“Just because we can’t win the War on Car Thieves, that doesn’t mean we Legalize Car Theft!”

I’m reading the KFOX El Paso story about the great drug legalization conversation veto override and I noticed they have a poll there on legalization.  I encourage you to go to the KFOX link and vote – only about 600 votes in and “YES” is leading with 49%.

Then I get to reading the comments on the story when I pick out this one from “Sam”:

It is true that the illegality of drugs is the cause of the crime surrounding their distribution. Likewise, it is the illegality of stealing cars that creates car thieves. In fact, the cause of all criminality is law. As far as I know, no one has ever suggested that law should therefore be abandoned. The inability of winning the “war” against theft, burglary, robbery, and fraud has never been used as an argument to legalize these crimes.

The present situation is bad, but it could be made worse by a wrong policy decision.

The extreme proposal to legalize the distribution and consumption of drugs as the answer to so many problems (crime, overcrowding in the prisons, etc.) should be evaluated carefully. Equating this issue with Alcohol Prohibition as is often done by pro-drug legalization groups, is false and inacurate: it is one thing to attempt to ban alcohol which is used by least 90% of the adult population, and another to ban substances that are still not in customary use, in an attempt to ensure that they never do become customary. Once the stigma of illicit drugs is removed, society will be on a very slippery slope. Surely we have already slid down enough without looking for more slopes to slide down

via El Paso City Council To Debate Legalizing Drugs – News Story – KFOX El Paso.

Sam, thanks for the laugh. I always chuckle at the “well, if we legalized rape, there’d be no more rapists!” arguments and the “if we legalize, we’ll be overrun by addicts!” slippery slopes that prohibitionists present whenever a commonsense move to legalize cannabis is suggested.

Why are theft, burglary, robbery, rape, murder, and fraud crime? Because someone is harmed. Cannabis use isn’t a “crime” in the true sense, it is a “violation of the law”.  A stupid law.  If suddenly there were no laws and no cops, and one human killed another human, the rest of the humans gathered could easily agree that a crime was committed and would probably organize to punish the murderer.  If there were suddenly no laws and no cops, Sam, explain to me why you’d organize the other humans to punish me for smoking the flower off a cannabis plant?  Because you think I should take hard liquid drugs (alcohol) instead of inhaling the vapor of mild herbs?  Because you don’t like the way it makes my eyes red?  Because you hate “jam” bands?  Because you’re trying to short-sell stock in Doritos?  Show me the harm and I’ll show you the crime, otherwise you’re just being a busybody.

Will you smoke pot once it is legal, Sam?  Well, if you’re not going to, who is it that doesn’t smoke now who will start smoking then?  Everyone who wants to smoke pot already does!  In fact, when it is legal, fewer people smoke it.  The Netherlands (I’m sure you’re rolling your eyes) has half the marijuana usage as America, even though they haven’t the “stigma of illicit drugs” and a “customary use” of cannabis in coffee shops.  Dr. Mitch Earleywine at SUNY Albany has shown that every state that passed legalization of medical marijuana saw a decline in the rates of teenage marijuana use.

A comparison to alcohol prohibition isn’t accurate, but not for reasons you think. First off, 90% of the population do not and did not use alcohol (modern gov’t surveys put the number at about 50%-55% of Americans 12 and older who take liquid drugs (alcohol), monthly). Fully 50% or 100,000,000 Americans have tried cannabis and 14,000,000 used cannabis this month.  The number of people who smoke pot at least once a year today is half the number of drinkers in the US in 1920.

Second, during Prohibition (of alcohol), your doctor — in any state — could write you a prescription for alcohol use.  You could get an exemption for religious use.  Nobody was really arrested or jailed for their personal home use; Prohibition fought mostly the traffickers and producers.  Even “speakeasys” were tolerated like coffee shops in Amsterdam; if you were caught with booze, they took it, smashed it, and sent you on your way.  Wine makers lobbied for and received from Congress permission to sell grape juice in huge barrels with warning labels reading “WARNING: Do not let this grape juice sit unrefridgerated for twelve days, as this would result in the fermentation of the juice to 30 proof alcohol, illegal under federal law.”  

So, you’re right, equating paramilitary no-knock midnight SWAT raids, helicopter task forces, civil asset forfeiture of one’s belongings, denial of employment, housing, welfare, health care, insurance, professional licensing, child custody, student loans and possibly one’s liberty for sowing a hemp seed to Alcohol Prohibition is false and inaccurate.  I’d kill for marijuana prohibition to be like Alcohol Prohibition.

It is far too late to think we can keep cannabis use from becoming customary – the 1960s called and wants to say “High!”  Have you watched television or movies or listened to popular music lately?  There is a reason the Mexican drug cartels are so rich they can buy off the government – people here like their marijuana!  The very existence of the problem proves that cannabis use has become customary!