I think this is the fourth time I've stated this.
Decriminalization and legalization of drugs won't stop drug use but rather drug violence.
Of course we will still get the same number of people in the U.S. who are drug addicts. And I'm fine with that. But it will stop the drug violence in the U.S. and in Mexico when legitimate businesses will be able to manufacture and distribute recreational drugs rather than criminal cartels killing each other over the trade.
I should stress the difference between decriminalization and legalization, though. Under the most common form of decriminalization, personal drug use is not a crime
that is punishable by incarceration. In America, this means you can be fined and hit with a violation similar to a speeding ticket for a small, personal supply. The penalties for intent to distribute are typically still there, though full decriminalization would fine distributers rather than imprison them.
The idea behind decriminalization is harm minimization to users and society, but it does not really stop the black market because those who sell the drugs still do not have access to the courts and police to solve business disputes, as they cannot reveal that which would, at the very least, render huge fines.
If you wanted to break the link between drugs and organized crime, legalization with reasonable regulation would be necessary.
:shock:Wow you guys. If you're really comparing Bill Gates and Pepsi to these psychotic cartels who decapitate their own brothers in competition then I'm just....i mean i don't know what else to say.
They would not be able to compete with a legal supplier is all they are really saying. The cartels use violent tactics, but this costs money. They can do this and compete because that’s the only way to play the drug game right now, and drug demand is relatively inflexible due to addiction. Legalizing drugs allows legal suppliers to offer the same product that is safer and cheaper than that produced by the cartels. They would have the full might of the courts, police, and if necessary, military behind them, rather than having to spend exorbitant money to evade and fight those same forces. This advantage would make all the difference in terms of what prices they can offer to consumers.
Do you really think legalizing drugs is going to turn these cartels into CEO's. These cartels are killing over the very few corridors leading into the US. I've been to Juarez, Mexico, and it's quite a sight. 18,000 cartel related murders in just four years. These cartels do it their way and no other way but their way. But sure Sam, I cant wait til Calderone informs the cartels on how, when, and where they're going to be doing business for now on. I refuse to believe you're this naive.
If you grow an apple in Colombia for one cent and then cell that apple in America for $20,000 then there's nothing, not one person in this world that could ever stop that!
Only anybody willing and able to sell an apple for less than $20k...
We're not talkin about a full scale war in America, we're talking about Mexico. Read the Op again, chief.
What you say would be true only if drugs could only be grown in latin America, and even then only if the cartels were in full control of all of latin America and the waters around it. Even coca, native to Columbia, need not be restricted to the area. Biosynthesis is possible, though not ideal. Before the drug war, significant proportions of the cocaine supply were grown outside of latin America due to attempts to grow it in various areas by colonial powers. Java coca was one success.
A History of Cocaine: the Mystery of Coca Java and the Kew Plant