"If drugs were legal, crime will go down"

[Shaoyuan]

Oh sorry, because the general public has such a great record on this stuff in the past.

Actually yes, they do. More liberal policies regarding drugs has led to less use, not more. See: Prohibition, Portugal, the Netherlands and the Czech Republic for examples.

I guess I just see red when someone says 'low tax is good'. I need to go look at kittens and calm down.

[Ifreann]

Actually yes, they do. More liberal policies regarding drugs has led to less use, not more. See: Prohibition, Portugal, the Netherlands and the Czech Republic for examples.

I guess I just see red when someone says 'low tax is good'. I need to go look at kittens and calm down.

A 'low' tax can be good, to help combat illegal manufacture and smuggling.

[New Manvir]

What you don't understand is that the black market makes drugs incredibly overpriced. For example, marijuana costs more per ounce than silver. No way a plant that anyone can grow in their basement would cost that much in an open market. I contend that even if most drugs were legal and taxed at a rate of 100%, the prices would still be lower than they are today. Most of the inflation is due to the risk involved in the market and because production can't be conducted in the open. This is also the reason why people addicted to hard drugs resort to crime to fund their habits. If heroin were legal it would be cheaper and people who do it could fund their habits easier, probably with a normal job.

Right!

One latent purpose of criminalization of drugs is to prop up the high price. Whether or not this is intentional may be debated. Remember, the CIA has long been dealing drugs as part of its operations; it was a factor in the iran Contra scandal, and unofficial reports said that many millions of CIA drugs were destroyed when the twin towers went down.

Another latent purpose is to support an expensive burdensome bureaucracy of enforcement. Hey, I thought we were trying to reduce governmental expenses?

Yep, but since when has blatant hypocrisy ever stopped the US government from doing things.

[Barringtonia]

Another savings is the cost of housing all the prisoners jailed under pointless and minor drug offenses.

My intuition says that drug use would go up due to its addictive nature but I tend to find facts don't accord with my intuition.

Ultimately, regardless of any conspiracy theories as to why the gvernment continues a failed drug policy, it's simply down to the fact that it would be political suicide to legalise them at the current time.

[New Manvir]

I've heard the argument that if drugs were legal, crime would drop, because the drug cartels and gangs would have no reason to exist. I Do not fully understand this for two reasons:

The first reason: Many of the people who support the legalization of drugs promotion their taxation. Would that also give the cartel a reason to exist by providing tax free drugs?

And the second reason: Certain drugs such as heroin is highly addictive. Wouldn't there be people who became addicted to these drugs and must resort to crime to get them?

Please correct me if I made ​​a mistake.

I sight Reagan in your flag. Good good. Milton Friedman, the father of Monetarism, the economic system Reagan applied as Neoliberalism, explains the title very nicely in this 7 minute video

He's right about crack, it (and meth) probably wouldn't exist today if cocaine wasn't criminalized.

[Pope Joan]

Another savings is the cost of housing all the prisoners jailed under pointless and minor drug offenses.

My intuition says that drug use would go up due to its addictive nature but I tend to find facts don't accord with my intuition.

Ultimately, regardless of any conspiracy theories as to why the gvernment continues a failed drug policy, it's simply down to the fact that it would be political suicide to legalise them at the current time.

NY is saving a bundle right now by closing medium security prisons which were crammed full of small time pot smokers. "Rockefeller laws" made these sentences mandatory, so then there were no beds available for violent offenders, who as a result got parole or reduced sentences. Now there is room for them and to spare, and the consolidation has helped us balance our budget.

[New Manvir]

Another savings is the cost of housing all the prisoners jailed under pointless and minor drug offenses.

My intuition says that drug use would go up due to its addictive nature but I tend to find facts don't accord with my intuition.

Ultimately, regardless of any conspiracy theories as to why the gvernment continues a failed drug policy, it's simply down to the fact that it would be political suicide to legalise them at the current time.

