It's Time to Legalize Drugs
OpEd The Washington Post
By Peter Moskos and Stanford "Neill" Franklin
Monday, August 17, 2009
Undercover Baltimore police officer Dante Arthur was doing what he does well, arresting drug dealers, when he approached a group in January. What he didn't know was that one of suspects knew from a previous arrest that Arthur was police. Arthur was shot twice in t
More..he face. In the gunfight that ensued, Arthur's partner returned fire and shot one of the suspects, three of whom were later arrested.
In many ways, Dante Arthur was lucky. He lived. Nationwide, a police officer dies on duty nearly every other day. Too often a flag-draped casket is followed by miles of flashing red and blue lights. Even more officers are shot and wounded, too many fighting the war on drugs. The prohibition on drugs leads to unregulated, and often violent, public drug dealing. Perhaps counterintuitively, better police training and bigger guns are not the answer.
When it makes sense to deal drugs in public, a neighborhood becomes home to drug violence. For a low-level drug dealer, working the street means more money and fewer economic risks. If police come, and they will, some young kid will be left holding the bag while the dealer walks around the block. But if the dealer sells inside, one raid, by either police or robbers, can put him out of business for good. Only those virtually immune from arrests (much less imprisonment) -- college students, the wealthy and those who never buy or sell from strangers -- can deal indoors.
Six years ago one of us wrote a column on this page, "Victims of the War on Drugs." It discussed violence, poor community relations, overly aggressive policing and riots. It failed to mention one important harm: the drug war's clear and present danger toward men and women in blue.
ad_icon
Drug users generally aren't violent. Most simply want to be left alone to enjoy their high. It's the corner slinger who terrifies neighbors and invites rivals to attack. Public drug dealing creates an environment where disputes about money or respect are settled with guns.
In high-crime areas, police spend much of their time answering drug-related calls for service, clearing dealers off corners, responding to shootings and homicides, and making lots of drug-related arrests.
One of us (Franklin) was the commanding officer at the police academy when Arthur (as well as Moskos) graduated. We all learned similar lessons. Police officers are taught about the evils of the drug trade and given the knowledge and tools to inflict as much damage as possible upon the people who constitute the drug community. Policymakers tell us to fight this unwinnable war.
Only after years of witnessing the ineffectiveness of drug policies -- and the disproportionate impact the drug war has on young black men -- have we and other police officers begun to question the system.
Cities and states license beer and tobacco sellers to control where, when and to whom drugs are sold. Ending Prohibition saved lives because it took gangsters out of the game. Regulated alcohol doesn't work perfectly, but it works well enough. Prescription drugs are regulated, and while there is a huge problem with abuse, at least a system of distribution involving doctors and pharmacists works without violence and high-volume incarceration. Regulating drugs would work similarly: not a cure-all, but a vast improvement on the status quo.
Legalization would not create a drug free-for-all. In fact, regulation reins in the mess we already have. If prohibition decreased drug use and drug arrests acted as a deterrent, America would not lead the world in illegal drug use and incarceration for drug crimes.
Drug manufacturing and distribution is too dangerous to remain in the hands of unregulated criminals. Drug distribution needs to be the combined responsibility of doctors, the government, and a legal and regulated free market. This simple step would quickly eliminate the greatest threat of violence: street-corner drug dealing.
We simply urge the federal government to retreat. Let cities and states (and, while we're at it, other countries) decide their own drug policies. Many would continue prohibition, but some would try something new. California and its medical marijuana dispensaries provide a good working example, warts and all, that legalized drug distribution does not cause the sky to fall.
Having fought the war on drugs, we know that ending the drug war is the right thing to do -- for all of us, especially taxpayers. While the financial benefits of drug legalization are not our main concern, they are substantial. In a July referendum, Oakland, Calif., voted to tax drug sales by a 4-to-1 margin. Harvard economist Jeffrey Miron estimates that ending the drug war would save $44 billion annually, with taxes bringing in an additional $33 billion.
