Tuesday, December 19, 2006

Open Thread Here's a few things worth checking out: Radley Balko does a really fine job explaining the meth "crisis" to the uninformed in his latest FOX news column: Government's Drug War Fuels Meth Problem So Americans' access to cold medicine has been restricted, we've embarked on questionable sting operations that likely ensnare innocent people, and the FDA is allowing a useless medication to be sold to U.S. consumers. And to what end? Meth is more available and more potent than it ever was. Typical drug war folly. This is probably the place to point out that drug war itself is the bad government policy gave us the crude form of methampehtamine that's so popular today in the first place. Bruce Mirken has a good piece at AlterNet: Why Smoking Marijuana Doesn't Make You a Junkie. He discusses the science that has put to rest the particular gateway theory that marijuana causes people to use other drugs. The lie that marijuana somehow turns people into junkies is dead. Officials who insist on repeating it as a way of squelching discussion about common-sense reforms should be laughed off the stage. Economist David R. Henderson explains the economics of the drug war in South and Central America in ways that a Kindergartner could understand (but would be totally over the heads of most politicians) in How to Undercut Chávez Peacefully With Less Military, Not More The raw cocaine price in Colombia is only about 1 percent of its street price in the United States, because of the risk premium added on to prices at each stage of the distribution. Therefore, tripling the raw price would cause the U.S. street price to rise by 2 percent. There's a better way to go. The U.S. government should stop pressuring Colombia's government to destroy its cocaine industry, and we the people should demand it. Then Colombia's government can decide whether to do that or not, and I predict that it won't. If, in the extreme, Colombia's government legalized the cocaine trade, production would increase and the price would fall. But even if the Colombian price fell to zero, clearly impossible, the U.S. price would fall by only 1 percent. Meanwhile, the leftist insurgent's funds would dry up [^] why pay for protection when you don't need it? [...] Transform Foundation Blog has good coverage of the recent discussion in England regarding the drug trade and the murder of prostitutes in Ipswich. The positive thing is that a real discussion is happening, and the notion of legalization as a form of harm reduction is getting serious play. Also nice to see articles like Prohibition: a crippling habit by Nick Davies: There are really only two kinds of people who support the prohibition of drugs: those who know the truth and, for some political reason, refuse to admit it; and those who genuinely have no idea what they are talking about. 9:44:01 AM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []

Libertarians and the Drug War I've never really felt the need to explain the position that libertarians should have regarding the drug war. In fact, in my FAQ, all I say is: Well, duh! If you need to ask, you're probably not a libertarian. One particular recent event, however, is muddying the waters... the conversion of Bob Barr to the Libertarian party. And as Mona notes, this is the same Bob Barr who was once a Congressman Drug Warrior: Suggesting the depth of hostility toward the notion of legal drugs, Rep. Bob Barr, R-Ga., asked whether anti-racketeering laws could be used to prosecute people conspiring to legalize drugs. That's right. He suggested that the government use RICO to go after people like... me. And now he's a spokesperson for the Libertarian party. What a conversion! Or is it? Jacob Sullum at Hit and Run notes that Barr avoids the topic in his recent interview with David Weigel and says: ... But it's hard for me to see how a libertarian (or Libertarian) can support drug prohibition. Contrary to what he says in the interview, this is no "minor disagreement." Not only does the war on drugs directly violate the basic right to control one's body and mind; it leads to exactly the sort of wide-ranging civil liberties violations, especially in connection with Fourth Amendment rights, that so concern Barr when it comes to the war on terrorism... I believe it's possible to be a pro-life Democrat. You could even be a gay Republican. But a pro-drug war Libertarian? It's oxymoronic. It'll be interesting to see what happens if Barr is pinned down on this issue. 9:18:13 AM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []