Drugs: The Legalization Debate

[Uboat509]

This is a thread that deserves a wider audience and a lot more discussion. Wish I'd come across it sooner. I'm by no means an expert, but have a few tiny observations from the driver's seat of a Crown Vic:

1: The drug war is twisting the Constitution. I get monthly updates on new appellate and (state) supreme court rulings. The vast majority are search and seizure related, originating from drug arrests. Thirty years ago search and seizure was relatively straightforward. Now it's a complex, nuanced maze that changes on an almost daily basis. This will become painfully apparent if terrorism ever makes it to the next level in this country. I'd hate to be the one that has to explain to the public that yes, we had an anonymous tip about the suicide bomber before he acted, but because of Florida v JL we couldn't do anything.

I would say that this is more of a consequence of the combination of unscrupulous lawyers combined with judges who want to legislate from the bench with a helping of liberal white guilt thrown in. I suspect that the drug war more of an enabler than a cause of this problem.

2. Treatment is an overrated option. As anyone who's been through AA will tell you, a person has to want to get better. Most abusers don't want to get better, they want to get out of their current trouble/discomfort. While there aren't nearly enough treatment options currently available for those that do want out, we as a society could spend enormous amounts of money for a minimal return on investment. The county I work in has over 3000 inmates in the county jail. Fewer than 2 dozen are in the jail's drug treatment program.

I would be very surprised if many of those who do seek treatment do so to avoid jail. If you legalize these drugs and remove that motivator, how many fewer will seek help?

3. Broken Glass Theory is nice if you have a community that will let you police it to that level. Ask LAPD how their community relations have been for the past 20 years. If the community thinks it is being occupied instead of policed they will push back (lawsuits, citizen complaints, jury nullification) to the point where you will be completely ineffective. (There's a corollary COIN concept that ties in with that, I'm not awake enough yet to pull it out.) Again, ask Atlanta PD how much fun they're having as a result of the Kathryn Johnston shooting. Worst-case outcomes by government can confer victim status on people that are the problem. (Read Rampart Scandal.)

I suspect that this is more of a cultural thing than anything else. People will often point to Europe as an example of how effective legalization of drugs or gun control can be. This ignores the gaping cultural differences. I have spent five years stationed in Germany. It is not uncommon to see Germans patiently waiting at a crosswalk for the Walk/Do Not Walk sign to change, with nary a car in sight. That, not stricter gun laws, is why they have lower incidents of gun violence. And I don’t think that that comes from stricter community policing. I think it is a cultural thing, that they are raised in.

4. Legalization/decriminalization tends to run aground on states vs. federal rights. California moved to partially legalize marijuana and the feds promptly sicced the DEA on users that were dying of cancer. (Can't find the cite.) We've got 51 dogs in this fight, each on a different leash.

Again, legalization of marijuana is one thing, legalization of other drugs is another thing altogether. I did post a link in an earlier post about marijuana users in federal prison and the total of marijuana users in prison for possession only as of, I believe 2005, was something like 63 individuals. The federal government doesn’t like marijuana use but I don’t think that they go after ordinary users all that much.

5. There is no plan. As I said elsewhere on this board, no one's written a modern, comprehensive outline of what legalization would look like. I'd happily sign off on anything that was halfway reasonable. It can't be a magic wand, "Now everything is permitted" decree. The plan will have to cover production, distribution, sales and permits, retail vending, and penalties for violation. Unless the plan covers the first three on that list it simply legitimizes the cartels and drug organizations and won't change an effing thing. They'll still kill over profit. The plan doesn't have to be fullproof, just articulate and comprehensive.

One of the biggest problems that I can see with this is that two of the biggest proponents of legalization tend to be the users, who often aren’t the best spokespeople for their cause and often don’t see past the fact that they want drugs to be legal, and the big L libertarians who believe that market pressures can fix pretty much any problem.

I've had a hypothetical working around in my head for a few weeks. What would be the downside to the US Government announcing it would engage in the production and distribution of heroin and cocaine for domestic consumption? The heroin would be purchased directly from farmers in Afghanistan, cutting out layers of intermediaries that use the money for nefarious purposes. We could buy cocaine directly from Bolivia, a country that's been by and large a victim of the drug war. (Fair Trade Crack anyone?) It would render moot the cocaine cartels in Mexico and end street-level dealing in the U.S., which is a big driver on the violence rate.

I kind of covered my feelings about this in my above post.

Surely this has stirred the pot. Anyone?

Is that a drug pun?

SFC W