A question for the next drug dealer bust press conference
Drug WarRant @ July 31, 2009 # No Comment Yet
As a follow-up to the previous post…
When they come out to brag about a successful operation that resulted in the arrest of some drug dealers, I’d like someone to ask:
Why should we be excited about having more drug dealers?
After all, we’ll have all the new drug dealers that will step in to replace these within hours – that’s dictated by the laws of supply and demand. And we’ll have the old ones, but we’ll be paying to prosecute and house them in expensive prisons. So we end up with a big expense, more dealers and the same amount of drug availability after this operation (which appears to have been executed very well).
So again, I ask, why should we be excited?
It’s a legitimate question that should be asked in these situations, but I doubt I’ll see it anytime soon. And if it was asked, I doubt that we’d get a coherent answer from the Sheriff or the Lieutenant of the Drug Task Force.
As I mentioned before, the disconnect can be pretty strong preventing the understanding that a successful law enforcement operation might actually be harmful to society.
I’m guessing that disconnect is even stronger among many law enforcement personnel –some of their vehement opposition to us (in addition to the financial angle) could be a desperate refusal to believe that their hard, successful work could actually have been destructive for many years. (I don’t know if that’s true – perhaps some of the LEO/former LEOs that read this site can shed some light here.)
More on page 1115
A question for the next drug dealer bust press conference
Drug WarRant @ July 31, 2009 # No Comment Yet
As a follow-up to the previous post…
When they come out to brag about a successful operation that resulted in the arrest of some drug dealers, I’d like someone to ask:
Why should we be excited about having more drug dealers?
After all, we’ll have all the new drug dealers that will step in to replace these within hours – that’s dictated by the laws of supply and demand. And we’ll have the old ones, but we’ll be paying to prosecute and house them in expensive prisons. So we end up with a big expense, more dealers and the same amount of drug availability after this operation (which appears to have been executed very well).
So again, I ask, why should we be excited?
It’s a legitimate question that should be asked in these situations, but I doubt I’ll see it anytime soon. And if it was asked, I doubt that we’d get a coherent answer from the Sheriff or the Lieutenant of the Drug Task Force.
As I mentioned before, the disconnect can be pretty strong preventing the understanding that a successful law enforcement operation might actually be harmful to society.
I’m guessing that disconnect is even stronger among many law enforcement personnel –some of their vehement opposition to us (in addition to the financial angle) could be a desperate refusal to believe that their hard, successful work could actually have been destructive for many years. (I don’t know if that’s true – perhaps some of the LEO/former LEOs that read this site can shed some light here.)
More on page 1114
I love watching their heads explode
Drug WarRant @ July 31, 2009 # No Comment Yet
It’s very hard for some people to grasp the concept that a successful law enforcement operation may not actually end up providing a net benefit to society. In fact, in the drug war, successful law enforcement operations often cause significant damage to society.
It is this fact (which is counterintuitive to many) that is noted by the UK Drug Policy Commission reported in Let drug dealers roam free, police told
POLICE should spend less time pursuing drug dealers, a leading think tank claimed today. [...]
The report showed drug dealers were able to avoid having their operations shut down by the police – and even when arrests were made and drugs seized – were “quick to adapt.” [...]
It also added successful police operations could in turn have negative consequences, if, for example, they created a turf war between rival gangs.
The report said: “Levels of enforcement activity appear to bear no direct relationship to levels of drug use or availability.
“Traditionally, drug enforcement efforts have focused on arrests and seizures, with the aim of reducing supply, but drug markets are large, resilient, and quick to adapt.”
Now the UKDPC should have gone on to recommend legalization as the solution, yet their half solution is still logical, given the fact that arrests of dealers cause additional problems — leave the dealers alone and expend your efforts in other areas.
Naturally, the responses were blisteringly fast, outraged, and.. incomprehensible.
Home Office minister Alan Campbell today insisted the report does not signify an end to the war on drugs.
