digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About
See the original image at cnn.com

Commentary: Legalize drugs to stop violence

cnn.com — Jeffrey Miron: Thousands have been killed in Mexico's ongoing drug war He says U.S. drug policy leads to corruption of politicians and law enforcement Miron: Legalizing drugs is the best way to reduce drug violence He says drugs should be controlled through regulation and taxation

Who dugg this? Made popular Mar 24, 2009

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

200 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • inactive, on 03/24/2009, -5/+48almost all of the organized and gang violence in our country can be linked directly to the prohibition of drugs.if we as Americans would use our education to remember what we were taught in school about the failures of alcohol prohibition we would know that.the increase in violence,police forces and prisons in our country represent a failure of our policies.that has caused untold deaths and imprisonments and cost the American tax payer billions of dollars wasted while the problem just keeps getting worse.ask yourself this if you had a sixteen year old daughter(as i do)what would be easier for her to get?pills,pot,meth,or..... a twelve pack of beer???DRUG DEALERS DON'T CHECK ID.thats why we should legalize.so we can tax and control what the criminals are taxing and controlling and have a better chance of keeping our kids off drugs.
  • wild, on 03/24/2009, -3/+45Good to see the MSM getting behind this sophisticated and intelligent approach to solving the problem. With a little luck and a lot of great discussion, maybe we'll see the end of this prohibition one day (in my lifetime).
  • sb66, on 03/24/2009, -2/+39Wow...could logic and reason become a factor in public policy? Lets hope so.


  • chanop, on 03/24/2009, -7/+36From the Comments of the Article:

    "How about we spend a few dollars on an add campaign that shows how many deaths result from every bong smoked? The clear criminals are the drug users. They are the source of the violence (supply and demand), not the government's regulations. Americans should take some responsibility for their actions. American's actions are creating the black market and the violence, not the government's prohibition. American's are funding terrorists, not the government's prohibition. Individual American's are responsible for the violence, corruption, eroding national security, disrespect for the law, draining the public purse... Smoking pot or sniffing cocaine isn't hurting anyone else, right? It's just a good time."

    He's right, I almost OD'ed after taking 3 bong rips. When I tried to quit smoking the pots (which I couldn't because it's highly addictive), 3 men in turbans came to my door strapped with explosives and held an AK-47 to my head saying I disrupted their jihad funds. I'm finally off the weeds and look forward to a healthy life ahead of me. brb, need my anti-depressants and pick up a bottle of scotch.
  • shycyberguy, on 03/24/2009, -1/+28People who make our drug policy couldn't care less how violent Mexico gets.
  • Frankyfan3, on 03/24/2009, -1/+18"Herb is the healing of a nation, alcohol is the destruction."
    Bob Marley

    There was a recent report about the impacts of marijuana prohibition from the University of Washington.

    http://www.aclu-wa.org/library_files/MarijuanaProh ...

    We're doing more harm to the respect of law than the plant itself ever could.
  • Hetman, on 03/24/2009, -1/+18What does drug use have to do with morals?
  • Bamboozled, on 03/24/2009, -1/+14If Obama tried to legalize drugs or at least Marijuana, the Republicans would probably use it as a political weapon against him and screw everything up.
  • Macgyrl64, on 03/24/2009, -1/+13This article was beautifully written and points articulated quite well, now if only we can be certain the information is trickled up to the powers that be. I'm all for legalization, every illegal drug is widely available now. I can walk out my office door and down a block or 2, pick up whatever I wanted if I were so inclined. Legalizing isn't going to make everyone a druggie, but it will certainly put an end to the most asinine Wars in history. $44 billion spent fighting, $44 billion. Conservatively $33 billion would come in as tax if legalized. That's $77 billion yearly back in the coffer. Obviously some of that would go to clinics and such to assist the addicts (very limited resources now), but it wouldn certainly assist in getting the deficit down and put the recession on hold.

  • Hetman, on 03/24/2009, -1/+13It would be cheaper and of better quality. Why would you buy it on the black market? When is the last time you bought some moonshine?
  • Frankyfan3, on 03/24/2009, -1/+12You don't use aspirin or drink caffeinated beverages?
  • CalltoSanity, on 03/24/2009, -0/+11Murder involves an unwilling party called a victim. Drug use is a consensual crime.
  • korvan504521, on 03/24/2009, -0/+11The irony is that almost every drug could be produced internally. . .not only would we be cutting out the drug dealers and the smugglers, we'd be *increasing* jobs and our economy.

    And people would still have the same choice as to whether or not to do drugs.
  • Hetman, on 03/24/2009, -1/+12So if herion was legal tommorrow. You would go grab a needle and shoot up?
  • Daneology, on 03/24/2009, -3/+14I agree with all but the inexcusable grammar.
  • Spire3660, on 03/24/2009, -1/+11Choosing to imbibe any particular material in of itself is not a 'moral' choice. Even Jesus drank wine, heck he manufactured it.
  • sugarazor, on 03/24/2009, -0/+10Underage drinking occurs, but there's not a huge black market out there for Keystone Light. Kids get their booze from people who bought it legally and then gave it to them illegally. Providing minors with alcohol or tobacco is a crime, and it would be if drugs were legal and an adult gave cocaine to a minor.
  • highlymodified, on 03/24/2009, -1/+11I'm curious about your statement.

    When you say "no drugs," do you still use alcohol? Caffeine? Would you still use narcotic painkillers if they were prescribed to you? Antidepressants? ED medication?

    Because then you equate "morality" to "legality," despite the fact that legal drugs now are for recreational uses too. Viagra, anyone?

    Please explain why drug use is immoral as long as no one is harmed, and where you draw the line around "bad psychoactive."
  • borez, on 03/24/2009, -2/+12We need drugs to stop us going mad from the establishments constant ***** feed.
  • p0lp0t, on 03/24/2009, -1/+11Drugs don't ruin lives, people make bad decisions and ruin their own lives. Decriminalization would create an environment where recreational drug use is much safer than it is now.
  • mjk340, on 03/24/2009, -0/+9The other day I smoked some pot and accidentally locked my keys in my car.
  • XtheXlanternX, on 03/24/2009, -3/+12Sadly, no one will listen.

    People are afraid of things they do not know anything about.
  • mrsteveman1, on 03/24/2009, -1/+9And if the public is behind the idea, they will look like ***** pathetic morons (which will only reinforce what everyone already thinks). I see no problem, let them hang themselves.
  • theutopian, on 03/24/2009, -1/+9Sounds good to me.
  • korvan504521, on 03/24/2009, -0/+8I don't do drugs, and I wouldn't even if it was legal.

    But making them illegal is stupid and harmful.
  • mjk340, on 03/24/2009, -1/+9Since I don't favor large black markets which fund terrorism and wars in Mexico does that mean I don't have morals?

    You need to pull your head out of your ass.
  • korvan504521, on 03/24/2009, -0/+8Then it will be a problem we can fix through other means, the same way we deal with alcohol abuse.

    As it stands, the harm from the prohibition exceeds the harm we would receive from regulation.
  • mrsteveman1, on 03/24/2009, -0/+8The majority of underage drinking occurs in the 18-20 year old demographic, stop telling them they are adults but 'not really' and you won't have that problem.

    Or, you could stop ***** lying about the negative effects of drugs and alcohol and some of them might listen. In either case it is not up to the government to decide.
  • OneRottenTomato, on 03/24/2009, -0/+8Murder requires a victim. Where's the victim when one drinks coffee or uses marijuana? Retard.
  • Spire3660, on 03/24/2009, -0/+8So socially having a few drinks is a dysfunctional behavior too?
  • z0rk, on 03/24/2009, -0/+7Yes but a free society has the right to choose which functional/dysfunctional behaviors they choose to engage in. Prohibition is so completely against the foundation of this country I'm surprised anyone is able to support it.
  • kanabiis, on 03/24/2009, -1/+8Red Herring much??

