CE Week #14: “Booze or Drugs, Prohibition Makes No Sense”
December 04, 2008
By Froma Harrop
WASHINGTON, D.C. — America ended Prohibition 75 years ago this week. The ban on the sale of alcohol unleashed a crime wave, as gangsters fought over the illicit booze trade. It sure didn’t stop drinking. People turned to speakeasies and bathtub gin for their daily cocktail.
Prohibition — and the violence, corruption and health hazards that followed — lives on in its modern version, the so-called War on Drugs. Former law-enforcement officers gathered in Washington to draw the parallels. Their group, Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP), has called for nothing less than the legalization of drugs.
And before you say, “We can’t do that,” hear the officers out. They have an answer for every objection.
Doesn’t the War on Drugs take narcotics off the street, raising their price beyond most Americans’ means?
Obviously not. The retail price of cocaine is now about half what it was in 1990. When the value of something goes up, more people go into the business.
In some Dallas junior high schools, kids can buy two hits of “cheese” — a mix of Tylenol PM and heroin — for $5, Terry Nelson, a former U.S. Customs and Border Patrol officer, told me. Lunch costs more.
Wouldn’t legalizing drugs create new users? Not necessarily. LEAP wants drugs to be regulated like alcohol and cigarettes. Regulations are why it’s harder to buy alcohol or cigarettes in many schoolyards than drugs. By regulating the purity and strength of drugs, they become less deadly.
Isn’t drug addiction a scourge that tears families apart? Yes, it is, and so are arrests and incarceration and criminal records for kids caught smoking pot behind the bleachers. There are 2.1 million people in federal, state and local prisons, 1.7 million of them for non-violent drug offenses.
Removing the stigma of drug use lets addicts come out into the open for treatment. We have treatments for alcoholism, but we don’t ban alcohol.
LEAP’s members want to legalize drugs because they’re tired of being shot at in a war they can’t win. They’re tired of making new business for dealers every time they arrest a competitor. They are tired of busting people in the streets of America’s cities over an ounce of cocaine, while the Andean region produces over 1,000 tons of it a year. They’re tired of enriching terrorists.
“In 2009, the violence of al-Qaida will be financed by drug profits,” said Eric Sterling, head of the Criminal Justice Policy Foundation, which joined the call for legalization. As counsel to the House Judiciary Committee in the 1980s, Sterling helped write the anti-drug laws he now opposes.
Harvard economist Jeffrey Miron estimates that legalizing drugs would save federal, state and local governments $44 billion in enforcement costs. Governments could collect another $33 billion in revenues were they to tax drugs as heavily as alcohol and tobacco.
No one here likes drugs or advocates putting heroin on store shelves alongside ibuprofen and dental floss. Each state or county could set its own rules on who could buy which drugs and where and taxes levied — as they now do with alcohol.
What about taking gradual steps — say, starting with marijuana. And couldn’t we first try decriminalization — leaving users alone but still arresting dealers? Those were my questions.
The LEAP people want the laws gone, period. “We’re whole hog on it,” Nelson said. Keeping the sale of drugs illegal, he said, “doesn’t take the cartels out of it.”
Ending this “war” won’t be easy. Too many police, drug agents, bureaucrats, lawyers, judges, prison guards and sprayers of poppy fields have a stake in it. But Prohibition was repealed once. Perhaps it can happen again.
I think that this article brings up some good points. I have always wondered why they couldn’t legalize some drugs. In fact, I am surprised that it hasn’t happened yet. Not only would a lot more legal jobs be created and new enterprises established, but there would also be so much money coming into the government from the taxes on the new products. Although I think that this could be a good idea, I do not believe that illicit drugs will ever be legalized in the United States. I don’t think its because of a money issue, because I am sure that the government realizes how much money they could make with the legalization of drugs, but rather it is a moral and cultural issue that will never be changed. People have grown up learning that drugs are bad, and that only bad people do drugs, and that they are terrible things. That is why people will never want to legalize drugs; they are scared of them. The only people who would support legalizing them would be police officers, users, and entrepreneurs who hope to make a profit off of the trade. “The violence of al-Qaida will be financed by drug profits” is a phrase that probably could rally support from the public, but I do not believe that it would ever be enough.
Connection: Part of the reason that drugs would not be legalized is because of the reputation that surrounds drugs from the media (tv shows, movies, etc). If the media bias was turned around to support the use of drugs as long as they were legal, perhaps the perception of drugs would change too.