Without the drug war, America's most decimated neighborhoods would have a chance to recover. Working people could sit on stoops, misguided youths wouldn't look up to criminals as role models, our overflowing prisons could hold real criminals, and -- most important to us -- more police officers wouldn't have to die.
Peter Moskos is a professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice and the author of "Cop in the Hood." Neill Franklin is a 32-year law enforcement veteran. Both served as Baltimore City police officers and are members of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition. Less..
Added: Aug 17 2009 In: news_politics,education
By: SouthParkIndie 
- Views: 1596 |
- Votes: 1 |
- Recommendations: 0 |
- Comments: 24
Comments - sort by newest to oldest
Government should have no say what we do to our own bodies. The war on drugs killed more people than the drugs themselves.
Posted Aug-17-2009 by "hlabrake" (R)
Somehow, I doubt that. Ever seen the homeless, destitute, and the prostitutes on the streets? Not to mention the unseen families and loved ones whose lives are destroyed by drugs.
Not because drugs are illegal - but because the drugs themselves are poisons that destroy lives.
I could maybe, maybe get behind legalizing pot. If it's legal to get shitfaced on booze, I say losers should be free to intoxicate themselves with weed too.
But how can a case be made to legalize junk like cocaine, opiates, or speed?
Posted Aug-17-2009 by "Exterminator_88" (B)
Somehow, I doubt that. Ever seen the homeless, destitute, and the prostitutes on the streets? Not to mention the unseen families and loved ones whose lives are destroyed by drugs.
Not because drugs are illegal - but because the drugs themselves are poisons that destroy lives.
I could maybe, maybe get behind legalizing pot. If it's legal to get shitfaced on booze, I say losers should be free to intoxicate themselves with weed too.
But how can a case be made to legalize junk like cocaine, opiates, or speed?
Why not give the British system a try? The British realized long ago that they could not and would not be able to control illegal drugs at all, unless they at least DECRIMINALIZED them first. I dont know all the details but i know the losers are free to get hammered without hurting other people to get their high.
Posted Aug-17-2009 by "Beinrich_Bimmler" (R)
Somehow, I doubt that. Ever seen the homeless, destitute, and the prostitutes on the streets? Not to mention the unseen families and loved ones whose lives are destroyed by drugs.
Not because drugs are illegal - but because the drugs themselves are poisons that destroy lives.
I could maybe, maybe get behind legalizing pot. If it's legal to get shitfaced on booze, I say losers should be free to intoxicate themselves with weed too.
But how can a case be made to legalize junk like cocaine, opiates, or speed?
Why not give the British system a try? The British realized long ago that they could not and would not be able to control illegal drugs at all, unless they at least DECRIMINALIZED them first. I dont know all the details but i know the losers are free to get hammered without hurting other people to get their high.
wrong it is punishable by 5 years in prison
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/drugs/drugs-law/cannabis-reclassification/
Posted Aug-17-2009 by "Sadistikal" (R)
Somehow, I doubt that. Ever seen the homeless, destitute, and the prostitutes on the streets? Not to mention the unseen families and loved ones whose lives are destroyed by drugs.
Not because drugs are illegal - but because the drugs themselves are poisons that destroy lives.
I could maybe, maybe get behind legalizing pot. If it's legal to get shitfaced on booze, I say losers should be free to intoxicate themselves with weed too.
But how can a case be made to legalize junk like cocaine, opiates, or speed?
THe feds can't even keep drugs out of their tightly controlled prisons and they expect to keep it from an open society? Get real dude, why not take the money and power from drug lords and stop the killing?
What many don't understand is that people who do heroin, crack and what not are going to do them if its illegal or not.
Posted Aug-17-2009 by "Chained" (R)
The vast majority of the street drugs consumed in the US are imported from Mexico. We need to at least legalize weed, and reduce the demand for Mexican brick. It is no exaggeration to say that men, women and children are killed by cartels just over weed business.