    Total logic fail...

    Murder has a victim..... victim = crime

    Marijuana consumption has no victims, thats why it is called 'vice crime'....

    Please, research something before opening your mouth..

    Or as my grandfather used to say, Its best to keep your mouth shut and let people assume you are an idiot then to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
  • Bloodburn, on 03/24/2009, -3/+10I dont do drugs, why? im too scared to get busted..

    But if it was legalized, I probably WOULD do them, responsibly. AND the tax will go torward the state too, Its a win win.

    They NEEEEEEEEEED To legalize all this crap now...its our only hope.
  • djfelix, on 03/24/2009, -0/+7Here here!
  • inactive, on 03/24/2009, -2/+8If we legalize cocaine it will take away alot of their profits.
  • mjk340, on 03/24/2009, -0/+6Read a book on alcohol prohibition. Pay close attention to the chapter on the Mafia and organized crime, and specifically, what happened to those groups after prohibition was ended and their source of money completely dried up.
  • Daneology, on 03/24/2009, -0/+6Thats not true at all. Anyone educated knows the solution to this problem, and thats why there are several bills in various state legislations supporting recreational marijuana use as we speak.

    Its going to happen because people are listening, the timing just depends on the state you live in.
  • korvan504521, on 03/24/2009, -0/+6the criminal element will still exist, yes. But we'll have eliminated a *major* source of their funds, the same way we eliminated much of the mafia's power when we legalized alcohol.
  • shredswithpiks, on 03/24/2009, -0/+6Why should dysfunctional behavior be illegal anyway? *Smoking pot is not necessarily dysfunctional behavior, but it can be... just want to humor the argument.
  • snafflepaffle, on 03/24/2009, -1/+6The war on drugs can only be won by losing.
  • Hetman, on 03/24/2009, -0/+5Baby steps.
  • toshimonkey, on 03/25/2009, -0/+5You moron.

    Underage drinking still occurs... nobody said it didn't. But it is actually easier for the average minor to obtain illegal drugs than it is to purchase alcohol. That's because there aren't black market alcohol dealers. Pretty much the only way of getting booze is at the store, and the clerk doesn't want to incur a 5000.00+ fine by selling booze to a minor. Meanwhile the drug dealers don't give a ***** what age you are, they are already breaking the law as it is. Fact is both drug and alcohol abuse are going to happen legal or not. Legalization actually makes it harder to obtain and also avoids many of the other consequences of prohibition such as funding of criminal organizations.

    "There will still be a market for narcotics, regulation or not." No *****? That's exactly the argument against prohibition you tool. It's gonna happen, why not have the money go towards the government and not the gangs currently terrorizing Mexico?

    Issues with perscription (sic) drug abuse? First of all I'd think that if cannabis were legal, many people would not feel the need to get scripts for things like Valium and Xanax. Lots of people resort to popping pills just because it is a somewhat legal method of getting high, prescription fraudulently obtained or not. Those pills are much worse for the body than cannabis, but people are forced to take them because of the continued stupid prohibition, upheld by short-sighted fools like you. And is prescription drug abuse currently responsible for so many billions of dollars spent on law enforcement (how many arrests are made for prescription drug abuse vs. illegal drug trade) or locking people up (how many people go to prison for popping pills vs. smoking dope)?

    So you say that legalization is another example of abdicating responsibility to the government? You truly are a retard aren't you? Again your logic is the complete opposite of reality. We are currently abdicating the responsibility of self-moderation of drug use to the government, wasting billions of dollars and ruining lives in the process. Legalization is a step toward putting the responsibility back where it belongs, in your own hands.