NY is saving a bundle right now by closing medium security prisons which were crammed full of small time pot smokers. "Rockefeller laws" made these sentences mandatory, so then there were no beds available for violent offenders, who as a result got parole or reduced sentences. Now there is room for them and to spare, and the consolidation has helped us balance our budget.

This brings up another bad aspect of the drug war, the reliance on private prisons to house inmates.

Federal and state government has a long history of contracting out specific services to private firms, including medical services, food preparation, vocational training, and inmate transportation. The 1980s, though, ushered in a new era of prison privatization. With a burgeoning prison population resulting from the War on Drugs and increased use of incarceration, prison overcrowding and rising costs became increasingly problematic for local, state, and federal governments. In response to this expanding criminal justice system, private business interests saw an opportunity for expansion, and consequently, private-sector involvement in prisons moved from the simple contracting of services to contracting for the complete management and operation of entire prisons.[9]

[ALMF]

I've heard the argument that if drugs were legal, crime would drop, because the drug cartels and gangs would have no reason to exist. I Do not fully understand this for two reasons:

The first reason: Many of the people who support the legalization of drugs promotion their taxation. Would that also give the cartel a reason to exist by providing tax free drugs?

the causts of taxes wold be less than that of maintaining a criminal orgnization

And the second reason: Certain drugs such as heroin is highly addictive. Wouldn't there be people who became addicted to these drugs and must resort to crime to get them?

there wold no-longer be an origination corrupting law enforcement perfecting them and there wold be acess to rehabilitation that is prevented by fear of prosecution.

[Pope Joan]

This brings up another bad aspect of the drug war, the reliance on private prisons to house inmates.

Federal and state government has a long history of contracting out specific services to private firms, including medical services, food preparation, vocational training, and inmate transportation. The 1980s, though, ushered in a new era of prison privatization. With a burgeoning prison population resulting from the War on Drugs and increased use of incarceration, prison overcrowding and rising costs became increasingly problematic for local, state, and federal governments. In response to this expanding criminal justice system, private business interests saw an opportunity for expansion, and consequently, private-sector involvement in prisons moved from the simple contracting of services to contracting for the complete management and operation of entire prisons.[9]

When America started privatizing jails, prison populations soared at a rate 7 times that of the national population as a whole.

These entrepreneurs who feed at the public teat use our tax money to pay for armies of lobbyists. They hand out fistfulls of campaign dollars to candidates of any and all parties. What do they want?

More. Specifically, they want harsher longer sentences! And of course they LOVE the "war on drugs".

http://leisureguy.wordpress.com/2011/06 ... to-prison/

[Seperate Vermont]

Making things illegal, regardless of the feeling, may sometimes not be the best way to prevent it in the long run.

[Beldonia]

If murder was legal, crime will also go down. Does that mean that we legalize murder?

[Soxastan]

Yes when people get stoned/high/drunk they do stupid shit. But most petty crime in the US is drug related. With Marijuana it is possession, with alcohol it is drunk driving, others it is possession. MJ should be legal and regulated by the US government. It makes sense. Tax MJ, get billions in revenue. Alcohol and drunk driving kills more people than Marijuana each year. No one has ever died from OD on marijuana. You would die form lack of oxygen or over eating before you would OD. Many have died by OD on alcohol after several beers or several shots of whisker or any other alcoholic beverage.

[Seperate Vermont]

If murder was legal, crime will also go down. Does that mean that we legalize murder?

You are comparing apples and oranges there by philosophical justification of crime.

Murder =/= non-violent crime.

[Ramenasia]

I've heard the argument that if drugs were legal, crime would drop, because the drug cartels and gangs would have no reason to exist. I Do not fully understand this for two reasons:

The first reason: Many of the people who support the legalization of drugs promotion their taxation. Would that also give the cartel a reason to exist by providing tax free drugs?

And the second reason: Certain drugs such as heroin is highly addictive. Wouldn't there be people who became addicted to these drugs and must resort to crime to get them?

