Posted on 03/20/2016 8:13:08 AM PDT by Kaslin
Is this a great country or what? Oh, sure, as Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump puts it, “We are led by very, very stupid people,” but still — the ingenuity of the populace shines through.
Sometimes the inhabitants of America find a path around their political potholes. Case in point: the amazing progress being made in the War on Drugs.
“Legal marijuana may be doing at least one thing that a decades-long drug war couldn’t,” explains Christopher Ingraham at The Washington Post’s Wonkblog, “taking a bite out of Mexican drug cartels’ profits.”
Oh, wait a second. “Legal marijuana” hardly qualifies as part of the drug war. It’s that war’s antithesis.
Nonetheless, the new reality of “legal” pot under state law (even though it remains illegal under federal law) has led to a booming quasi-legal marijuana industry in the United States. Lo and behold, pot produced in the good old USA is outperforming pot grown south of the border.
In last year’s National Drug Threat Assessment, the DEA announced that, “The quality of marijuana produced in Mexico and the Caribbean is thought to be inferior to the marijuana produced domestically in the United States or in Canada. . . .”
The business acumen and advantages enjoyed by American marijuana entrepreneurs has altered the entire drug supply dynamic, bringing down prices. In fact, the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) has acknowledged that U.S. marijuana is now being illegally smuggled into Mexico. (Maybe the smugglers will pay for the wall.)
Surging domestic pot production comes only in part from ballot initiatives passed by voters to fully legalize marijuana in Alaska, Colorado, Oregon, Washington State and the other Washington, the nation’s capital. There are another 23 states where marijuana is legal for medical use, and pot is widely prescribed. Today, medical marijuana-permitting California grows the most marijuana.
Let’s remember, too, that legalization — outright or for medical purposes — didn’t come about after five decades of drug war failure because politicians came to their senses, admitted their mistakes and advocated a different approach. No. Instead, frustrated citizen leaders teamed up with successful entrepreneurs to launch ballot initiatives, allowing voters to directly decide the issue.
More domestic pot means economic growth — jobs. It means fewer unlucky Americans will be incarcerated for a victimless crime tens of millions of other Americans have committed without penalty, including the last three presidents. And it means that the Mexican drug cartels are losing market share to non-violent American businesses.
How important is it that legal pot in the U.S. is cutting into the take for Mexico’s cartels?
Well, those criminal gangs have waged a war with the Mexican government killing more than 164,000 citizens between 2007 and 2014. Less profit to fuel the Mexican drug lords in that bloody war is more for our peace and security.
Let’s call it a peace dividend.
Corleone's law
Look at the increase in crime in parts of Colorado, too, though.
What increases? In what kinds of crime? In what parts of Colorado? As compared with crime rates in what other parts of the country?
An unsupported claim like that has no place in a reasonable discussion.
Regards,
“Since 2012, the year when Colorado voters passed recreational marijuana legalization, the number of crimes in Denver has grown by about 44 percent, according to annual figures the city reported to the National Incident Based Reporting System.”
The Denver Post is trying to explain it away:
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_29527800/marijuana-legalization-unlikely-blame-denver-crime-increase
Alaska is noticing crime increases after legalization, too:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/03/violent_crime_rate_rises_in_aftermath_of_alaskas_medical_marijuana_legalization.html
Regards.
We deride the Liberals for their failure to deal with reality, and then applaud those who sell the means to avoid reality because they are doing it more efficiently.
I read both articles and they don’t link the increased crime rate to weed. Looks like a correlation vs causation thing.
I’m sure crime rates in NYC and Baltimore are also up but for other reasons.
“More domestic pot means economic growth — jobs. It means fewer unlucky Americans will be incarcerated for a victimless crime tens of millions of other Americans have committed without penalty, including the last three presidents. And it means that the Mexican drug cartels are losing market share to non-violent American businesses.”
I think ou are smoking rose-colored-glasses pot. Hospital visits, some fairly violent episodes in robberies, pot growers, etc. are telling us a different story.
Having spent elenenty gazillion dollars being told that smoke is bad for you, now it’s OK. There is no reliable way to judge purity or strength of most marijuana and this isn’t the crap we smoked in the 60’s.
