Just in case this recent CNN headline — “Government: More than 22,000 dead in Mexico drug war” — didn’t make this point crystal clear, we now have a scientific study published by the good folks at International Centre for Science in Drug Policy to drive home the painfully obvious.
Study links drug enforcement to more violence
via The Associated Press
The surge of gunbattles, beheadings and kidnappings that has accompanied Mexico’s war on drug cartels is an entirely predictable escalation in violence based on decades of scientific literature, a new study contends.
A systematic review published Tuesday of more than 300 international studies dating back 20 years found that when police crack down on drug users and dealers, the result is almost always an increase in violence, say researchers at the International Centre for Science in Drug Policy, a nonprofit group based in Britain and Canada.
… In 87 percent of the studies reviewed, intensifying drug law enforcement resulted in increased rates of drug market violence. Some of the studies included in the report said violence increases because power vacuums are created when police kill or arrest top drug traffickers. None showed a significant decrease in violence.
Predictably, Drug Czar Gil Kerlikowske — like all prohibitionists — would rather stick his head in the sand than acknowledge the obvious.
When asked whether he believes that legalizing and regulating marijuana — the crop that, according to his own office, provides Mexican drug lords with over 60% of their present profits — would in any way stave this ongoing violence, he responded: “I don’t know of any reason that legalizing something that essentially is bad for you would make it better, from a fiscal standpoint or a public health standpoint or a public safety standpoint.”
Really? So does the Drug Czar favor outlawing alcohol, tobacco, red meat, trans-fats, soda, corn syrup, junk food, caffeine, sugar, and any one of thousands of other products and activities that are “essentially bad for you” too?
And what about those 20,000+ dead since 2006 — many as a direct result of the United State’s prohibitionists policies? The Drug Czar doesn’t believe that staving such violence isn’t benefiting the public’s health? (Answer: You can’t make someone understand when it is in their job description not to.)
Sickeningly, ex-Drug Czar John Walters does Gil K. even one better — reiterating the notion (previously expressed by pending DEA head Michelle Leonheart) that the soaring violence and death south of the border is a sign that U.S. marijuana prohibition is working!
According to the AP: “The former drug czar, John Walters, said the researchers gravely misinterpret drug violence. He said spikes of attacks and killings after law enforcement crackdowns are almost entirely between criminals, and therefore may, in a horrible, paradoxical way, reflect success. ‘They’re shooting each other, and the reason they’re doing that is because they’re getting weaker,’ he said.”
Yes, you read that right. In John Walters’ deluded mind, murder victims Lesley Enriquez, — who worked at the U.S. Consulate and was four months pregnant — and her husband must have been ‘criminals,’ and the rising death toll on the U.S./Mexico border is obviously a human billboard of our success!
It’s now apparent that only a fool — or someone who is paid to act like one — would fail to see that it is time to remove the production and distribution of marijuana out of the hands of violent criminal enterprises and into the hands of licensed businesses. Of course, the only way to do that is through legalization — yet this is a policy that, tragically, remains devoid from the Drug Czar’s, and the President’s, vocabulary.
It’s obvious to anyone with an IQ over 50 that marijuana should be legalized and basically treated the same as liquor and tobacco. I think it is very clear to anyone that is paying attention that there are a lot of Americans that want Marijuana to be legalized. The reasons are valid and plentiful – I don’t need to repeat them… The only question is whether or not our government, who is supposed to represent the will of the people, is going to do that. We need to start asking everyone running for a public office how they feel about the subject. If they are stupid enough to believe that the current prohibitionist policy is working then get em’ out!!!
we need to start legalizing marijuana at the state level. our federal government has already sold out to big business and, therefore, marijuana prohibition will persist at that political level…..however, once the states start legalizing marijuana, the federal government will be forced to review and change drug laws.
Registered Washington State voters, exercise your right to vote. Get I-1068 on the November ballot by signing the I-1068 petition. Washington State Initiative-1068, the Marijuana Reform Act, with enough signatures to get it on the November ballot, would allow you to vote for or against the legalization of Marijuana. let’s allow the voters to decide, not some biased politicians backed by special interest groups and lobbyists hired by pharmaceutical, alcohol, tobacco, oil, paper and other major companies.
I-1068 would ” remove all civil and criminal penalties for persons eighteen years or older who cultivate, possess, transport, sell, or use marijuana. Marijuana would no longer be defined as a ‘controlled substance’. civil and criminal penalties relating to drug paraphernalia and provisions authorizing seizure or forfeiture of property would no longer apply to marijuana related offenses committed by persons eighteen years or older. the measure would retain current restrictions and penalties applicable to persons under eighteen”.
visit http://sensiblewashington.org/ for more information or find out where to sign by clicking on the following hyperlink…………… http://sensiblewashington.org/where-to-sign-i-1068/
they can make marijuana legal if they (the goverment) won’t to.i agree if you don’t vote,how are things going to change?
The substance is irrelevant. When self ownership is outlawed, the law is endorsing the opposite of self ownership. What is the opposite of self ownership?
It isn’t freedom. It is slavery.
When we take away somebodies freedom because we do not approve of their actions even though their actions harm nobody, we open the door of intolerance and EVERYBODY’S rights are subject to the whims of the person or persons with the biggest gun or political pull.
The real crime is people have confused “legal” with moral and just, “illegal” with immoral. Slavery was once legal, it was never moral or just though was it?
when a person puts on a badge on there no longer a person. there above the law and nothing is done to then, no matter what they do.the u.s. is so screwed up. if your rich or a star you have it made if you the average joe your screwed. i think it’s time to move to canada. screw the u.s.