151–160 of 248 posts
Why does government follow policies that make drugs so incredibly profitable?
The only way to stop these large criminal enterprises is to legalize the stuff. Just like alcohol prohibition created some of the most notorious American criminals, South American drug prohibitions produce powerful criminals down there. There isn't any large crime related to South American cocoa or coffee imports. Legalize it and then spend money and make laws regulating consumption, it would greatly reduce the miser…
The one key aspect that I often find that is missing from the intellectual reasoning of the drug cartel violence in Mexico is that most Americans don't understand that narco culture that exists in Northern Mexico. For over 30 or 40 years, there has developed a narco culture in Mexico where songs and movies have been influenced by the trade (see Chalino_Sánchez). Basically, Chalino_Sánchez was like the Mexican Jay-Z except he didn't sell out and was gunned down by an unknown assailant.
What's the point of these articles if they have no impact on legislation or the national conversation?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cigarettes, while harmful, don't result in instant death. Banning cigarettes would result in the same problem banning other drugs has created. The only things that should be "banned" are those that are so intrinsically harmful they cause severe, immediate, measurable harm to both the abuser and society. There aren't many drugs that people consume that qualify for this standard since to be able to continuously abuse s…
I agree with the spirit of your argument, but for reference 30mg of nicotine is fatal. It's a potent neurotoxin and is actively used as a pesticide. It would easily qualify as something "so intrinsically harmful [it] cause[s] severe, immediate, measurable harm."
This is a 101 on capitalism. Raw capitalism, where killing someone is cheaper than settling on a solution that works for everyone. One where power amasses. But most importantly: where all actors are innovating. You can be amazed at crudely built submarines and private cell relay stations but really its just market pressure at work. Which brings us back to the obvious conclusion: prohibition doesn't work; the market w…
Yes, exactly. The war on drugs is a perfect example of capitalism v socialism. In the red corner we have black market capitalists engaged in an enterprise with extremely high risk premiums. In the blue corner we have socialized law enforcement. If you truly believe that capitalism is the superior force, you can't help but know that the war on drugs is absolute unwinnable folly.
But I disagree with your choice of colors. The communist/socialist side is traditionally colored red.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of note, since I was curious as to the answer myself and just found out, there are still 'gangs' (though less the urban variety we're used to seeing) based around moonshining. That prompted me to ask "why is moonshining illegal", and the best (wrong) answer I could come up with was for production and delivery to dry counties. Turns out, it's just a matter of taxation. Moonshiners are welcome to go legit, but they the…
That's an interesting point that I've never considered (or heard mentioned in the legalize argument). I'm for legalization + taxation of all drugs but will we still see significant folks producing and selling illegally as a tax dodge? May legalization merely get drugs into more hands but still maintain significant illegal production? If so, a lot of the supposed benefits of legalization dry up.
"The number of jurisdictions which ban the sale of alcoholic beverages is steadily decreasing which means that many of the former consumers of moonshine are much nearer to a legal alcohol sales outlet than was formerly the case. Moonshine-like distilled beverages with names like Collier and McKeel White Dog,[27] Everclear, Virginia Lightning, Georgia Moon Corn Whiskey, Ole Smoky Tennessee Moonshine,[28] Platte Valley Corn Whiskey Cat Daddy and Junior Johnson's Midnight Moon are produced commercially and sold in liquor stores, typically packaged in a clay jug or glass Mason jar. As a result of these changes and aggressive law enforcement, moonshine production is far less widespread than it was formerly." [1]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem isn't gangs; it's gang violence. Making their crimes less stringently punished (reducing the paranoia within their ranks) as well as doing more to restrict the flow of arms from the United States (a better use of funds than incarcerating college potheads) seems a more sensible experiment to try before full legalisation. Consider the negative externalities of cocaine use (much higher than marijuana's); the…
What if production and sale were legal, but consumption was illegal?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of note, since I was curious as to the answer myself and just found out, there are still 'gangs' (though less the urban variety we're used to seeing) based around moonshining. That prompted me to ask "why is moonshining illegal", and the best (wrong) answer I could come up with was for production and delivery to dry counties. Turns out, it's just a matter of taxation. Moonshiners are welcome to go legit, but they the…
That's an interesting point that I've never considered (or heard mentioned in the legalize argument). I'm for legalization + taxation of all drugs but will we still see significant folks producing and selling illegally as a tax dodge? May legalization merely get drugs into more hands but still maintain significant illegal production? If so, a lot of the supposed benefits of legalization dry up.
Obviously there is a point at which taxation is virtually equivalent to prohibition (1,000,000%?) so the aim of a good tax in this arena is to (1) discourage consumption (2) provide some revenue to offset against social costs of the activity (healthcare costs of smokers, for example) while (3) not being so outrageous as to push the activity underground altogether.
“A catapult,” he repeated. “We’ve got the best fence money can buy, and they counter us with a 2,500-year-old technology.”
Catapults are cutting-edge tech compared to a fence..
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the border in Arizona, south of Sierra Vista. I often drive the international road and rarely see anyone else...not even border patrol. One does not need a catapult. http://postimage.org/image/wtie29yrb/
Are drones patrolling the area from above?