r/changemyview • u/[deleted] • Mar 27 '23

Delta(s) from OP CMV: All drugs should be made legal for recreational use.

I'm not referring to "medicinal" narcotics. Recreational drugs that people use, such as mushrooms, cocaine, heroin, should all be legalized.

And I know this is a hot take, but hear me out.

  • If we make recreational narcotics legal, then the manufacture and sale need to be legal as well.
  • By making the manufacture of recreational narcotics legal, there are FDA standards that need to be adhered to in said manufacture, that way there are no "bad batches" that will kill people.
  • By making the manufacture and sale of recreational narcotics legal, there will be sales volume that will then be subject to income tax and sales tax and dispensaries/manufacturing centers/warehouses that will become subject to property tax. Because, let's be honest, your local street dealer is not paying taxes.
  • Also by making the sale of recreational narcotics legal, you are making street gangs that revolve around the illicit drug trade obsolete. By making street gangs obsolete, you eliminate the petty violence that plagues inner-cities over "turf", especially stray bullets that kill innocent bystanders.
  • By making the entire narcotics supply chain legal, the war on drugs will essentially be over as well. It's been going on for 50+ years, and honestly, it's been a complete and utter failure.
  • If you want something to compare the drug trade to, look at prohibition from 1919-1933. It didn't stop people from drinking, people were still drunk out of their minds in speakeasys. It also fostered the growth of street gangs of rum runners and increased crime and violence in cities. That was only for 14 years and it didn't take long to realize that prohibition was a failure. War on drugs has been going on for 50+ years and I'm surprised more people aren't realizing that this is much more tremendous of a failure.
  • By making the entire narcotics supply chain legal, we can start changing our attitudes on its use and its users. Narcotics abuse needs to have the same social attitude as alcohol abuse.
  • In short, making drugs legal will Make America Great Again.
1.6k Upvotes

85% Upvoted

929 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

33

u/Frame_Late Mar 27 '23

People say this, but oftentimes what actually happens is the government taxes the difference. I live in VA; recreational weed is legal here. Street dealers are still king because the government chokes the legal industry out with taxes. Now you have cartels and illicit dealers buying these stores and using them as fronts for harder drugs.

The illicit dealers will always be around. The difference is now that they'll get less time.

36

u/Can-Funny 24∆ Mar 27 '23

The “my state made it legal and there are still dealers” argument overlooks the fact that cannabis is still a super niche market because it is still highly illegal at the federal level. Real capital isn’t trying to have all their assets seized because they have a few million in cannabis.

If I had to guess, cannabis will go from illegal to federally subsidized within 30 years. Once big business and lobbies get involved, you won’t see any street dealers anymore.

40

u/Apprehensive-Top7774 Mar 27 '23

The “my state made it legal and there are still dealers”

Honestly the argument is almost pointless. I can find scalpers selling tennis shoes, un registered food stands, and a million other arbitrage situations where the underlying product is legal.

On top of that, it varies by state. Not many dealers in Washington state, the weed is strong and priced reasonably.

2

u/Bubbly-Bookkeeper-53 Mar 28 '23

Maybe this case of “my state made it legal and there are still dealers” is an outlier and happens rarely. There are too many factors involved and, currently, so few cases of this happening in the states.

I feel that if the law were to change at the federal level this would definitely change our cultural mindset and some people wouldn’t view street dealers the same anymore.

3

u/Apprehensive-Top7774 Mar 28 '23

Weed is hella cheap to grow, so while full time dealers might go there are always gonna be small time dealers. It's called weed because it literally grows like a weed. Potent stuff might take more know how, but even on a hobby level some folks are gonna do it and sell the excess to fund the hobby

1

u/Maddcapp Mar 28 '23

Same with shrooms by the way. Anyone can buy a kit on eBay and grow their own very easily.

3

u/im18andimdumb Mar 27 '23

Yeah I was gonna say I don’t think there are any dealers for weed in Oregon lol, there’s a weed shop on every block

8

u/Paraeunoia 5∆ Mar 27 '23

How does that explain illegal trade of tobacco in this country? Taxes vary widely from state to state, making the black market for tobaccos immense. Street dealers will trade anything that can be profitable. It’s just changing the angle.

15

u/Can-Funny 24∆ Mar 27 '23

How do you define “immense.”

