As Violence worsens, drugs become cheaper and more available

[CaramonLS]

It has nothing to do with the fact that penalties for usage/possesion of pot have been decreased since the Chretien era?

[Street Pharmacist]

As a pharmacist who deals extensively with the BC methadone program I can tell you that oxycodone is legally produced and dispensed. Yet that seems to have no effect on the incredibly large black market. Put me down for doubting legalization will decrease crime. It will decrease money spent on prosecuting marijuana crimes

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by Hilch

Has nothing to do with soft sentences, look at the punishments handed out in the states and they have the same problem with the amount of marijuana in their country. If anything harsher punishments just equal more money in the criminals hands because they can charge more with increased risks even though it costs the same to produce.

The reason why B.C. has become the North American's supplier of marijuana is the weak penalties on growing/ dealing. Reagan's war on drugs pushed growers into B.C. along with the organized crime that goes with it.

Drug testing should be manditory for all employment. That would make work places safer while drying up the 95% of the money in the drug trade. It would then be managable for law enforcement to deal with the rest.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

As problematic as cocaine, opiates, methamphetamines and pharmaceutical drugs are, the currency of organized crime in this province is marijuana in exactly the same way it was during Alcohol Prohibition.

I really disagree. I also live in Vancouver and have met many people involved in the drug trade over the years. Lower level types tend to deal in Marijuana. The bigger guys all know where the real money is: cocaine, heroin, and meth.

I've never heard of a turf war over someone selling weed to his college buddies. All the violence in Vancouver is coming from the big time gangs involved in the sale of hard drugs.

Same thing with the violence in small town Alberta/Edmonton. These cities are acting as hubs for cocaine distrubution.

The money just isn't there in the grow ops. Lets say you've got a major grow op with 1000 plants. Your looking at an ouput of around 1000 lbs/ year under ideal conditions, which translates into a value of just over 1,000,000.00. You've put a lot of work into that both in terms of production and sales.

Meanwhile moving a few bricks of cocaine/meth/heroin can get you the same return. Takes a fraction of the time and effort.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

As a pharmacist who deals extensively with the BC methadone program I can tell you that oxycodone is legally produced and dispensed. Yet that seems to have no effect on the incredibly large black market. Put me down for doubting legalization will decrease crime. It will decrease money spent on prosecuting marijuana crimes

Oxy isn't available to the public without a prescription, which is difficult to get. Start selling it at the corner store for $20 a bottle and people will stop buying it illegally.

The idea is to legalize marijuana and sell it like cigarettes or alchohol.

I, however, don't think it will make that big of a difference to organized crime. Like I said before, the money just isn't there. Weight/volume per dollar makes marijuana a non-profitable drug to sell.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

As a pharmacist who deals extensively with the BC methadone program I can tell you that oxycodone is legally produced and dispensed. Yet that seems to have no effect on the incredibly large black market. Put me down for doubting legalization will decrease crime. It will decrease money spent on prosecuting marijuana crimes

I appreciate your input, but there is one differential.

Oxycodone is regulated on a prescription basis and thus, is not readily available.

The Black Market exists because there is high demand and limited supply.

Now, I'm not suggesting that oxycodone be legalized and sold at 7-11 next to marlboro ultra lights, but there is a large difference between being able to buy it at the store and having to get my doctor to prescribe it to me.

For instance, if I had to go to the doctor to get a rum prescription I may pay a higher price to get it without a prescription. Why? Because it's a restrictive hassle, and it's the same reason Cold Beer and Wine stores get my business frequently over liquor stores.

Contrary to that though, I also bottle my own beer.

That's not something I could ever hope to do with oxycodone.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by blankall

I really disagree. I also live in Vancouver and have met many people involved in the drug trade over the years. Lower level types tend to deal in Marijuana. The bigger guys all know where the real money is: cocaine, heroin, and meth.

I've never heard of a turf war over someone selling weed to his college buddies. All the violence in Vancouver is coming from the big time gangs involved in the sale of hard drugs.

Same thing with the violence in small town Alberta/Edmonton. These cities are acting as hubs for cocaine distrubution.

The money just isn't there in the grow ops. Lets say you've got a major grow op with 1000 plants. Your looking at an ouput of around 1000 lbs/ year under ideal conditions, which translates into a value of just over 1,000,000.00. You've put a lot of work into that both in terms of production and sales.

Meanwhile moving a few bricks of cocaine/meth/heroin can get you the same return. Takes a fraction of the time and effort.

I agree with you and likely wasn't making myself very clear.