Posted Aug-17-2009 by "Small_axe" (R)
I think the gov't should only stick to regulating dangerous chemicals.
Posted Aug-17-2009 by "bro77dog" (R)
Its not that everyone will take drugs like not everyone drinks. Most people who can drink drink moderately. The same with drug use. Most would take it moderately. If you have a problem with drugs or drinking there is always rehab. Legalize everything.
Posted Aug-17-2009 by "freedomcalls" (R)
yea baby
Posted Aug-17-2009 by "leakinghole" (R)
Somehow, I doubt that. Ever seen the homeless, destitute, and the prostitutes on the streets? Not to mention the unseen families and loved ones whose lives are destroyed by drugs.
Not because drugs are illegal - but because the drugs themselves are poisons that destroy lives.
I could maybe, maybe get behind legalizing pot. If it's legal to get shitfaced on booze, I say losers should be free to intoxicate themselves with weed too.
But how can a case be made to legalize junk like cocaine, opiates, or speed?
Is that you smirky?
That was a reasonable response...nice!
Peace!!
Posted Aug-17-2009 by "nattyroots" (R)
Somehow, I doubt that. Ever seen the homeless, destitute, and the prostitutes on the streets? Not to mention the unseen families and loved ones whose lives are destroyed by drugs.
Not because drugs are illegal - but because the drugs themselves are poisons that destroy lives.
I could maybe, maybe get behind legalizing pot. If it's legal to get shitfaced on booze, I say losers should be free to intoxicate themselves with weed too.
But how can a case be made to legalize junk like cocaine, opiates, or speed?
Is that you smirky?
That was a reasonable response...nice!
Peace!!
Sup Buddy?
Posted Aug-17-2009 by "Exterminator_88" (B)
I for one refuse to smoke that shitty dirt weed from Mexico. The best weed in the US comes from the US, and sometimes from Canada too. Legalizing weed in the US would deal a crippling blow to the blood thirty Mexican cartels and improve our available domestic product at the same time, all the while driving prices and profits down for the dealers, less profit = less crime. So I am all for the re-legalization of the soothing herb.
"Make the most of the hemp seed, sow it everywhere"
-George Washington
Posted Aug-17-2009 by "BenFranklin420" (R)
Yeah sure legalize being a criminal.
Posted Aug-17-2009 by "Cheerio" (R)
The answer is NOT to legalise drugs. It is to take the control of drugs away from criminals.
I believe that it would be cost efficient to supply registered addicts their drug of choice totally free of charge. The savings in health care and crime investigating by supplying free ckean drugs would more than cover the actual cost of the drugs themselves.
It is not the drugs that are the problem it is the way they are sold. If criminals had control of the supply of water we would all be breaking the law to acquire the money to pay ridiculous prices for water not fit to drink.
Posted Aug-17-2009 by "fr33thinker" (R)
Somehow, I doubt that. Ever seen the homeless, destitute, and the prostitutes on the streets? Not to mention the unseen families and loved ones whose lives are destroyed by drugs.
Not because drugs are illegal - but because the drugs themselves are poisons that destroy lives.
I could maybe, maybe get behind legalizing pot. If it's legal to get shitfaced on booze, I say losers should be free to intoxicate themselves with weed too.
But how can a case be made to legalize junk like cocaine, opiates, or speed?
I know all about that but that is not the drugs fault it is the persons using them fault. If drugs were legalized would you go out and stick a needle in your arm or snort coke, probably not am I right. It all comes down to personal responsibility. People are using drugs and they dont care if there legal or not. How many more years of a failed policy do we have to see before we say ok this isnt working. Thousands of people a year are murdered because of the prohibition of illegal drugs. Cartels are making billions off of us, instead why not legalize it and tax it.
Posted Aug-18-2009 by "hlabrake" (R)