He claimed: “Tough enforcement is a fundamental part of our drug strategy, and the police continue to make real progress in tackling the supply of illegal drugs and in reducing the harm they cause.
Talk about not even beginning to addressing the conclusions of the report. But people like Alan Campbell can’t wrap their minds around the truth — it’s too far from their world view.
This head-exploding disconnect was also noticeable in the comments…
Where on earth do we get these idiots from. The more you let go fre the more there will be on the street, then the crime rate will go even higher because adicts will want money for their “fix”
Well, no. It’s simple economics. If you don’t arrest the dealers, there won’t be more dealers because the market will become saturated and any new dealers entering the market will reduce profits too far. So the crime rate actually won’t go higher because the number of addicts won’t actually change.
On the other hand, every time you arrest a drug dealer, you essentially increase the number of drug dealers in the world. There’s the new one that stepped up to take the place of the one you arrested, and there’s the original one that we’re now paying huge sums of money to prosecute and house.
Another commenter:
The solution to the problem of drug dealers is a mandatory life sentence for the second conviction. [...]
If they are caught selling drugs let’s get medieval on them. It would make them think twice before they act.
Again, no. You just end up with full prisons and more drug dealers.
Another gem of pure insanity. If you believe you cannot fix a problem, then just give up. Perhaps Labour is keen to get a generation of unemployed into dealing drugs legally. They could then qualify for a small business loan and ultimately the profits from drugs could be taxed. What an asylum Britain has now become!
Actually, the best idea in the bunch, dressed up as insanity. Legalize and tax the drugs, provide jobs and put the criminals out of business.
Let the criminals take over the country we can save a lot of money and anyway a quick snort never did anyone any harm. What a pathetic bunch of free loaders. I will tell you what we should do. Sack these think tanks get rid of all these quangos Get rid of all the so called spy cameras and the millions saved will allow us to employ more police.Back in the 1920s America was over run with criminals they fought back and won.So must we.
Actually, what America did to get rid of the criminals was to end prohibition. Good idea.
More on page 1090
Marijuana Use Associated With a “Significantly Reduced Risk” of Head and Neck Cancers — Will The Mainstream Media Care?
Paul Armentano, NORML Deputy Director @ July 30, 2009 # No Comment Yet
For some 35 years the United States federal government has been well aware that cannabis possesses potent anti-cancer and anti-tumor properties. And for the past three years, government-funded researchers have speculated that these qualities may offer “protective” effects against the onset of various types of cancer in humans, including lung cancer.
Yet to date, virtually no [...]
More on page 1085
Why not prohibit smoking?
Drug WarRant @ July 30, 2009 # No Comment Yet
CNN.com: Commentary: Why not prohibit smoking? by Tony Newman
Excellent OpEd comparing the status of tobacco with prohibited drugs to demonstrate the inherent stupidity of using criminal prohibition as a tool for attacking drug abuse or drug dangers.
Instead of giving teens “reefer madness”-style propaganda, we have treated young people with respect and given them honest education about the harm of cigarettes, and we have been rewarded with fewer young people smoking today than ever before.
Although we should celebrate our success and continue to encourage people to cut back or give up smoking, let’s not get carried away and think that prohibition would eliminate smoking.
We need to realize that drugs, from cigarettes to marijuana to alcohol, will always be consumed, whether they are legal or illegal. Although drugs have health consequences and dangers, making them illegal — and keeping them illegal — will only bring additional death and suffering.
[Thanks, Lawson]
More on page 1077
Mexico wants U.S. to ‘persecute’ marijuana offenders
Drug WarRant @ July 30, 2009 # No Comment Yet
Funny. I thought we were already doing that.
MEXICO CITY (AFP) — Mexico’s attorney general said the United States had insufficient resources and infrastructure to clamp down on marijuana trafficking, after meeting the US anti-drug czar.
