Slashdot Mirror
The Technology of Drug Prohibition
ches_grin writes "Although the GWOT gets all the headlines, technology is proving to be the key factor in the 'war on drugs'. This article and slideshow take a look at the current state-of-the-art for both federal agents and drug traffickers, from greenhouses to Predator drones: 'In the pitched battle surrounding illegal drugs, each side has its advantages. Law enforcement can take advantage of private sector expertise, expensive machines, and, of course, the law. Those who cultivate, manufacture, and smuggle illegal drugs can leverage vast sums of cash, generated by constant demand.'"
"Prohibition goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation and makes crimes out of things that are not crimes. A prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded."
-- Abraham Lincoln
Evidence of this today in the article summary:
"Those who cultivate, manufacture, and smuggle illegal drugs can leverage vast sums of cash, generated by constant demand."
The war on drugs is a guise to control people and to actively have racial crimes on the books.
What negatively affects me the most about the "war on drugs" is that it essentially makes having mental illness a crime. Many, if not most, people with mental illnesses get addicted to drugs and alcohol because of their mental illness, and trying to quit because of legal reasons with little to no medical attention is next to impossible. Next time you see the wino-street-drunk, odds are he just needs medical attention, but you and the government would prefer him to just be "off the street" and out of our sight. I know one of these guys who happened to get medical help, and he is pretty cool. He used to be a "garden variety street drunk" who would badger people, spit when he talked, and all of that. And today he is better not because of going to jail and being punished, but by being helped.
Money and control of money. Alcohol takes some equipment and knowledge to make and a way to distribute it to your end user. Marijuana is a weed. Anyone can grow it anywhere so no distribution channel. Which one is easier to control and make money from?
Do not taunt Happy-Fun Ball
The thing is that the "war on drugs" has become such a profit driven thing by our government that they cannot legalize it anymore because it would kill their bottom line
No it wouldn't, because they could tax drug sales. The reasoning to legalize them is still you have the RIGHT to do with your body what you want, but that doesn't mean the government still couldn't tax them.
Netherlands taxation is average for Europe: corporate income tax 29.60%, individual income tax 0-52%, VAT 19%. And the homeless are largely coming from Eastern Europe because begging in the 16th greatest economy in the world (with just 16.3 million people) pays a lot better than it does in Romania.
The experiment with drug politics has turned out to be quite successful. Or at least it showed that controlled sale of marijuana doesn't trigger the end of the world. Other parts of Europe (especially Belgium and Switzerland) have already taken steps into the same direction.
blow your mind already
(This post is where my signature will make its debut of relevancy)
The pharmaceutical industry would take a huge hit when happy-pills and antinauseals take a falling out due to their replacement. Marijuana is INCREDIBLY good for clinical depression (in my experience). Also, the most "dangerous" thing about marijuana in the eyes of those in power is that the limits on it cannot be strictly defined. How much does it take to impair your driving? Depends on how big you are. How much does it take to overdose? For an average-weight individual, there's a higher chance you'll die from asphyxiation due to the amount of smoke you're inhaling than from THC overdose.
So what's happened since Marijuana's been illegal? Canadian growers have developed a method of growing Marijuana with many times the THC content as is found naturally. Cue Hydro's domination of the college and corporate market.
+5, Truth
The history of the prohibition of drugs is the history of shitting on blacks and mexicans. As I have repeatedly stated here and in other locations, the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 utilized the interstate commerce clause of the constitution in order to allow the federal government to "regulate" the sale of marijuana, which it does by requiring federal tax stamps for the sale of any of the stuff. Of course, actually getting the stamps was not possible.
The point was twofold, and both sides were economical. First, hemp was a threat to the paper and plastic industries. Second, blacks and mexicans were competing with white people for jobs during the depression. The solution? Demonize them so no one will hire them. The plan? Paint them as users of marijuana and then paint marijuana as a dirty drug that caused antisocial behavior. The plan came off swimmingly.