Please correct me if I made ​​a mistake.

1. The drug-producers who wanted to maximize profits would not sell to the cartels, because the drug-producers would make more money by selling drugs on the legal market and so cartels would be forced to produce their own or stop conducting business. Ideally, most of them would choose the latter.

2. If drugs were legal, crime would drop. That doesn't mean that legalizing drugs is a good thing, it just means that lower crime is a consequence. There would almost certainly be more addicts, but there is no relationship between these two consequences.

[Beldonia]

If murder was legal, crime will also go down. Does that mean that we legalize murder?

You are comparing apples and oranges there by philosophical justification of crime.

Murder =/= non-violent crime.

The point stands. Yeah, legalizing something reduces crime, but it increases or, at the very least, does not change the number of people who do the deed.

[New Manvir]

If murder was legal, crime will also go down. Does that mean that we legalize murder?

What do drug use and murder have in common, besides the fact that the government doesn't like you doing either?

[New Manvir]

You are comparing apples and oranges there by philosophical justification of crime.

Murder =/= non-violent crime.

The point stands. Yeah, legalizing something reduces crime, but it increases or, at the very least, does not change the number of people who do the deed.

Empirical evidence proves you wrong regarding drug use and decriminalization/legalization.

[Beldonia]

If murder was legal, crime will also go down. Does that mean that we legalize murder?

What do drug use and murder have in common, besides the fact that the government doesn't like you doing either?

Well, let's see:

Both are things that humans are capable of doing.
Both contain the letters d, e, r and u.
Both have been mentioned in this thread.
Both were done by David Berkowitz, the Son of Sam

That's 4 things right there.

[New Manvir]

What do drug use and murder have in common, besides the fact that the government doesn't like you doing either?

Well, let's see:

Both are things that humans are capable of doing.
Both contain the letters d, e, r and u.
Both have been mentioned in this thread.
Both were done by David Berkowitz, the Son of Sam

That's 4 things right there.

touché.

[Beldonia]

Well, let's see:

Both are things that humans are capable of doing.
Both contain the letters d, e, r and u.
Both have been mentioned in this thread.
Both were done by David Berkowitz, the Son of Sam

That's 4 things right there.

touché.

**Tips cap and flies away**

[Gauthier]

You are comparing apples and oranges there by philosophical justification of crime.

Murder =/= non-violent crime.

The point stands. Yeah, legalizing something reduces crime, but it increases or, at the very least, does not change the number of people who do the deed.

Except that there is no economic demand for murder. Drugs on the other hand, someone will always want to buy them. If you make drugs illegal, organized crime can charge a premium for it and make money, which in turn leads to increased murder anyways as the cartels and such maintain and expand their territories. Look at Prohibition.

You ad absurdum fell flat.

[Mike the Progressive]

Yes and yes.

[Greater Cabinda]

The first reason: Many of the people who support the legalization of drugs promotion their taxation. Would that also give the cartel a reason to exist by providing tax free drugs?

No more so than taxed liquor gives some hillbilly an incentive to make moonshine.

And the second reason: Certain drugs such as heroin is highly addictive. Wouldn't there be people who became addicted to these drugs and must resort to crime to get them?

Please correct me if I made ​​a mistake.

Well, I have no response to this, as I only support Marijuana legalization.

[New Manvir]

Yes and yes.

Damn you Nixon, it's your fault we're in this mess in the first place!

*waves fist angrily*

[Wikkiwallana]

Sure.

People are going to do them legal or illegal. Just the way we are. You can find drug use all through recorded history.

Philadelphia recently reported saving 2 million a year by not prosecuting pot smokers...

Some should remain controlled. Crystal meth for example. Nobody comes back from that......

I feel the same. Legalize the stuff that just has you sitting around looking at the pretty colors and philosophizing about the meaning of Tuesday, keep the shit that makes you dangerous while high or coming down illegal.