Drug Cartel Murders Another Blogger
readwriteweb.com
readwriteweb.com
Which is a good argument for immediate across the board legalization. The recovery is going to be a very long process. Unfortunately I doubt that will happen. Even the idea of marijuana legalization is scoffed at by a city (Washington DC) which is fueled by the very cocaine and pills it purports to abhor.
I would propose creating an open database dedicated to tracking individuals known or believed to be associated with violent drug cartels. Perhaps call it a crowd sourced intelligence network.
Knowing that a government official being anonymously accused of being corrupt recently went on vacation in a foreign country and stayed at a 5 star hotel would go a long way in validating suspicions when combined with other data points, such as their relatives purchasing large quantities of real estate.
Presumably no cartel member or corrupt official operates with complete anonymity. When hundreds of individuals are able to combine their reports together, the "social network" of a criminal organization should be completely visible to all.
While I strongly advocate individual anonymity and privacy rights, anyone who explicitly infringes and impedes the rights of others has no rights.
This is a guerrilla war which can only be won by its own victims.
Doesn't most violence associated with these drug cartels take the form of fights over supply/territory? What will they be fighting over if they are no longer the suppliers?
Economics aside though, if you use the end of prohibition as an example of what might happen, you might over estimate the speed of commercialization. This is because prior to prohibition there was a thriving liquor business, and that business simply returned (within one generation so people who had run legal liquor stores before where around to run them again). This situation does not exist for drugs, medical pot clubs not withstanding.
I'm not really worried about the employment angle because cartel jobs aren't productive jobs. Essentially you're freeing up labor for the productive part of the economy which makes for a higher standard of living for everyone.
It might take a year or two to have nicely packaged heroin from well known companies available in pretty boxes in liquor stores, but I think you'd be rid of all the cartel violence within 6 months.
Given the various occupy activity, and the quantity of money that drugs influence, it seems like the 1% would figure out how to move all that money to them if they could do so without risking being arrested, extradited, murdered, Etc. Perhaps an unintended side effect, or perhaps not, but until recently I hadn't given a lot of thought to who would benefit most financially from such a change.
US policy is less about who would benefit from legalization (everyone) and more about who would suffer. If prohibition were ended there would be massive cuts in the budget and staff of the ATF, DEA, police, the entire boarder security industry, infantry defense contractors, prisons, courts and law firms.
Many politicians went to law school. No one wants to put their friends out of work.
EDIT: Or Arizona or Texas, I guess would be the more relevant point.
It's a separate problem with no solution unless profit dries up.
Edit: Looks like pot is actually the #1 crop in the US http://www.drugscience.org/Archive/bcr2/cashcrops.html (if their numbers are accurate.)
Pot cultivation went way up after 9/11 due to the increase in border security. It just isnt cost effective to smuggle a kilo of pot versus a kilo of coke. Pot is pretty difficult to move in large amounts so it make sense to grow it north of the border. Wholesale pot might go for 2-3k per key while coke might go for 10-20k per key.
The drug lords have invested a bunch of money setting up smuggling networks and equipping mini-armies. Legalize drugs and they'll just switch to smuggling something else.
I agree drugs should be legalized, but it's because I don't like the government telling me what I can do.
For any of them that are really in it for the thrills the time would depend on their reserves, but I doubt it'd last longer than a few months for any of them.
Fake designer clothing? If this hypothetical market existed they would already be there.
For example, in Europe, cocaine got significantly cheaper and rather easy to find. This led to a a considerable increase of its popularity during the last three years or so. Cocaine is starting to take 'market' from cannabis based drugs which are much less dangerous and carry much softer consequences.
'Legalize drugs' is a too naive statement, the drug situation needs to be carefully analysed and adequate solutions need to be put in practice based on as much factors as possible.
That said, generally, in developed countries I think consumption decriminalization is a positive thing at present time. It makes room for advances in thins like hygiene, medical treatment of addicts, etc. without creating easier access to drugs.
Giving any small group of humans the right to decide which properties drugs have and how important/dangerous those properties are is EXTREMELY dangerous. This is not kids stuff. Millions live and die by these decisions. Who do we trust to make such decisions?
You claim that the drug situation should be carefully analysed. Well, it must be analysed by someone, right? Who will do the analysis? Who deserves this power? Who do we trust enough to make unbiased decisions in this domain?
Another underlying assumption that you seem to be making is that drugs are bad. You want to allow room for advances in hygeine, medical treatement, etc. but you don't want people to do more drugs.
I want people to do more drugs. I want there to be more and deeper research into drugs. I want people to trip more. I want cocaine and heroin addicts to have easy access to ibogaine. I want there to be less shame associated with having gone through a period of heavy addiction. I want people to smoke weed and do mushrooms and LSD and 2CE on their days off rather than getting drunk.
"Legalize drugs" is not an over-simplification, it is a purification. It is the only position which is consistent with freedom and mutual human respect. It is the only position which has any hope of allowing humanity to move towards a healthy and mature stance on drug use. Your attempt to cast it as a "simplification" is a subtle (and all-too-common) context-switch from the land of ideals into the land of hubristic utilitarianism/pragmatism.
http://www.theatlanticcities.com/jobs-and-economy/2011/11/co...
Also, illegality has had no effect on use rate.
The actual article is located at http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Blogger-murd...
Now, if that is the case, how to explain the title of the Wikipedia entry, i.e. the usage of hanged in place of hung. This is the common phenomenon of regularization of irregular verbs, that has been going a loong time in English, eventually almost all of them will be regularized. This article (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-486935/How-irregular...) gives some details and explains that there are about 98 irregular verbs left in the language, compared to 177 in Old English.
You can see this process today in the "driven-drove" dichotomy, different people choose one or the other. Eventually drove will disappear.
1. It will always be "I drove to the store" and "I was driven to the store" and "I am a driven person," never "I driven to the store" or "I was drove to the store" or "I am a drove person."
1. Ex.: Drive-drove-driven, write-wrote-written, ride-rode-ridden, etc. While they follow a different conjugation pattern, most ablaut verbs are perfectly regular.
Deleted comment
Some of the cartels would go legit to become drug companies. The ones who wanted to remain criminals would have to downsize their organizations to fit the remaining markets.
There is more violence in America than most people realize. It's considered mundane so you don't see it in the news as much.
The US is selling arms to the cartels in Mexico, so their violence is escalated there.
Mexican cartels aren't larger in the US than in Mexico because their supply sources are in Mexico, they lose momentum over distance and face domestic competition as they move across the US.
I think maybe in the US the cartels have reached some equilibrium that allows them to operate without so much violence and be discrete enough that they don't get bothered so much by the police.
a mom and kids gets caught in the crossfire. this was an accident, and how much news coverage does it get? had you heard about this story before?
the war is outside your house right now and you don't even know, because the casualties are almost universally poor people (okay maybe not outside your house because you might not be in the USA)...
That didn't sound repulsive to my little ears, it was simply how things worked. I learned that bit of travel advice from listening in on the adult dinner table at about the same time I learned to ride a bicycle in that very same city (Nevo Laredo).