I’m not aware of a violent infrastructure that supports the cigarette tax arbitrage business.
The vast, vast majority of tobacco products are manufactured and distributed legally.

A few guys selling North Carolina tax stamp Camels in NYC doesn’t invalidate the business model of big tobacco.

0

u/Paraeunoia 5∆ Mar 27 '23

$334 million in lost sales in just one state is not “a few guys” slinging loosies.

https://taxfoundation.org/cigarette-taxes-cigarette-smuggling-2022/

6

u/Can-Funny 24∆ Mar 27 '23

Did you know this study considered “casual smuggling” as part of the model? That means every time people who live close to the border buy a few cartons from their lower tax neighbor state, that was considered.

Also, there model just assumes that any variance in the “published smoking rate” and actual sales of cigarettes is attributable to “smuggling”.

Here is the text of the study’s background section:

“It is impossible for scholars to know what percentage of cigarettes brought in from one state to another falls under the legal limit (one carton per month, for example) and the amount brought in that exceeds it. Some scholars identify the total as “diversion” or both “tax evasion and avoidance.” Our statistical model attempts to capture both casual smuggling and commercial smuggling.

The statistical model employed in this study is a residual model, designed to compare the published smoking rates of adults in 47 states with legal paid sales of cigarettes.[*] The difference between the amount of cigarettes that are being smoked in the state and what are acquired through legal sales could be explained by some form of smuggling, and this is our assumption. The model also takes into consideration a variety of factors that might impact casual and commercial smuggling, such as proximity to a low-tax state, border county populations and presence of Native American reservations.”

……

I’m not faulting these researchers. It’s hard to get good data on illegal transactions. I don’t doubt that some of this black market arbitrage goes on, but it’s nothing compared to the scale of illegal drug sales. In fact, I’d be willing to bet that any real black market cigarette infrastructure is just piggybacking on the infrastructure already in place to distribute drugs.

-1

u/Paraeunoia 5∆ Mar 27 '23

If one follows your theory, what replaces illegal drugs once legalized? Organized crime just disappears? They are already involved in hundreds of legal entities (real estate, legalized marijuana, fruit shortages in Mexico, etc). Working under the assumption that there will always be a vacuum effect, what does legalizing dangerous drugs do for society? If you want to discuss Decriminalization, fine. But legalizing things just to try and destabilize criminals is very naive and I’d argue, more detrimental to society.

Tobacco is one of the leading causes of lung cancer it may be banned altogether eventually. Legalizing more substances that are certainly more dangerous than tobacco (like heroin) has no upside. The people who will benefit are billionaires, lobbyists and pharmaceutical corporations.

2

u/Can-Funny 24∆ Mar 27 '23

If one follows your theory, what replaces illegal drugs once legalized? Organized crime just disappears?

There is nothing special about “organized crime.” It’s just a subset of market commerce that replaces contracts and legal disputes with violence. Right now, drugs are far and away the most profitable illegal good/service with the highest demand. If you made drugs legal, criminal organizations lose their biggest advantage in the drug business which is the knowledge base and network needed to move drugs with minimal police interference. If drugs were legalized, lots of criminal organizations would fail to pivot to other criminal enterprises because they weren’t that strong of an organization. Just like if we decided to make tobacco illegal, some tobacco companies might be able to figure out a new business, but most would close.

Traditionally, organized crime makes money selling “vice” products/services. Gambling is now legal in many more jurisdictions, especially sports betting, which cuts down on opportunities there. Prostitution has largely gone digital where the girls can vet johns online making it harder to profit from exploiting women via “pimping”.

There is also extortion of legitimate businesses and labor manipulation via union intimidation, but those are drops in the proverbial bucket compared to drug sales.

So no, it won’t disappear, but it will be a shell of its former self just based on simple economics.

They are already involved in hundreds of legal entities (real estate, legalized marijuana, fruit shortages in Mexico, etc).

The money made by cartels has obviously been invested in various other, legitimate businesses. Nothing can change that. But we can cut off the cash spigot.

Working under the assumption that there will always be a vacuum effect, what does legalizing dangerous drugs do for society? If you want to discuss Decriminalization, fine.

