prohibitionist policies, and no one has paid a higher price" than Mexico, Belaunzaran said.

The tour also attracted two pro-legalization members of the Canadian Parliament.

"Colorado has put together a pretty impressive regulatory scheme," said Sen. Larry Campbell of Vancouver.

The visitors all gaped at the numbers of cameras they saw in Colorado dispensaries, along with the computer tracking accessed with biometric authentication, a fingerprint held to a computer.

The owner of one of the dispensaries on the tour, Norton Arbalaez, boasted that his dispensary tracks plants "the same way Wal-Mart does tracking."

The whole thing got a laugh from Camilo Collazo, a legalization advocate from Mexico.

"It was amazing, how American all this was," Collazo said with a laugh after the tour. "It's all dignified, very American, business efficiency first."

Collazo expects other countries will interpret marijuana regulation differently, but still be inspired by change in the U.S.

"The United States has no longer legitimacy to enforce the law abroad without enforcing it here. So I think politicians worldwide are more open to looking at this, too."

Public polls in the U.S. show mounting support for legalizing the drug. A nationwide Gallup poll released this week showed 58 percent think pot should be legal. The poll surveyed 1,028 people by phone Oct. 3-6

When Gallup first asked the question in 1969, only 12 percent favored legalization.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

NO ONE not even the Pro or anti legalization people, can say for certain what will happen in they legalize drugs or even marijuana.

Maybe in the US but Portugal has had de facto legalization of drugs for over a decade now.
Deaths from accidental overdoses have dropped by 50%. Overall drug use actually decreased. Even alcohol related incidents have decreased, somewhat.
That's not to say that drug related crimes have been completely eliminated as a result, but the results have been more than positive enough to not warrant going back to prohibition.

[Curtman]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

NO ONE not even the Pro or anti legalization people, can say for certain what will happen in they legalize drugs or even marijuana.

Maybe in the US but Portugal has had de facto legalization of drugs for over a decade now.
Deaths from accidental overdoses have dropped by 50%. Overall drug use actually decreased. Even alcohol related incidents have decreased, somewhat.
That's not to say that drug related crimes have been completely eliminated as a result, but the results have been more than positive enough to not warrant going back to prohibition.

Portugal doesn't have legalization though, it's decriminalization. There's no legal supply, only legal use.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Curtman Curtman:

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

NO ONE not even the Pro or anti legalization people, can say for certain what will happen in they legalize drugs or even marijuana.

Maybe in the US but Portugal has had de facto legalization of drugs for over a decade now.
Deaths from accidental overdoses have dropped by 50%. Overall drug use actually decreased. Even alcohol related incidents have decreased, somewhat.
That's not to say that drug related crimes have been completely eliminated as a result, but the results have been more than positive enough to not warrant going back to prohibition.

Portugal doesn't have legalization though, it's decriminalization. There's no legal supply, only legal use.

What they have is de facto legalization, for weed anyway. There's no legal drug supply except for marijuana. Smokers can grow up to 5-6 plants for personal consumption. Portugal didn't want to make the same mistake Holland made.
But yes, you are correct in that the other drugs have only been decrimmed for personal use, not manufacture or distribution.

[OnTheIce]

Curtman Curtman:

I wonder where the author of this got that statistic.

You calling someone else out for the use of statistics?

Probably the same place you get your statistics from. The seat of your pants.

Making things up on the fly is so much easier than actually presenting facts. You're the master of it.

[Freakinoldguy]

andyt andyt:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

it really points out is that NO ONE not even the Pro or anti legalization people, can say for certain what will happen in they legalize drugs or even marijuana.

But EVERY ONE can see what is happening with criminalization, it's not working. Time to try something else and find out what happens. The only way to change direction is if you're moving - as a sailor you should know that.

And, as an old hippie you should know that change doesn't always mean an improvement.

I don't believe or disbelieve the article but used it to make a point that nobody can say with any real certainty what's going to happen to organized crime if they legalize marijuana or other drugs for that matter.

So don't get your panties in a knot especially considering that even computer models have proven to be wildly inaccurate lately. IMO all we can do is sit back and wait to see how it works out in Washington State and Colorado before we have a real model to work from.

If crime goes down, then that hypothesis will have been proven right but, if it just morphs into something else then the opposing view will have been vindicated.

Either way it's just a carnival trick to claim it's a certainty that any of these hypothesis will come to fruition.

[andyt]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

andyt andyt:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

it really points out is that NO ONE not even the Pro or anti legalization people, can say for certain what will happen in they legalize drugs or even marijuana.

But EVERY ONE can see what is happening with criminalization, it's not working. Time to try something else and find out what happens. The only way to change direction is if you're moving - as a sailor you should know that.

And, as an old hippie you should know that change doesn't always mean an improvement.

I don't believe or disbelieve the article but used it to make a point that nobody can say with any real certainty what's going to happen to organized crime if they legalize marijuana or other drugs for that matter.

So don't get your panties in a knot especially considering that even computer models have proven to be wildly inaccurate lately. IMO all we can do is sit back and wait to see how it works out in Washington State and Colorado before we have a real model to work from.

If crime goes down, then that hypothesis will have been proven right but, if it just morphs into something else then the opposing view will have been vindicated.

Either way it's just a carnival trick to claim it's a certainty that any of these hypothesis will come to fruition.

You can say that about anything. Are you sure you'll be around tomorrow? That the sun will rise?

Nobody I know is claiming certainty - it's only you and OTI et al that claim others are claiming certainty. What we do know is what we're doing right now isn't working out. Going to a harsher system, a la the Chinese might work (might not, different culture) but we have this annoying concept of civil liberties. There's the saying that the definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over, expecting different results. Time to get off that treadmill.

[OnTheIce]

andyt andyt:

Nobody I know is claiming certainty - it's only you and OTI et al that claim others are claiming certainty.

Your boy Curtman does all the time, he even did so in this post.

Didn't have to look far to find an example of that.

[Curtman]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

andyt andyt:

Nobody I know is claiming certainty - it's only you and OTI et al that claim others are claiming certainty.

Your boy Curtman does all the time, he even did so in this post.

Didn't have to look far to find an example of that.

$1:

"We see the hypocrisy of the American policy toward Latin America," said Julio Calzada, drug czar in Uruguay, which is expected to become the first country in the world to license and enforce rules for the production, distribution and sale of marijuana for adult consumers.

"We have thousands of deaths, simply a product of prohibition. And here you have a very regulated market, marijuana that is produced in a controlled fashion. That is where we are going."

Calzada and the other dignitaries toured marijuana dispensaries and growing sites. They also huddled with Colorado officials to learn about how the drug is taxed and sold.

The certainty is that there is better ways of dealing with addiction than what we are doing now, and what we are doing now is fuelling organized crime.