if i were offered a job making 500k a year to be a member of a task force that was tasked with finding out marijuana users or marijuana growers or marijuana dealers, so that they could be rounded up and 'brought to justice' and thrown into private prisons, i would not take it.

do you know why? because i consider that immoral scumbag behavior.

You know the scope of these drug dealing gangs better than we do. Most of the people I think of when I think of drug dealers are run of the mill guys. I see a lot of them in court. I would imagine if you're the type of guy that a gang can count on to accomplish the kind of violence you listed there you would not be thrown into the system like their run of the mill drug dealers. Those run of the mill guys can certainly be violent, but they are not sociopaths.

Sorry for your loss and experiences. And thanks for sharing them.

But the rest of your post is just repetition of what you formerly said. Maybe you think about that issue a little more.

Legalization would certainly ease up the situation and there is no sensible argument against it. Just because you can't "heal" all the bad apples does not mean that you continue to fight a cause that causes that much misery.

These are terrible crimes and would be dealt with harshly with or without the drug element being involved. A business that uses violent tactics to pursue debt collections is considered unethical in this day and age (with the exception of the U.S. government, of course). The fact that drugs are the product being argued over is merely incidental--these are hardened criminals and they're not playing around with their business. If they owned a bar and a customer owed a big bar tab they would probably handle it the same way.

The police would have plenty to do without drug laws, things that would be much more beneficial for society. But you have to admit that the budget of many departments has been being pumped for narcotics money for decades, and that many cops would be laid off due to a lack of arrests to be made in some places.

I think my argument is being misinterpreted.

While I do have a great deal of dislike and anger at drug dealers due to my life experiences, that's really irrelevant to my argument. I just merely went out on a tangent about it.

The basic point of my argument is that I don't think there would be either massive reductions in violence, or property crime due to drug legalization.

Maybe a minimal reduction, I just don't feel it would be as drastic as many of you believe.

I see drug legalization as a means to end A problem. I get a sense many of you believe that drug legalization would stop MOST of America's problems.

Essentially we agree on the main issue, disagree on a technicality.

Strawman imo. None of us think drug legalization is going to make unemployment and wage slavery go away, nor is it going to make people be responsible and save money, nor is going to make boardroom ceos suddenly decide to be generous and just give their workers a raise for the heck of it.

But it's the right thing to do for many important reasons, freedom being among the top. It's a step in the right direction.

I don't think anyone believes that either. We just think legalization would be a good thing for America. Not so much that it solves all problems, most problems, or changes human behavior. Just that it's better legalized than not.

I think it would get rid of most violent crimes related to drugs.

Not sure what you are thinking we are thinking.

Would you respond to this post please? Really interested in what you have to say.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...0&postcount=78

I'd say both are exceptions to the types I've encountered.

It all depends on what happens to price. You have to keep in mind that for every 1 career violent criminal drug dealer out there, there are probably like 2 dozen junkies that are out breaking into cars, burglarizing houses, mugging people, etc. If their $150/day habit changes to a $15/day habit, crime is going to down regardless of whether the newly unemployed dealers take up bank robbery or used car sales.

Legalizing drugs might push current drug dealers into other violent crimes but it will stop the creation of new drug dealers. With drug dealing gone as an easy way to make money the people that would be tempted to get into that trade will now have to look for something else. And they will soon realize that most other crimes are a lot harder and a lot worse when it comes to risks and rewards. So much harder that a large percentage of what would have been drug dealers will now try to finish school or end up flipping burgers.

Yeah, and this kind of thing happened during alcohol prohibition as well, but now that alcohol is regulated and legal how many thug/gang related deaths are there fighting over the profits and territory of the alcohol black market?

Although its certainly much smaller in scope, you are aware that an "Alcohol Black Market" exists today, in 2012 in America, correct?

Lather, rinse, repeat.

Yes, but the violence and gang related crime related to it is miniscule compared to when we had a war on alcohol(prohibition)...

There is always going to be violent *******s that need to be dead or locked up, unfortunately. The question is how to best deal with this subset of the population, and how to best deal with those with real addiction issues. I feel the war on drugs is the nut worst way, just as prohibition was likely the nut worst way of dealing with many of the real problems associated with alcohol.

Same with sportsbetting. When all the online places opened in the mid-late 90's many bettors thought that would put illegal bookmakers out of business. It didn't because they still offer things offshore books don't, credit and winnings paid in cash. Also in the last 3-4 years big offshore books refusing to take action from US players helped revive illegal bookmaking.

I agree with DblbarrelJ. The college kid that sells weed to his buddies is probably going legit if drugs are made legal. How bout the guy that's 35, been in and out of jail a few times and has no or little work history and is accustomed to averaging 3k a week? I don't see this guy joining the work force. Guys like that will definately get into another illegal enterprise.

Sure, but you need to show that this other enterprise (which has not yet been specified ITT) is MORE violent than slinging crack for this theory to make sense. And as we've established, selling drugs is a pretty violence-intensive proposition.



*rolls eyes* Yeah when people start making lame appeals to emotion, that's when I check out of the thread.

Thanks for stopping by then.

Come back soon.

Do you agree that if it is made harder to profit from violent crime then fewer people will do so?

If so, then what is your point? It's obvious that desperate people will do desperate things and eventually get to the point where they are 35 and have no legitimate life choices, the question is how desperate they have to be before they think about violent crime as an option.

Drunk driving is illegal because it puts an unnecessary risk to innocent people.

I wonder if the legal status of certain drugs could be equivalent.

obviously all the drug dealers are nice people posters have never owed money to a dealer. Or have never been in a position where they have no cash on hand. The addicted people tend to miss work because they're baked, and can't hold or get another job because of the same reason. It's not far removed from an alcoholic's inability to function.

Just because your college buddy made some extra cash selling weed, and never was either shot or shot someone else, doesn't mean it doesn't occur.

Um, no.


Drugs : Alcohol :: Drug Violence : Drunken Driving

No, the vast majority of dealers just want easy money.

You're kidding, right?



Old chart, but still.