Every generation thinks they have made a big discovery with pot. Ironic, that the moderate to even heavy smoker of years ago no longer smokes. Just a personal anecdote. As for my other observations, my first experimentation was many, many years ago. I never thought it was a problem. But given the increase in potency (bound to ramp up in a legal market) and the potential for graft, more governmental oversight and bigger government for inspection etc., (what does the T in ATF stand for) I do not share your enthusiasm. I order a vodka made with a proof that I know, I know what will happen to me (more or less) but a bag of Eat Me First brownies doesn’t tell me anything, does it? And really, doesn’t wine always go well with pot? Unless you are stuffing your face with pickles, I guess.
“They believed that they can compensate for any effects of marijuana, for instance by driving more slowly or by allowing greater headways,” the GHSA report said. “They believed it is safer to drive after using marijuana than after drinking alcohol.”
That right there should worry anyone. Every alcoholic in history has used that same line.
This is a good article, I think, because it is even handed.
Unless you’re willing to recriminalize alcohol, you’re a hypocrite.
“Unless you’re willing to recriminalize alcohol, you’re a hypocrite.”
No skin off my nose, I don’t drink. Why the snarky crap? I don’t know you. At least wait until you realize what a bastard I can really be before you start this crap.
So now, asking for evidence to support the claims someone makes is "poo-pooing?"
And by implying that this so-called "actual truth" has already been established, you are committing the fallacy known as petitio principii ("assuming the initial point" - but often incorrectly translated as "begging the question").
Regards,
The stats are describing only crimes related to that specific drug as related to that drug’s introduction.
This means the ancillary issues, secondary factors and causes, that follow the drug aren’t properly tied.
It like a casino goes into a nice quiet place with low crime, and crime shoots up. The casino wasn’t robbed, so no crime increase is attributed to the gambling. However, prostitution, drugs, theft, rape—these all went up . Why? Because there are activities that follow activities and attempt to take advantage of the “opportunities.”
It’s as plain as day.
Don't expect to get very far with facts and logical argumentation with this one, Wolfie. You'll garner only ad hominem attacks and verbal chest-thumping.
Regards,
Crimes where marijuana was a direct part of the crime is all that is ascribed to the legalization.
That does not mean that the legalization did not bring a bunch of threat actors seeking to take advantage of the situation.
There’s nothing that you’ve provided to counter the facts.
Has it already been established in the case at hand (i.e., the legalization of marijuana at the state-level in certain states) that any putative subsequent increases in crime are, in fact, ultimately attributable to said legalization?
Regards,
1. The "facts" here have yet to be established.
2. I, personally, don't see any need to "counter" them, anyway. If people commit violent crimes, lock them up! My position is that - regardless of any crime statistics one might be able to dig up - it is no business of the Federal Government what kind of "high" I enjoy - alcohol-induced or marijuana-induced.
Regards,
Humm- Instead of robbing a quicki-Mart, the thugs now go after “MJ retail outlet” because they know the place is will have $tack$ of cash. You can do your own research, it’s out there for the Denver area.
I don’t want that crap in my neighborhood - period.
Illegal sales?
-Thugs will kick in the door, then trade shots with the resident. Bullets don’t care, they go where they go. All they want is the dope and cash.
-Cops will kick in the door, shoot the residents Pit Bull(s), trade shots with the resident - rinse, repeat. Because all they want is the dope and cash.
Legal sales fixes that?
-Thugs will kick in the door, then trade shots with the retail staff. Bullets don’t care, they go where they go. All they want is the dope and cash.
And if the local pols even **think** you are cheating on the taxes...
Cops will kick in the door, shoot the Pit Bull(s), trade shots with the tax cheat - rinse, repeat.
The upside?
So, you maintain that continued, ongoing crime increases are perfectly acceptable, as long as the criminals are apprehended. Prevention is not important.
No, I did not say that they were "acceptable." Rather, I said: If people commit violent crimes, lock them up!
Do you hold a different position? Do you feel, instead, that legitimate activities (such as taking recreational drugs) that may have undesireable secondary effects like increased violence or, say, traffic accidents should be outlawed (catchwords: Social Engineering / Nanny State)? Can you then please also cite the relevant articles of the U.S. Constitution which give the Federal Government the authority to intercede in such cases?
Thanks and regards,
I would have no problems with drugs being made legal if we had no social net for their use/abuse. Additionally, I believe torture penalties should be in place to punish criminals with three-fold back torture or financial harm to that which they dished out to an innocent person.
Does that help you understand how I view liberty and responsibility?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.