Mexico’s increasingly powerful drug traffickers operate throughout the United States and beyond as well as in Mexico.
“We frequently see insufficient resources and infrastructure to persecute those who carry out small-scale or fragmented marijuana trafficking in the United States,” Eduardo Medina Mora said at a joint news conference with the US Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, Gil Kerlikowske, in Mexico City.
“One of our biggest concerns is that the United States doesn’t give up, and that it increases persecutions of crimes related to the trafficking of marijuana from Mexico to the United States,” Medina Mora said. [emphasis added]
U.S. Drug Czar Gil Kerlikowske merely nodded with incomprehension due to his limited vocabulary.
More on page 1067
The Union
Drug WarRant @ July 29, 2009 # No Comment Yet
I just finished watching the newly available DVD: The Union: The Business Behind Getting High that was released yesterday. It’s outstanding!
It is the most comprehensive documentary review of cannabis policy, politics, history, myths, science, and.. humanity that I’ve seen. It’s compelling (and yes, a little overwhelming — you almost need to take a break during it to absorb everything).
It takes you briefly through the history of criminalization, debunks every bit of reefer madness nonsense from the suffocated monkeys’ lost brain cells to Walters’ marijuana treatment stats, explores the Chong and Emery cases, takes you into grow-ops and the business of black market cannabis, talks with the scientists and economists and doctors and patients and hemp activists and members of LEAP. It also vividly demonstrates the absolute lack of integrity of so many who promote continued criminalization, including Presidents of the United States.
There are tons of great quotes in it. I started writing some down, but then couldn’t choose, so I’m not going to bother. I really recommend getting it and showing it to your friends.
If you buy it by going to the link above, it sends a few cents my way without adding to your cost if you wish.
Here’s a trailer:
More on page 1065
NORML Is Coming To Talk Radio — Be Part of ‘Marijuana Nation’
Paul Armentano, NORML Deputy Director @ July 29, 2009 # No Comment Yet
Earlier this year NORML requested your assistance to help us launch the first ever nationwide television ad campaign calling for the regulation of cannabis for adults. Because of your generous support, NORML was able to purchase over 7,500 ad buys in all 50 states on cable networks like CNN, CNBC, Fox News, Fuse, FX Networks, [...]
More on page 1064
Bookstore Blues
Drug WarRant @ July 29, 2009 # No Comment Yet
I used to love nothing better than spending hours wandering through large bookstores.
Yesterday, I spent some time browsing the three-story Borders Books in downtown Chicago. Despite looking fairly extensively (though not asking), I was unable to find any books about the drug war. However, prominently displayed on the main floor were “nonfiction” books by Michelle Malkin, Mark Levin and Glenn Beck.
Sigh.
I realize that Borders is just providing what the customers want, but that’s even more depressing.
….
Speaking of the Blues, I was privileged to hear Shun Kikuta play blues guitar (with J.W. Williams) at Kingston Mines on Monday night. Damn!
….
A thought that went through my head while I was at Kingston Mines… Any plan involving the legalization of marijuana really, really, really should consider accommodating blues and jazz clubs.
More on page 1063
Bookstore Blues
Drug WarRant @ July 29, 2009 # No Comment Yet
I used to love nothing better than spending hours wandering through large bookstores.
Yesterday, I spent some time browsing the three-story Borders Books in downtown Chicago. Despite looking fairly extensively (though not asking), I was unable to find any books about the drug war. However, prominently displayed on the main floor were “nonfiction” books by Michelle Malkin, Mark Levin and Glenn Beck.
Sigh.
I realize that Borders is just providing what the customers want, but that’s even more depressing.
….
Speaking of the Blues, I was privileged to hear Shun Kikuta play blues guitar (with J.W. Williams) at Kingston Mines on Monday night. Damn!
….
A thought that went through my head while I was at Kingston Mines… Any plan involving the legalization of marijuana really, really, really should consider accommodating blues and jazz clubs.
More on page 1062
