The “war” against ending any criminal activity is ineffective, and often immoral. Does that mean we shouldn’t arrest and prosecute gang members, rapists, pedophiles, thieves, white-collar criminals, or murderers? This is a stupid argument.
Two-thirds of murders are solved - a success rate surely several orders of magnitude higher than the rate at which drug "crimes" are even detected.
and often immoral.
Does that mean we shouldnt arrest and prosecute gang members, rapists, pedophiles, thieves, white-collar criminals, or murderers?
Unlike drug "crimes," those crimes have actual victims.
If arresting and prosecuting people for murder, rape, etc. had no discernable effect on those activities, led to as much corruption as the Drug War, and created all new problems we’ve never had to deal with before, then, yes, we should wonder whether they’re worth the trouble. But we never will, because those things you mention are malum in say, or evil in themselves, and people wouldn’t stand for perpetrators not to be brought to justice.
Drug consumption, production, and distribution are not evil in themselves. We criminalize them because we don’t like their direct and indirect consequences. If it’s a big waste of money, those consequences come about anyway, and new evils result from the direct and indirect consequences of the Drug War, rather than the drugs themselves, it’d be stupid not to considering dropping the whole charade.
malum in say = malum in se