Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What If U.S. Cities Just Stopped Participating in the War on Drugs?

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 145 posts

Re: What If U.S. Cities Just Stopped Participating in the War on Drugs?

#41

Post by dinkumthinkum »

joel_perl_prog wrote: post #32
aianus wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, what did the low level bootleggers and enforcers do after prohibition ended? If I was one, I'd have moved on to similar work in narcotics and prostitution. People choose to risk jail time and physical harm to make mediocre money as a street dealer because they have no better options. Most of them don't even have high school diplomas, what else are they going to do? If we don't do anything other than eli…

Sure. But you assume there's a permanent class of criminals whose only interest is crime. The principle interest in the drug game is money. It's a business. What I'm saying is, there's not a "fixed amount of crime," which you imply; you basically say it's like squeezing a balloon. The amount of air doesn't change, it just gets displaced a little bit. What we need is a sociologist (or someone who has otherwise done th…

You can talk about studies and all that and that's fine but I think this is horribly naive. The world is not a pop sociology book.

Re: What If U.S. Cities Just Stopped Participating in the War on Drugs?

#42

Post by Spooky23 »

toyg wrote: post #6
GauntletWizard wrote: post #2

Then organized crime would run the streets, as the combative pressure keeping these operations small would removed. Gangs would spring up like weeds, get absorbed into syndicates, and wield large amounts of power over ghettos and other blighted areas without regular sweeps to keep them in line.

Choose your own semi-ironic response now: ☐ "Which totally doesn't happen now. Oh wait..." ☐ "Yeah, Amsterdam is completely run by gangs. Oh wait..." ☐ "Yeah, gangs would get richer and expand as price of drugs plummets and they get commoditised. Oh wait..." Edit: downvotes? I was trying to summarise the inevitable counterpoints.

Usually there is a balance of power dynamic going on. The police know who the drug folks are, and basically let them be to some extent as long as they don't cross the line.

Chicago is a great example of why cops do this. The leadership of a few major gangs was taken out by the police, and the resulting power struggle basically ignited a street war with death counts similar to the war in Afghsnistan.

Re: What If U.S. Cities Just Stopped Participating in the War on Drugs?

#43

Post by joel_perl_prog »

dinkumthinkum wrote: post #41
joel_perl_prog wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure. But you assume there's a permanent class of criminals whose only interest is crime. The principle interest in the drug game is money. It's a business. What I'm saying is, there's not a "fixed amount of crime," which you imply; you basically say it's like squeezing a balloon. The amount of air doesn't change, it just gets displaced a little bit. What we need is a sociologist (or someone who has otherwise done th…

You can talk about studies and all that and that's fine but I think this is horribly naive. The world is not a pop sociology book.

That's exactly why it's so important to decriminalize (or outright legalize). Because the theory behind criminalization simply doesn't work. It is you who are naive, sir. Please see my other comments above. I explain this. I hope I explain this. What didn't I convey?

Re: What If U.S. Cities Just Stopped Participating in the War on Drugs?

#44

Post by thecabinet »

joel_perl_prog wrote: post #24
aianus wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing I've always wondered: what would street dealers do if they couldn't make money selling crack anymore? I somehow doubt they'd give up and get a job at McDonald's. Legalizing drugs might therefore lead to an increase in robberies, muggings, kidnappings, sex trafficking, etc as these former dealers need to find new ways to support themselves. Thoughts?

Just ask yourself one question: what did all the bootleggers do after alcohol prohibition was dropped? Exactly. There's a sort of twinge of classism (or even racism) in your comment, by the way. The assumption that people who participate in a normal capitalist marketplace are inherently criminals is just silly. They do what they do because it's a bustling marketplace. Period.

Instead of accusing people of racism, why I don't you try actually answering the question? "OMG, he said crack rather than meth, therefore racism!" So, what did all the bootleggers do? I don't have any idea, so I'm probably a racist too... I do know alot of them became politicians, so I think the suggestion that they might turn to a different criminal enterprise is entirely on point.

According to Freakonomics, a lot of low-level drug dealers make less than minimum wage. So why do they take those jobs? Can they not find legal employment (ue to lack of opportunities, disqualification due to criminal record, insufficient education, etc. or are they rejecting legal employment for a job that's more exciting, more acceptable among their peers, has a higher maximum vale despite lower expected value, etc?

If they're rejecting legal employment it's entirely plausible they'll move on to a different (probably criminal) enterprise that has similar characteristics.

Re: What If U.S. Cities Just Stopped Participating in the War on Drugs?

#45

Post by Natsu »

chongli wrote: post #19
sharkweek wrote: post #4

The Economist wrote a near perfect editorial about the war on drugs a few years back: http://www.economist.com/node/13237193 (you might need to Google "The economist failed states and failed policies" to read the article) Regarding drug policy, the biggest misstep of the past 40 years has been taking a public heath issue and turning it into a crime and punishment issue. I highly recommend anyone curious about the his…

Regarding drug policy, the biggest misstep of the past 40 years has been taking a public heath issue It's never been a public health issue for its major proponents. The war on drugs has always been about racism, corruption, the militarization of police forces, civil forfeiture and the prison-industrial complex.

> The war on drugs has always been about racism, corruption, the militarization of police forces, civil forfeiture and the prison-industrial complex.