I have to admit, I have never looked at the drug issue in this light before. I have to agree that this sounds like a great idea! For a group, LEAP in this case, to try to make a bad situation better is as good as it is going to get. I’m my experiences with peers etc., I have found that things are no longer as popular or fun when they are legal. It’s just like when people don’t wear their seatbelts at night because they like getting away with it and they feel as if they are ’sticking it to the man.’ As absurd as this may sound, I have reason to believe it is completely legitimate. Yes drugs are bad, no we will never be able to completely abolish them. Marijuana for instance, I know way more people who smoke weed than those who drink alcohol. They both are illegal at our age, but the punishment is about the same. During this time of economic trouble I would think that the government would be happy to hear that they can actually make money (“Governments could collect another $33 billion in revenues were they to tax drugs as heavily as alcohol and tobacco.”). Another positive aspect of this idea is the fact that if legalizing of currently illegal drugs was passed, the al-Qaida loses much of its money and gives the U.S. an advantage over them.
Connection:
We talked in class of the 2004 election. In this election John Kerry voted one way and said something completely different. Eric Sterling, head of the Criminal Justice Policy Foundation, who had in the 1980’s help right anti-drug laws now feels that they need to be legalized. These two men both changed the way they voted or things they said. The difference is that Sterling realized that those anti-drug laws didn’t help anything; Kerry just wanted to make himself look better in front of some veterans.
I think that this is kind of ridiculous. Legalize drugs? Come on. LEAP is saying that it is a good idea because they think it will help drug users to be more open to getting treatment and help… would anyone honestly do that? If someone was using marijuana and it became more acceptable, wouldn’t they do it more? That is the way I see it. Although I agree with the catch the dealers not users thing, using drugs is still way to risky of a subject to take lightly. Cigarettes will kill you, yes. However, if you smoke a cigarette and then get behind the wheel of a car, are you in any way impaired? No. Doing this with legalized marijuana, you’d be more prone to hurt yourself or others. The bottom line is, people are going to do things whether they are illegal or not, if they really want to do them. And they are REALLY going to do things if they are legal and they want to do them. We need to keep illegal drugs illegal, and hopefully make advancements in keeping everyone, especially America’s youth, safe.
CONNECTION:
This can be related to public opinion. The opinion of some law enforcement officers has morphed into a group, LEAP of people who want change. They want to see this happen, they want new laws being made and action to be taken. The members of LEAP have made a very courageous “leap” in the fact that they are trying to get this enacted into law. They might even get lobbyists or supporters to help reach their point out to the public.
If prohibition still existed, would we have as many alcoholics? I believe so. It would probably be worse!! People get thrills out of doing illegal things; it makes it that much better. It is the same concept with drugs. I believe that if drugs were regulated like alcohol and cigarettes, less young people would do them. “By regulating the purity and strength of drugs, they become less deadly.” That is very true! If the drugs were sold behind counters, the law could make them not as harmful and then drugs might not be AS BAD.
Most kids try drugs just because it is illegal and they enjoy the feeling of “being bad.” However, there are those certain underage people who manage to get their hands on illegal substances and sell them. Therefore it would only reduce underage use, not prevent it.
If anything, legalizing drugs would only benefit the government because they could put a tax on them just like cigarettes and alcohol. I don’t understand why everybody says that marijuana is a gate way drug. So is caffeine and nicotine, and those are not illegal. LEAP wants to take gradual steps toward legalizing drugs, and I believe it could help reduce the number of children doing illegal drugs.
CONNECTION: Interest groups. LEAP is an interest group and is fighting for what they believe. LEAP may not fund any candidates, but they go straight to the government. They are using litigation to get themselves heard. Who knows if they will win this war?
A lot of the arguments made by LEAP are logical. However, I still don’t think legalizing drugs would be a good thing. If this truly would save the local governments $44 billion the idea is appealing. The $33 billion in revenue just seems like an immoral argument. We can’t legalize drugs to boost the economy. But, it would, I think, spiral out of control. The image would become that drugs are OK, and it would ruin the hard work that education systems in schools have worked so for. Even if we just started with legalizing marijuana other drugs will follow. Our economy will become so independent on the drug market, just like the tobacco industry. Also, I don’t think that you could compare this to prohibition because alcohol was legal before it was prohibited in the 18th amendment. That is why all the riots happened. Besides alcohol is more socially acceptable than drugs. Legalizing drugs would not make it harder for underage people to get them just because of the regulations. Why do people under 21 still get alcohol frequently?
connection: I would like to link this to the iron triangle discussion we had in class. Think about it. If drugs were legalized we would become independent on it like we are the tobacco industry. The interest groups subborting drugs would have a lot of money and support congressment with their ideal and so on.
