
Drug Decriminalization Has Failed? - olalonde
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=13612
======
frankus
The problem is that legalization (like alcohol) is different from
decriminalization (like pot in the Netherlands) in both the effect on use and
the effect on crime. Too often authors like this one will pick and choose the
best or worst attributes of each to match their conclusion.

This article cites the small or negative impact on use that decriminalization
has had in Portugal and then jumps straight into how legalization (e.g. after
Prohibition ended) has resulted in a drop in crime.

But there is no reason to suspect that full legalization wouldn't result in a
situation similar to what we have currently with alcohol. That is to say
pervasive use and abuse, lavish marketing campaigns, and really awful effects
on public health and safety. Not to mention regulatory capture by the
industry, where even modest policy changes (like raising the federal tax on
alcohol) are pretty much a non-starter.

Likewise, there is little reason to suspect that decriminalization (of use and
possession of small amounts) would do much to reduce drug-related crime, both
by dealers and by those users who don't have a rock band or trust fund to
support their habit. And you can't really tax a substance that is not legal to
sell. And it does nothing to improve the safety or purity of street drugs.
Basically all it does is put fewer non-violent users behind bars.

That might be worth it, but don't keep bringing up the benefits of
legalization when you're arguing for decriminalization.

------
jinushaun
Definitely one of Ron Paul's least popular positions among the socially
conservative Tea Party-style libertarians. I agree with Paul. Prohibition
causes more problems than those it is supposed to prevent.

Despite being illegal, drugs are not hard to get and it is likely that we've
already hit equilibrium drug usage. Therefore, drug usage levels should remain
the same after legalisation.