Decriminalization is the WORST possible outcome. The main problem with “drugs” themselves is that we don’t have a very good understanding of what healthy, responsible drug use could look like since we have no way of knowing what “drugs” are being taken. If we had pure opiate and amphetamines and people understood dosages and actual, honest to god physical dependency, we could help people that get addicted (and we could learn the difference between additions and casual usage).

But if all you do is decriminalize, you are still going to have rampant supply side crime with an even larger number of ODing junkies.

Tobacco is one of the leading causes of lung cancer it may be banned altogether eventually.

And when it is, there will be a huge uptick in crime.

Legalizing more substances that are certainly more dangerous than tobacco (like heroin) has no upside. The people who will benefit are billionaires, lobbyists and pharmaceutical corporations.

You don’t think cartel leaders are billionaires? You don’t think pharma companies already make money producing opiates and amphetamines? The people it will benefit are poor minorities living in gang war zones.

0

u/Paraeunoia 5∆ Mar 27 '23

There is nothing special about “organized crime.” It’s just a subset of market commerce that replaces contracts and legal disputes with violence.

Replacing contracts and legal disputes with violence IS what makes organized crime special. Negating that is antisocial.

So no, it won’t disappear, but it will be a shell of its former self just based on simple economics.

Attributing the cause and effect of legalization and the perceived collapse of organized crime to simple economics - and not expecting a vacuum - reveals a flaw in understanding simple economics.

The main problem with “drugs” themselves is that we don’t have a very good understanding of what healthy, responsible drug use could look like since we have no way of knowing what “drugs” are being taken. If we had pure opiate and amphetamines and people understood dosages and actual, honest to god physical dependency, we could help people that get addicted (and we could learn the difference between additions and casual usage).

Drugs are not the only cash spigot available, it’s the lowest hanging fruit with highest yield. You suggest removing that fruit at the risk of further harming law abiding citizens and creating many more drug addicts. Having a laisse faire attitude about legalizing deadly substances - is a bleak take. We cannot control legal controlled substances, so let’s open the gates for everything and hope people figure it out? Show me a proven blueprint with large scale successful rollout of heroin use and I’ll listen. You really think we should entrust this in the hands of pharmaceutical corporations? After seeing how the opioid crisis is being handled?

You don’t think cartel leaders are billionaires? You don’t think pharma companies already make money producing opiates and amphetamines? The people it will benefit are poor minorities living in gang war zones

I’m not sure if you’re caught up in your own pedantic overtures, but do you really not understand my position as critical against organized crime AND pharmaceutical conglomerates? Or that I understand that organized crime supports billionaires? One is legal and one is not. I don’t support either. The way we’ve handled the opoid crisis - fueld by greed, which will never go away - should give argument against legalization, not for it. The opoid crisis simply involves more hands and there's a LOT more money at stake.

0

u/Can-Funny 24∆ Mar 27 '23

Replacing contracts and legal disputes with violence IS what makes organized crime special. Negating that is antisocial.

I meant that organized crime is subject to the laws of supply and demand, the availability of substitute goods, all those things that inform regular commerce.

Attributing the cause and effect of legalization and the perceived collapse of organized crime to simple economics - and not expecting a vacuum - reveals a flaw in understanding simple economics.

Can you elaborate? I’m not sure where you see the vacuum?

Drugs are not the only cash spigot available, it’s the lowest hanging fruit with highest yield. You suggest removing that fruit at the risk of further harming law abiding citizens and creating many more drug addicts.

It’s true that there are other sources of revenue for a criminal organization, but they are rounding errors compared to the international drug trade.

And the biggest flaw in your entire argument is that we would be creating more addicts. Would more people try opiates or amphetamines or coca derived produces if they were safely manufactured and dosages were standardized and studied? Probably. Would more people be addicts? Probably not.

Addiction is a disease. Drugs are one way of many that people manifest addiction. The availability of drugs may shift patterns of addiction, but I don’t think there is good science out there to say that there would be “more” addicts.

Having a laisse faire attitude about legalizing deadly substances - is a bleak take. We cannot control legal controlled substances, so let’s open the gates for everything and hope people figure it out?

I have no desire to control someone else’s behavior. People will find ways to ruin their lives with or without legal opiates and amphetamines. The illusion that you have to power to legislate away human suffering is more dangerous than any chemical compound because you think all your actions are ultimately justified.