In America today, drugs are a major issue, but they do have their place. Lets face it, in America “money is the motivation” (Lil’ Wayne), everyone wants part of the multibillion dollar corporation that is the drug business. People from lower-class backgrounds do not always have the best opportunities, whether it is because of their position economically or because of a continuum mentality, see this business as an enticing opportunity that they can take advantage of. “They’re tired of making new business for dealers every time they arrest a competitor”. There will always be people willing to take this rout to “success”. Legalizing drugs may, or may not have positive social effects. People may be able to openly get treatment like they do for alcohol; maybe our economy will share some of the drug revenues with the Columbians and Middle-Easterners. (Maybe in the next five years or so, we will see a Wal-Mart brand “dub sack”, or “Sam’s Choice Cocaine”. Kautzman, feel free to delete this in the parentheses if you think it is inappropriate). But, adversely, the ability to regulate most drugs is not there. People might still try and make a profit by producing the drugs themselves and undercutting the industry. Also, I would like to know, what would the purity of drugs like cocaine and ecstasy be if it were regulated? Because what verifies a “safe” concentration? And if people wanted a more concentrated dose, could they not still manufacture it themselves? This is a very touchy subject.
With saying that, I am a proponent of keeping illegal drugs illegal. Families are truly torn apart by drugs, and I do not think that legalization of “hard” drugs would help this cause. Being deprived of family is tough, and should not be taken lightly. It is best to leave the law the way it is, from a social point of view, and if you value the projected 77 billion dollar swing in the economy over family (which hopefully nobody does), you are a sick person.
Connection: Obviously, the prohibition of alcohol. In the days of the prohibition, families like the Kennedy’s made fortunes off of illegally bootlegging alcohol. People maintained drinking alcohol regardless of the law, but did so in less open and more dangerous ways. If we open up the drug industry, and find out that there are negative effects, we may not be able to revert back to the amount of safety and laws that we have now. This could be an irreversible decision, and we all saw how well the prohibition worked after alcohol had been legal.
This is a very interesting article. Alcohol and drugs do have some similarities, like their variety, potency, and their wide use for recreation. They both are also the source of “…addiction a scourge that tears families apart”. If it was difficult for people to get a hold of the drugs then I would be against the legalization of them, but it isn’t difficult for people to get drugs. With all the anti-drug and anti-alcohol media that is around today in the news and our schools people know the risks and effects of these substances. Ignoring the facts and taking the risks is the people’s choice. And if “legalizing drugs would save federal, state and local governments $44 billion in enforcement costs” and “Governments could collect another $33 billion in revenues were they to tax drugs as heavily as alcohol”, I think this would be worth trying. I have no strong feeling either way on this decision, but with our current economy it can not be denied how much help the extra funds would be. And the chance that legalizing the drugs will encourage people to come out with their problem and get help more freely for themselves is a bonus as well.
Connection: This group is an Interest group trying to get its opinion heard. It gives many reason for why they think that drugs should be legalized, like generating money and possibly getting people to seek help.
In Response all those who are in favor of legalizing drugs,
I must say I disagree with your point of view. It is true that legalizing drugs would have its benefits and maybe it could help our economy, but at what expense. Do we really wnat to take such a large risk just so the government can make more money. Money that could possibly go to bailout irresponsible corportations. (Sorry I digress.)
LEAP says that if drug addicts could openly get help, the number of users would go down. That is not necessarily true. Drug addicts and people who are drawn to doing drugs aren’t going to stop just because it is legal. Young people will probably still have the thought that they think it is “cool”.
A few people commented that maybe the number of young people doing drugs would decrease if drugs were legalized because it would no longer be illegal; therefore kids would stop doing them because it wouldn’t be “bad”. Drugs aren’t going to be legalized for children under 18 or even 21. It is just like alcohol. The solution of legalizing drugs won’t stop this problem.
As far as dose control goes, I agree with Cyle. If people want to use stronger doses they will just make the drugs themselves. It isn’t going to stop the dealing problem. In fact if drugs were legalized and sold by controlled doses the number of drug dealers may increase (buy the drugs over the counter, make stronger doses, sell for a high profit).
In Response to Tommy Uran:
I have to disagree completely. I understand that legalizing drugs; such as, marijuana would bring more money to the government, but why can’t they do it in a different way? Drug abuse is a tremendous problem in our society, especially in our schools. Teenagers, as well as adults, are going to smoke marijuana whether it’s legal or not. From experience, my brother started out with marijuana and when it didn’t give him the same effect he moved to other drugs like cocaine and meth. His whole life spiraled and all he thought about was the next hit he was going to take. My brother chose drugs over our family and got into some big trouble. Fortunately, he is getting his life together, but three years of his life were gone because of drugs. When you have an addiction, it’s so difficult to quit. Legalizing these drugs would just encourage more teenagers to do it and ultimately end them in the direction my brother took. The effect goes greater than the victim; family and friends are effected as well. I also, believe that this law will never be passed because too many Americans would be against it. I don’t think the government’s morals should be compromised in this sense for some money.
In response to Cyle:
I agree with what you are saying. On paper legalizing drugs and selling them at “safe” concentrations sounds great, what with the $33 billion in revenues from taxes and a savings of $44 billion in law enforcement who wouldn’t want to enact this plan right away? What you’re saying, along with most other people, is that the economy boost wouldn’t be worth the increase in drug use in our country. It would be projecting an image that the US can’t afford for groups like al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations to see, for them to see a weak spot in our society is basically an invitation for some form of terror attack.
