Don't Legalize Cannabis

Miscellaneous Current Events
1

I watched the debate recently between Ron Paul and Stephen Baldwin regarding cannabis and whether or not to legalize it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufekh_SwZd0

While the dream is that legalizing cannabis will free all the wrongfully incarcerated people (which might be the only good it would do) and miraculously solve all the tax problems by all the revenue it will generate with new taxes, that is simply a dream.

In the spirit of freedom, don’t legalize; decriminalize.

As far as taxes go, how in the world will giving more money to the same buffoons who have been misallocating money for decades help at all? That’s total insanity - doing the same thing and expecting different results. So, no, it won’t solve the tax problems. Does more money ever solve anything, especially when that money is going to the government?

If cannabis is legalized, how will it be any different than alcohol? How free are you to walk to the store, any time day or night, and buy any drink with any amount of alochol in it? Who gets to sell alcohol, besides the government and who the government permits (licenses)? Who decides how much alcohol actually goes in to the drink? If they legalize cannabis, are they going to limit how much THC can be in products for sale? (They already mandate the size of holes in Swiss cheese.) Who’s going to be allowed to sell it, and when? Where’s the freedom in any of this?

And what if I simply want to grow something in my house, for my own consumption, be it tomatos, flowers, herbs, or anything else? Will legalizing cannabis make it safe for people to grow their own, so as they’re not funding “terrorists”, or will it still be as wrong in the eyes of the “law” as it is at this very moment? If so, then legalization wouldn’t help but would only trap people more.

With decriminalizing, if they were to treat offenses as minor fines (say, for using it in a non-designated area and someone complains), people would be more inclined to pay small amounts here and there for something that doesn’t go on the record, and that way the cities/states would be making something off the fines. The police also wouldn’t be wasting resources holding those people in jail, but would just write them the citation and part ways without any confiscation but simply being told to move along. Sure, it may not work, but how many people willingly send in the money for small speeding infractions, red light tickets, and the like? And in those instances the officers just let those law breakers go (along with their property) and get right back to speeding (isn’t that being contributorily negligent?). So why couldn’t it work with cannabis?

This is preaching to the choir I imagine, and maybe this conversation has gone on already, but I am interested in what others theorize would be a good solution that doesn’t prohibit anyone - including the plant. Of all things, to criminalize a plant!

2

Interesting post, but without full legalization the drug trade will still be in the hands of organized crime. Best to put them out of business.

3

Exactly. A large part of legalization is about wiping out criminal syndicates responsible for all kinds of kidnappings, theft and civil disorder (civil war even, in places like Colombia).

4

But why is it good to put a free (underground/black) market out of business, even if it is organized crime?

And what exactly is organized crime? The government has all the earmarks of organized crime, so it doesn’t seem right to give them more authority than they know what to do with.

As always, it’s scarcity that creates the problems. If people were allowed to grow whatever plants they want and do with them as they please, so long as they’re not infringeing on anyone else’s right and no one is infringeing on theirs, that would more likely than not do away with people killing each other over plants, which all non-taxed/illegal drugs come from plants more or less. (Look at how suppressed nature is and people wonder why it reacts the way it does?)

I understand the concept of not wanting “bad” people to have something, but until someone infringes on your rights and harms you (your property, family), who is anyone to stop them from doing what they choose to do? Obviously they wouldn’t be meeting the supply if there wasn’t a demand. If there’s a demand, then there’s a market and business for someone.

5

You aren’t putting anybody’s market out of business. In the case of drugs, there are two impediments to the market: the state and organized crime cartels. The former use force to stamp out the market, and the latter take advantage of the situation to use coercive (state-like) force in order to create monopolies that exist outside of the reach of the law (let’s make that any kind of law, for the ancaps - both public and private).

I’m thinking mainly of groups like the paras in Colombia that basically constitute themselves as semi-independent states, but the same line of thinking can be applied to drug cartels that use violence to accomplish their aims.

6

The government is one of the most organised of criminal groups.
So no, we shouldn’t give them authority over things like fining us for inhaling the smoke of certain plants.

7

In what possible sense does the government have legitimacy to claim money from users of certain plants?

8

How is it not putting a market out of business if you’re shutting the suppliers of the demand down?

In today’s age, thanks to governments, the drug problems are no longer localized. Is the rationale that due to “organized crime” in Colombia and other places around the world, the government in the US should prohibit my freedom to grow what I want, on my own property, and use it however I choose? Where is the freedom in that? To save the world from problems in other places than my own backyard isn’t a worthy enough cause for me. It might be good intentions to do away with drug cartels and organized crime, but good intentions are just that…good intentions and nothing else.

According to the description, it sounds like the State and organized crime cartels operate using the same tactics. The state uses force, and the drug cartels use state-like coercive force. Sounds like they’re both a problem and neither one is helpful to the free market.

9

The government doesn’t have any legitimate claim, period. Thanks!

I was just trying to make the point that a lot of people put the message out there that legalizing cannabis will solve all the money problems of governments. But not really, as it would give them more work and more regulations to create. If they (governments) wanted to make money, it’d be more beneficial for them to decriminalize it and fine people when caught in the act, same as speeding. But I prefer the idea of living a life, free to do what I want, where I want, when I want, not stopping anyone else from doing the same so long as they’re not stopping me from doing what I want or harming me in the process. I’d say, is that too much to ask for, but it apparently is.

10

I beleive your advocating decriminalization as it would remove the state from interferring in this particular market. And your against legalization because this will entail taxation and regulation. Is that correct?

However by accepting fines and permits etc, we are still suffering from interference from the state. The truth of the matter is, we advocate legalization without any “regulation” or taxation.

It’s an interesting idea though, it’s almost like de jure implenting agorism. Let the grey markets run wild. I think this is something that does require more thought. .

“If cannabis is legalized, how will it be any different than alcohol? How free are you to walk to the store, any time day or night, and buy any drink with any amount of alochol in it? Who gets to sell alcohol, besides the government and who the government permits (licenses)? Who decides how much alcohol actually goes in to the drink? If they legalize cannabis, are they going to limit how much THC can be in products for sale? (They already mandate the size of holes in Swiss cheese.) Who’s going to be allowed to sell it, and when? Where’s the freedom in any of this?”

Well the market should decide. Not the state.