Today, the real issue is all the revenue that creates all those jobs; plus, the more money is moved around, the more of it can be siphoned off into the pocketbooks of the powerful. Well, that and that the government keeps us from boiling over by separating us from one another. They have nothing to fear so much as people getting together and ignoring their differences, which will give them time to gang up on the feds.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
"I believe that the cost of marijuana if legal would not significantly change. The same for cocaine as well."
Considering that during prohibition alcohol sold for 10 to 20 times it's value when it was legal (and was often of questionable quality), I think drugs would cost significantly less. The fact that they are illegal, and people will still do almost anything to get them, is what deterimines the price. You can't compare prices from years ago to current - they were still as illegal then as they are now. You used to be able to buy cocaine in pharmacies (until the Harrison Tax Act) for literally pennies when it was legal.
"But this one goes to 11!"
It showed that as long as the rats have good living conditions and aren't cramped in tiny little cages, they have no will to use drugs. Even drugs that are highly addictive like morphine. Rats that were in those tiny cages that showed the behavior you mentioned weened themselves off once introduced to better living conditions.
Bullish Machine Tzar
Well, first off...not all drugs are addictive. Second, I think most numbers show that in places where there has been decriminalization, while there might have been an initial spike in users and first time users....these leveled off, and not everyone used drugs.
Think about it now...alcohol, which in some can be addictive..is legal. But, not everyone drinks, and certainly, not everyone is irresponsible with alcohol consumption. Why should it be any different with something say, pot, which hasn't ever been shown to be physically addictive?
"Human beings are sadly not much better then rats. Some of us too will happily do drugs while we rot away. Yes this is freedom, but society as a whole for now has chosen too put restraints on personal freedom. It is the simple thing of suicide being a crime. A truly free society would have no such ban. Yet again, do you totally trust a society that does not mind if say population group X killed itself?"
Well, you know...people can get hooked on anything, there are people out there that gamble too much, I'm sure that there is someone out there that like to knit so much, they let the rest of their life waste away...people will do it with anything. But, why punish those who can handle things in an adult manner just because some people are weak? Ever hear of survival of the fittest? Heck, by saving people from themselves, we may be in fact working against nature, which would have allowed these people to take themselves out of the gene pool.
I think occasionally, the gene pool NEEDS a little chlorine. And as for suicide...what is more personal that your own life? If you are suffering, should you not be allowed to choose what to do with the "1" thing that you truly own in life...your own life? What right do I have to tell you that quantity of life is more important than quality of life?
Go spend some time in the onc ward of your local hospital for awhile...and see if you don't change your mind a little...
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
While the use of drugs is indeed a personal freedom issue the simple obstacle for me is that I would not exactly like a world were the majority of citizens are doped out.
Sorry fella, you already live in such a society. Unless you live in an Islamic theocracy, that vast majority of the people around you have easy access to mood enhancing drugs and use said drugs regularly. It is called alcohol. You can call it ethyl alcohol if that name makes it sound more like a "real" drug.
Alcohol is as much of a drug as any other drug. In fact, on the scale of drugs, it is probably one of the worst. It is absolutely lethal if you over dose, it is damaging to your body in low doses, it induces aggression in many people, and it destroys sound judgment. The only thing that keeps alcohol related deaths down compared to some drugs is that alcohol is made in a nice clean factory instead of some sketchy drug dealer's basement. If alcohol was made the same way illegal drugs are made (as it was during prohibition) you would find all the same problems that current illegal drug face in terms of purity and safety.
What would happen if the government legalized all drugs? Crime would plummet, police would have significantly more time to pursue real crimes, the prisons would empty, criminal organization would suddenly find that they are completely incapable of funding criminal activities, a handful of South American nation would become significantly more stable, and the number of drug related deaths would plummet. Drugs would be made in sanitary controlled ways by pharmaceutical companies and they would merrily compete to make the best non-addictive drug possible with the fewest side effects.
As to how society would change, other then a dramatic drop in crime and massive budget surpluses from the resulting savings in law enforcement, nothing much would change. People would still take drugs to recreate, they just might throw in some other drugs into the mix besides alcohol and caffeine. You would still get fired if you went to work, and alcoholics / drug addicts would still find themselves fucked when it comes to holding down a job. In other words, very little would change except a dramatic reduction in crime and government spending.