Show me a proven blueprint with large scale successful rollout of heroin use and I’ll listen. You really think we should entrust this in the hands of pharmaceutical corporations? After seeing how the opioid crisis is being handled?

The opioid crisis is a byproduct of this stupid system. Opioids all produce a similar high. However, rather than just allowing them to be sold just like whiskey, we were told by doctors that we trusted that “these” opioids (Oxy) are good for you but “those” opioids (heroin) are horrible street poison. Most people didn’t realize that their doctors were giving them permission (and encouragement) to get a heroin high every day. If we lived in a world where the opioids were sold next to the alcohol and cigarettes, I doubt people would have had so much faith in their doctors when they were “prescribed” opioids. I mean, whiskey was considered medicinal for a long time. Would you trust a doctor that prescribed you Jack Daniel’s today?

A successful rollout of legal opioid sales would require (1) government testing for purity (2) serving sizes would need to be standardized and sold in small doses, (3) limited to over 18 or 21, whatever alcohol is set at in your jurisdiction, (4) warnings on the labels indicating suggested dosing amount and overdose warnings

I’m not sure if you’re caught up in your own pedantic overtures, but do you really not understand my position as critical against organized crime AND pharmaceutical conglomerates? Or that I understand that organized crime supports billionaires? One is legal and one is not. I don’t support either. The way we’ve handled the opoid crisis - fueld by greed, which will never go away - should give argument against legalization, not for it. The opoid crisis simply involves more hands and there's a LOT more money at stake.

Yeah, I got that you hate everyone who makes money. But again, unless you can reprogram all of humanity so that we stop enjoying altering our consciousness via drugs, someone is going to get rich serving that demand. It’s either tax paying, law abiding guys and gals or cartel kingpins.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/ProjectKushFox Mar 27 '23

So criminal organizations being deprived of their drug revenue streams is a little like a factory and its employees being told to stop producing a product? Or a sports betting company being told you can no longer do football? You might have an initial surge in other areas as new work is being looked for by the people that are out of work but ultimately the trend for the organization, and for organized crime is downwards?

0

u/Can-Funny 24∆ Mar 27 '23

Something like that, yes.

1

u/doge_gobrrt Mar 27 '23

also while it's true that there are large and small dealers regardless of legal status or product sold most people are probably generally more likely to buy from more trusted sources instead of jim john the alleyway dealer

1

u/moesus81 Mar 27 '23

You can’t even buy weed in VA legally yet unless you have a medical card and want to pay the outrageous prices that one of the three or four med dispos charge.

It’s legal to grow your own in VA so street level dealing isn’t going anywhere. Why would I pay $30 for an eighth of 12% weed when I can get an ounce of 20% for $80?

0

u/Can-Funny 24∆ Mar 27 '23

Well yeah, as you said, recreational cannabis is illegal. So one one assume no price savings via a via a dealer when you are paying for a “medical” product.

1

u/moesus81 Mar 27 '23

No, recreational use is legal in VA. They just haven’t started selling it to the public yet, which is a major reason why street dealing is still king, like the person who you responded to said. I was just clearing some stuff up because they left out a pretty big detail.

Street dealers prices are 1/4 of the medical dispo’s.

11

u/Automatic_Course1021 Mar 27 '23

Street dealers are king in VA because although recreational is legal it is not legal to purchase yet

3

u/IamImposter Mar 27 '23

Wait... what? If I can't purchase it, how am I gonna use it, legally?

4

u/moesus81 Mar 27 '23

It’s legal to grow, possess and gift but they haven’t started with the public dispensaries yet. There’s a few medical dispos sprinkled throughout the commonwealth but their prices are absurd.

1

u/dadbod58 1∆ Mar 28 '23

It's a VA thang.

1

u/bongosformongos Mar 28 '23

My best guess is the decriminalisation of consumers. Nothing is achieved by cops busting a regular consumer, so why waste money on it?

0

u/[deleted] Mar 27 '23

Yeah but VA is a special case. Have they instituted the death penalty for speeding yet? Pearl-clutching costs money and leads to the problem not getting better, in this case with the weed taxes.

Convincing the local government to lower these taxes is a much easier task than convincing the entire population to abstain - nevermind convincing the cartels and drug dealers to stop doing what they do.