    You are an idiot and you should try actually thinking your arguments through so you don't look like such a ***** *****.
  • fury420, on 03/24/2009, -0/+5drug lords and their power structures... how exactly can they possibly compete over the long term against legal enterprise? i just don't see drug kingpins having any real advantage over those who are not ex-drug kingpins when it comes to the legal growing of plants on an industrial scale for harvest.

    If what you claim is true, where is this massive black market production of alcohol and growing of tobacco you speak of? Granted there are problems with cigarettes being sold under the table, but that is more on the packaging & distribution side than the growing side, and is illegal nonetheless
  • feignNU, on 03/24/2009, -0/+5"What happens when the supply stream of those hard drugs are limitless?"

    Well it depends on what happens to the demand. The argument could be made that removing the "forbidden fruit" aspect of drug use will cause demand to lower. Of course, the counter-argument to that point is that at the end of Prohibition, the number of people who drank alcohol went up. Apparently the decriminalization of *all* drugs in Portugal has resulted in an increased use of marijuana, but a decreased use of heroin. So...we have conflicting data, and we probably can't say for sure exactly what would happen.

    My question to you, though, is what does it really matter if more people try heroin or cocaine? There are pleeeeeenty of readily available prescription drugs that are just as "hard" as these (eg oxycontin, amphetamine, heavy sedatives like phenobarbital, etc), and we don't see a huge problem with people ruining their lives with them. The problem is that the drug warriors have so thoroughly convinced you that using heroin will immediately turn a person into a lying stealing junkie that it actually seems reasonable to prolong the drug war (and all its associated problems) instead of allowing for the fact that a few more people very well may try these drugs.

    There are very few drugs that are practically impossible to use responsibly, in fact at the moment I can only really think of datura. And guess what? That's not even regulated!! There are so many dangerous plants growing in the world it would make your head spin, and as hard as it may be to believe, we're all doing totally fine without having laws against them. We don't need to be protected from ourselves, and if a person DOES get himself in over his head with drug abuse, he needs to be able to go seek help without feeling like a criminal or being afraid of being thrown in jail forever.
  • shredswithpiks, on 03/24/2009, -1/+6"Every gun, every bribe, every hit was paid for by you, the american drug user."

    Your argument makes the (incorrect) assumptions that

    1) Americans are the only consumers of drugs manufactured or grown by violent gangs/organizations

    2) All drugs are manufactured by violent gangs/organizations

    I don't do drugs, and don't promote their use... but I don't understand how we (Americans) can justify the prohibition of things like marijuana but have no problem with things like alcohol.

    Why not treat them the same as alcohol? If there was a crazy violent gang running around selling alcohol to children, we'd still go in and try to stop them, right? So legalize the recreational drugs and prohibit the illegal and violent distribution. You don't have to legalize the drug lords to legalize the drugs.
  • Frankyfan3, on 03/24/2009, -0/+5Ya, imagine that. Their policies support expanding individual liberties.

    Totally hilarious.
  • highlymodified, on 03/24/2009, -0/+5You're absolutely right. Unfortunately, Americans don't usually give a ***** about where their products came from.
    Not just drugs, but ANYTHING.

    Does the average Joe try to find ethically manufactured clothes or research organic products? Is there a massive boycott of diamonds, oil, or cell-phones, all of which are fueling violence in various parts of the world?

    I do my best. But I'm a very tiny minority.

    There's a huge disconnect between the consumer and the consequences.
  • feignNU, on 03/24/2009, -0/+4@nbrewer:

    Stop with your moralizing and you will see clearly that you have the cart before the horse on this issue. The proper way to put it is, "You don't CRIMINALIZE something that doesn't have a victim."
  • feignNU, on 03/24/2009, -0/+4Only a stupid idiot would believe the propaganda put forward by the War Against (some) Drugs and then call the people who see through such ***** "stupid idiots".
  • snafflepaffle, on 03/24/2009, -0/+4You're missing the point...
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 204 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.