- This topic has 5 voices and 5 replies.
-
Posts
-
I just finished watching a History Channel show on the history of cocaine that I had recorded. Basically it made the point that the criminalization of drugs, probably since Nixon's tenure, has included a greatly increased wave of violence. It said there's a 17,000% markup(!) on cocaine prices.It made me think. Would there be any scenario in which it would be better to legalize and regulate cocaine, thereby putting the Colombian cocaine cartels out of business (or greatly weaken them)? I realize this would entail a surge of destructive behavior in the United States - although we have experienced cocaine usage in the past, such as during the years (mid-19th Century until early 20th Century) when it was still legal (the show I watched went into these early years in some detail). However, this surge in destructive behavior (likely immediately following legalization but then decreasing after that) would likely be offset some by a decrease in destructive behavior in other areas (drug trafficking on streets, violent gang behavior, etc). It would also include a decrease in the number of incarcerations, as from what I understand many people currently in prisons are there for drug-related offenses. This would free up plenty of resources to be used in plenty of other areas that need it.Mind you, I'm not suggesting that legalizing hard drugs is necessarily the best thing, or even a good thing. I'm just trying to uncover some effects that would flow from such a move and see if I can get a better grasp of what the big picture would look like.
Taking this thread in a slightly different direction: I think the past failures of the war on drugs was because of the “wall of separation” between the DEA and the Intelligence community. From this article about overhauling Intelligence:
In 1981, for example, the Drug Enforcement Administration was taken out of the intelligence community because of concerns that it would improperly mix intelligence and law enforcement. But that commingling was absolutely necessary: with its large law enforcement presence abroad, the DEA is able to contribute unique narcotics information and overseas experience. Hence, last year, the DNI helped the DEA establish its Office of National Security Intelligence. This newest member of the U.S. intelligence community brings access, insights, and experience in foreign and domestic narcoterrorism.
This is especially pertinant nowadays seeing that the Latin American drug lords are using the money to finance Al Qaeda terrorists who have found a safe haven in South America. 😮
....Mind you, I'm not suggesting that legalizing hard drugs is necessarily the best thing, or even a good thing. I'm just trying to uncover some effects that would flow from such a move and see if I can get a better grasp of what the big picture would look like.
Legalization, taxation, regulation... seems to have tobacco and alcohol somewhat undercontrol (no black market or cartels to speak of). Doubt the majority could swallow the change, though, it might be worth a shot. What we have done in the last 40 years or so hasn't worked too well.Wally
One benefit of legalization would be a standardized degree of drug purity rather than the adulterated mixtures on the illegal market. With standardization and taxation it might work. The tax revenues could go for drug education and addiction prevention.