So, there's nothing about not liking the addicts who hassle people on the street?

Re: What If U.S. Cities Just Stopped Participating in the War on Drugs?

#46

Post by dinkumthinkum »

joel_perl_prog wrote: post #43
dinkumthinkum wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can talk about studies and all that and that's fine but I think this is horribly naive. The world is not a pop sociology book.

That's exactly why it's so important to decriminalize (or outright legalize). Because the theory behind criminalization simply doesn't work. It is you who are naive, sir. Please see my other comments above. I explain this. I hope I explain this. What didn't I convey?

Oh, no I'm not naive. You think some Pinker book shows that complete legalization would result in people involved in the drug becoming upstanding members of society. You talk of "criminals" as some kind of theoretical agent.

Re: What If U.S. Cities Just Stopped Participating in the War on Drugs?

#47

Post by Natsu »

joel_perl_prog wrote: post #24
aianus wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing I've always wondered: what would street dealers do if they couldn't make money selling crack anymore? I somehow doubt they'd give up and get a job at McDonald's. Legalizing drugs might therefore lead to an increase in robberies, muggings, kidnappings, sex trafficking, etc as these former dealers need to find new ways to support themselves. Thoughts?

Just ask yourself one question: what did all the bootleggers do after alcohol prohibition was dropped? Exactly. There's a sort of twinge of classism (or even racism) in your comment, by the way. The assumption that people who participate in a normal capitalist marketplace are inherently criminals is just silly. They do what they do because it's a bustling marketplace. Period.

> Just ask yourself one question: what did all the bootleggers do after alcohol prohibition was dropped?

"Bootlegging helped lead to the establishment of American organized crime, which persisted long after the repeal of Prohibition. The distribution of liquor was necessarily more complex than other types of criminal activity, and organized gangs eventually arose that could control an entire local chain of bootlegging operations, from concealed distilleries and breweries through storage and transport channels to speakeasies, restaurants, nightclubs, and other retail outlets. These gangs tried to secure and enlarge territories in which they had a monopoly of distribution. Gradually the gangs in different cities began to cooperate with each other, and they extended their methods of organizing beyond bootlegging to the narcotics traffic, gambling rackets, prostitution, labour racketeering, loan-sharking, and extortion. The national American crime syndicate, the Mafia, arose out of the coordinated activities of Italian bootleggers and other gangsters in New York City in the late 1920s and early ’30s."

Source: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/73745/bootlegging

Re: What If U.S. Cities Just Stopped Participating in the War on Drugs?

#48

Post by joel_perl_prog »

dinkumthinkum wrote: post #46
joel_perl_prog wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's exactly why it's so important to decriminalize (or outright legalize). Because the theory behind criminalization simply doesn't work. It is you who are naive, sir. Please see my other comments above. I explain this. I hope I explain this. What didn't I convey?

Oh, no I'm not naive. You think some Pinker book shows that complete legalization would result in people involved in the drug becoming upstanding members of society. You talk of "criminals" as some kind of theoretical agent.

I can see that were not going to connect here. And I shouldn't have called you naive. I should have said your position is naive.

But is it really such a stretch to expect alignment between swiftly declining rates of violence and declining rates of all anti-social behavior.

Keep in mind, doing drugs, just recreationally doing drugs, minding ones own business IS NOT A CRIME (or shouldn't be) and isn't anti-social (or doesn't have to be, and isn't for most casual users). Think: casual alcohol drinkers. As most are. Are there alcoholics? Of course. But that does nothing to diminish my case. It was never expected that all crime would vanish (or perhaps...you expect that?).

Re: What If U.S. Cities Just Stopped Participating in the War on Drugs?

#49

Post by dobbsbob »

sirdogealot wrote: post #27

The same thing that would happen to any country or state that decided to stop participating in the war on drugs. They would be sanctioned and heckled by other city governments. They may even have their drug enforcement programs carried out by other governments, like when Canada sat back for years while Marc Emery sold Marijuana seeds worldwide. The DEA basically coughed and the RCMP had Emery arrested on the spot and…

I live a block away from Emery's store. There's a seed store still there that is doing exactly what Emery was doing (selling pot seeds to Americans) yet they haven't been busted. This is probably because it's owner didn't give a million dollars to NORML in the US to fight prohibition of Marijuana.

Emery also writes a federal prison blog, interesting insight into how foreign prisoners are treated in the US, like the time he spent at D.Ray Fed prison where it's entirely made up of foreigners. No racism/forced segregation based on skin color, no homogeneous gangs of all one ethnicity, they all live together in dorms without any of the problems he saw in other fed prisons like Seatac where some guy threatened him because he was playing dominos with a black inmate and that was "not allowed".

Re: What If U.S. Cities Just Stopped Participating in the War on Drugs?

#50

Post by pekk »

Natsu wrote: post #45
chongli wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding drug policy, the biggest misstep of the past 40 years has been taking a public heath issue It's never been a public health issue for its major proponents. The war on drugs has always been about racism, corruption, the militarization of police forces, civil forfeiture and the prison-industrial complex.

> The war on drugs has always been about racism, corruption, the militarization of police forces, civil forfeiture and the prison-industrial complex. So, there's nothing about not liking the addicts who hassle people on the street?

Then outlaw hassling people on the street.
Post reply on HN