Druggies Beware

[snoopy369]

I think there's a vast gulf between "we should consider not incarcerating people for minor drug offenses" and "we should be okay with a guy taking 20 pounds of pot anywhere". The unsaid problem here is that these people are largely going to be involved in crime *anyway* - they're doing what they're doing because of a combination of culture, lack of opportunity, and ease of access. Okay, stop locking them up for drug offenses. What happens? You lock the *same* people up for burglaries or gang violence or whatnot. The problem isn't drugs; the problem is the lack of opportunity in the inner cities that leads to the involvement in organized crime/gangs and then drugs. Improve education, figure out how to mobilize entire cities to fix the cultural issues (ie, the fact that being in a gang and participating in this is 'cool'), figure out how to make sure there are plenty of good job prospects for folks in the inner city that aren't just working at McDs. Fix *that* problem. (And stop locking people up for minor drug offenses. That's dumb.)

[notyoueither]

Well congratulations, he's spending his twenties in federal prison, costing the public hundreds of thousands of dollars and not doing anything remotely productive.

Good!

The guy is a participant in organized crime. He didn't just grow some plants in his place for himself and friends.

Meanwhile, some other guys inevitably took his place in the market, so it's not like this is preventing any illegal activity. I'm sure that to you this makes a whole heck of a lot of sense, but to me it looks like a huge waste.

So what? Let's not prosecute people who work in and with the mafia because there'll just be more of them later?

Yes, it's a waste to treat drugs the way we have.

No, it is not a waste to throw the book at people who join organizations that use murder and mayhem to settle their scores.

[MRT144]

I think there's a vast gulf between "we should consider not incarcerating people for minor drug offenses" and "we should be okay with a guy taking 20 pounds of pot anywhere". The unsaid problem here is that these people are largely going to be involved in crime *anyway* - they're doing what they're doing because of a combination of culture, lack of opportunity, and ease of access. Okay, stop locking them up for drug offenses. What happens? You lock the *same* people up for burglaries or gang violence or whatnot. The problem isn't drugs; the problem is the lack of opportunity in the inner cities that leads to the involvement in organized crime/gangs and then drugs. Improve education, figure out how to mobilize entire cities to fix the cultural issues (ie, the fact that being in a gang and participating in this is 'cool'), figure out how to make sure there are plenty of good job prospects for folks in the inner city that aren't just working at McDs. Fix *that* problem. (And stop locking people up for minor drug offenses. That's dumb.)

Explain why 20 ounces makes you more comfortable than 20 lbs given that any time in the supply chain of pot, there is likely to be 20 lbs floating out there somewhere waiting to be broken down into 20 ounce amounts. Volume or quantity is a terrible basis for morality.

[MRT144]

Driving 20 pounds across the country is not a couple of plants in your apartment.

If I grew 20 lbs of pot and drove it across country how am I contributing to organized crime. Explain the mechanic.

[snoopy369]

Boris said 2 ounces, not 20. Possession w/intent is based on quantity usually; if you have significantly more than you reasonably could use for yourself, you're likely distributing.

The laws don't really differentiate between "You are selling 20 lbs of your own stuff" and "You are selling 20 lbs of the mob's stuff", in part because that's not really a distinction the law can or should make. Don't sell 20 lbs of your own stuff either. Don't sell any at all, would be better.

Again, this is being capable of differentiating between "The laws probably should be like X" and "The laws right now are like X". A lot of people agree that MJ probably shouldn't be illegal. I'm not sure I'm one of them (in large part I just don't care as it doesn't affect me), but at least I'd like to change how the laws work relating to it. But that doesn't mean we have to agree that jailing people for being a part of the crime syndicate that distributes it is a bad thing. I don't want to stop jailing people for distribution; I want to stop people feeling like they have to join the gangs and distribute.

[notyoueither]

If I grew 20 lbs of pot and drove it across country how am I contributing to organized crime. Explain the mechanic.

Your question is nonsensical. Why would you drive your own pot across country?

The obvious inference is that 20lb guy was a mule for trafficing, especially since he did it regularly.

[Fake Boris]

This discussion is pointless.

It shouldn't be any more illegal to distribute weed, than it is to distribute alcohol.

Anyone who claims otherwise is a scumbag apologist.

[The Mad Monk]

Moonshine is illegal.

[MRT144]

Moonshine is illegal.

As is importation of young cheeses made with unpasteurized milk. Laws are not based on cogent morality or harm reduction ideal. they're a patchwork of prevailing opinions of the time.