I also agree with your thoughts on how greatly the strength of the drugs would have to be reduced to be considered “safe” by the government, the users would not see the point in buying weak drugs that are so heavily taxed when we all know that their dealer would still have his connections and be getting “the good stuff” that he or she could buy for a comparable price and since most druggies aren’t generally big on government anyways its just an added bonus that they’re acing the government out of their tax dollars.
In the end, I agree, on paper legalizing drugs would make sense to clear out the prisons and make room for the real criminals, the Joseph Duncans and Kevin Coes of this world, but really it wouldn’t be the best thing to do because it would create so many more problems.
In Response to Makayla Sander:
I have to agree with you for the most part. There would be a large economic benefit, and many new jobs would be created in the drug business. The only problem is that some of the more “sketchy” drugs will hook you for life. I could understand if marijuana was legalized, they might as well; about 90% of the people I know have either smoked it or experimented with it. You can’t ban something as popular as that. Look at the prohibition, all it did was make consumption explode, partly because it was still in effect at the beginning of the depression, and secondly nothing makes you want to do something more than when you say you can’t. Look at all the negative effects too, gangs exploded. The same thing has happened with the drug trade, particularly cocaine. However, even if gang activity continues I still believe hard drugs should remain illegal. The only people who are dying are users, and gang-bangers who kill each other, and lets face it, they are not exactly the salt of the earth. I noticed some people wrote, “Drug addiction is not the user’s fault.” Well whose fault is it then? They are the ones who tried them, and socio-economic background is no excuse. It’s not like the drug dealers are sneaking up behind them, injecting them with heroine and running away laughing and screaming, “I got you I got you!” When it’s about legalizing marijuana I say why not, but that’s where I draw the line.
In response to Makayla Sander,
I completely agree with you when you advocated LEAP’s position in legalzing drugs but didn’t think that there would be enough support to get off the ground. Because our society has been taught that drugs are bad and because we have had this menatality ingrained in us as early as elementary school, it’s going to take a lot more than just one interest group’s ideas to sway our opinion. However, I think LEAP has some fundamental legitimate points. I believe that we should start this process cautiously, in legalizing a few smaller drugs and ultimately leaving it up to the state’s discretion where to legalize it. If we start all at once with selling marijuana in every Walmart, we will have a flood of drug dealers all trying to stock up and we will have lost all of the hard work we have tried these past years to educate that drug dealing is against the law. But if we can start slowly legalizing drugs while also oontinuing to educate our children against drugs, maybe we will see a decline in using drugs just because it’s a “cool” illegal thing to do. But at this point, all I can say is LEAP will still have a lot of battling to do and a lot of opinions to overcome.
In Response to Kellie Hensley:
I don’t think this idea is as ridiculous as you make it out to be. “LEAP is saying that it is a good idea because they think it will help drug users to be more open to getting treatment and help… would anyone honestly do that?” I think you missed the point here. Its not that drug users will be more open. It’s the fact that most drug users buy their drugs illegally and behind closed doors. What LEAP is saying is that by legalizing drugs other people can see who drug users are. Most people who know drug users want them to go get help. By legalizing drugs you can let other people persuade drug users to go get help.
“The bottom line is, people are going to do things whether they are illegal or not, if they really want to do them.” I think you are right here. People are going to do things whether they are illegal or not. However, when things aren’t illegal, they lose their appeal. I know some people that do things just because it’s illegal. By making drugs legal, you weed out the people who just are doing drugs because they are illegal.
LEAP’s arguments are pretty sound but I think this is too emotional of an issue to be trying to legalize drugs just yet. Kellie, your response is evidence of this and even though it may seem like a good idea, I don’t think the general public would be able to accept the legalization of drugs.
In response to Kellie Hensley
I do not agree with your point that we should not legalize marijuana because you become more prone to crash your car while using, isn’t that exactly the same thing that happens when people drink and drive? Wow, that’s weird, and the last time I checked alcohol was legal. The way I looked at the situation wasn’t that drugs are bad; everybody knows that, there is no real solution to the drug epidemic, just ways to try and defuse some of the effects. Keeping American youth is very important, that’s why alcohol and cigarettes are illegal to youth. The youth still smokes and drinks but it is illegal. More important than sheltering Americas youth, is making a better world for tomorrow, cliché I know. Millions and millions of our nation’s dollars are going to pay for the care of drug dealers and users; we call it jail and prison. Putting these people in jail doesn’t do anything except drain our pockets. If Americas youth was really that important to you than you would probably realize that our economy is number one, why would we want to spend all our money on people who aren’t helping it. Giving the al-Qaida money to attack us isn’t really protecting the youth of this country either.