As such, I still dont get why people want to punish someone for drug trafficking when by and large they agree that the drug they were trafficking isn't that bad and that the by products of the illegal status of pot causes trafficking.

What does punishing a mule do?

Certainly hasnt stopped pot from being smoked.
Hasnt stopped pot from being more readily available.

Also, with the grey market status of pot, I really don't see how what he did with 20 lbs of pot is that different from a medical dispensary picking up their inventory other than its semi legal in one place and hella illegal everywhere else for no good reason. Drug laws are nonsensical so I don't proscribe punishing people on nonsense.

[snoopy369]

Until and unless we repeal the laws against drug(s), drug trafficking is illegal, and should remain such. If and only if those laws are repealed should trafficking be legal - and then it would still be illegal to do it in illegal manners (see Canadian prescription drug rackets etc.)

[DinoDoc]

figure out how to make sure there are plenty of good job prospects for folks in the inner city that aren't just working at McDs. Fix *that* problem.

Isn't this part of the cultural problem? That they view certain jobs as somehow being beneath them?

[MRT144]

Isn't this part of the cultural problem? That they view certain jobs as somehow being beneath them?

When McDonalds posts an out of touch budget planning tool for its employees, I'd say itd be hard to not view McDonalds beneath them given how little they think of you, an employee.

But honestly DD, the problem isn't an aversion to working in mcdonalds as hundreds of thousands of low skill employees do daily - its that there arent enough mcdonalds to satisfy the voracious appetite of the low skill job market demand or reasonable access to skill improvement. If a hundred thousand mcdonalds employees had bachelor's degrees, we'd still have a problem of low skill jobs being less available than low skill employees.

In fact the only cultural group I've ever viewed as opposed to working fast food are entitled white suburbanites whose fast food locales employ minorities almost exclusively.

[PLATO]

Moonshine is illegal.

In many parts of Tennessee you can legally make what you use for personal consumption. At the very least, pot should be the same.

Of course Copperhead Road is actually in Tennessee and the manufacture of quantities above the amount for personal consumption and their transport will still get the nasty revenuers on your tail!

[C0ckney]

I think there's a vast gulf between "we should consider not incarcerating people for minor drug offenses" and "we should be okay with a guy taking 20 pounds of pot anywhere". The unsaid problem here is that these people are largely going to be involved in crime *anyway* - they're doing what they're doing because of a combination of culture, lack of opportunity, and ease of access. Okay, stop locking them up for drug offenses. What happens? You lock the *same* people up for burglaries or gang violence or whatnot. The problem isn't drugs; the problem is the lack of opportunity in the inner cities that leads to the involvement in organized crime/gangs and then drugs. Improve education, figure out how to mobilize entire cities to fix the cultural issues (ie, the fact that being in a gang and participating in this is 'cool'), figure out how to make sure there are plenty of good job prospects for folks in the inner city that aren't just working at McDs. Fix *that* problem. (And stop locking people up for minor drug offenses. That's dumb.)

the sort of people moving large amounts of weed around are unlikely to be involved in low level criminality like burglaries. it's a question of opportunity and risk. people who are moving or selling reasonably large amounts of drugs make a lot of money and take big risks to do so (small chance of getting caught, but heavy punishment if you are). they're not going to do things like burglaries, or holding up shops, or snatching old ladies' bags, because these things are high risk and low reward. the sort of people doing these things are addicts looking to get their fix, not big time, or even reasonably sized dealers.

there's a large moral difference as well between, for example, stealing from a house and selling drugs. the former is a violation of someone's property. you're taking their things without consent. the latter is a voluntary exchange. someone wants some drugs, someone has drugs and wants money, so they come to a mutually beneficial and consensual arrangement. a lot of people who sell drugs wouldn't cross that barrier.

there's another point here. the only reason that the drug trade violent is because of its illegality. let's imagine a couple of situations. when a beer company wants to increase its sale in a particular place, what do they do? do they go and drive sellers of rival brands out of town? do they burn down the factory or warehouse of a competitor, or assassinate its CEO? of course not. they'll run an advertising campaign, or come up with some small variation on their product, or maybe sponsor some sporting event. in the same way, if someone robs some high value legal items from someone else, what does that person do? he can go to the police and report the crime, he can claim on his insurance and recover his loss. what's a drug dealer going to do if someone steals his product? what options does he have? he can either take the loss or he can resort to violence. if drugs were legal then the remedies that are available to other businessmen would be available to those who sell drugs. in other words, they wouldn't have to resort to violence.

[MRT144]

Thanks cockney