The currency is that weed is an easy cash crop to fund your other ventures. It's a tap that never turns off. Often, as you mention, it's far easier to muscle your way into an existing operation than start one from the ground up. There is inherent violence involved in this.

Obviously the money is in high level trafficking (hard drugs, sex, people), but you get the currency to buy into and finance things through the marijuana trade and the associated bribery, extortion, racketeering, embezzlement etc that go along with it.

The whole point is that weed isn't something that should be a cash crop for precisely the reason you state. The only thing making it profitable is it's illegality.

[stang]

Was gonna chime in if you legalized and taxed pot, you could use that money to fight the harder drug crime. As well as cutting into an illegal stream of revenue. Double whammy. More money to fight and less money in drug dealers pockets.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I agree with you and likely wasn't making myself very clear.

The currency is that weed is an easy cash crop to fund your other ventures. It's a tap that never turns off. Often, as you mention, it's far easier to muscle your way into an existing operation than start one from the ground up. There is inherent violence involved in this.

Obviously the money is in high level trafficking (hard drugs, sex, people), but you get the currency to buy into and finance things through the marijuana trade and the associated bribery, extortion, racketeering, embezzlement etc that go along with it.

The whole point is that weed isn't something that should be a cash crop for precisely the reason you state. The only thing making it profitable is it's illegality.

Even if what you are saying is true, that won't result in a decrease in violence. If you legalized marijuana, that's not really going to affect gun violence, which is over the harder and more profitable drugs.

Personally, I don't think legalizing marijuana will make that large of a difference. The cops really don't divert that many resources to marijuana growing in BC. You can pretty much buy it freely already. The full legalization of marijuana sales would be more of a cultural shift/recognition issue than anything. It'd be really just a symbolic move.

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by missdpuck

I think the Dutch law changed recently, but I'm too lazy to look it up.

Pot smokers....

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by blankall

Even if what you are saying is true, that won't result in a decrease in violence. If you legalized marijuana, that's not really going to affect gun violence, which is over the harder and more profitable drugs.

Personally, I don't think legalizing marijuana will make that large of a difference. The cops really don't divert that many resources to marijuana growing in BC. You can pretty much buy it freely already. The full legalization of marijuana sales would be more of a cultural shift/recognition issue than anything. It'd be really just a symbolic move.

I think you're mistaken.

Marijuana related enforcement across the country accounts for 50 percent of the total enforcement budget. I don't have a figure for BC, but it's not a stretch to believe that percentage would be far greater in this province.

I don't even care about reducing the money spent, I just think there are far more efficient ways to spend the money.

Even if you don't think things like these targeted assassinations are a result of the marijuana trade, talking to people in the interior, they'd welcome a reduction in grow-op related violence.

Small changes have significant impacts. Removing something that isn't worth spending hundreds of millions of dollars from the criminal sphere could constitute one of those 'small' things.

[Hilch]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

The reason why B.C. has become the North American's supplier of marijuana is the weak penalties on growing/ dealing. Reagan's war on drugs pushed growers into B.C. along with the organized crime that goes with it.

Drug testing should be manditory for all employment. That would make work places safer while drying up the 95% of the money in the drug trade. It would then be managable for law enforcement to deal with the rest.

That isn't true, not even one bit! The reason BC is a major supplier is because the environment is primed for growing "perfect" plants. It doesn't matter what the penalty is it will always be grown in BC, the price will just go up.

How is that war on drugs going for the USA anyways? Do you feel Reagan's policy helped deter people from using a drug like marijuana? And let's be honest Reagan's policy had nothing to do with marijuana being bad and everything to do with giving more power over hippies who wanted to stop his real wars. Maybe do some research on how things turned out for alcohol prohibition.

The only thing that came out of the war on drugs was giving organized crime a blank cheque. Growers, dealers and criminals thank every single person who wants to keep marijuana illegal, just more money in their pockets. Oh and less in yours because your tax money is spent chasing around a very harmless drug compared to things that are legal like booze and cigarettes.

[Traditional_Ale]

If you can make your own crappy beer and invite your friends over and force them to try it, same could be said for growing pot. Take every dollar spent busting and prosecuting potheads and put it into medicine. Healthcare situation is vastly improved in a second.

[Mtt48]

The legalization of marijuana has a lot of benefits. When I was growing up, it was so much easier to buy weed than buying cigarettes or booze. Why? Because you had to go to a store that was regulated and had rules indicating who they may and may not sell to. This would at least have the benefit of making it more difficult for young people to obtain. I have also read studies that show that marijuana has a much greater effect on young people and their brain chemistry which can cause problems later on in life. There is an added benefit that regulation would provide to children in their formative years.

Also, all of these growops around the city are a serious problem. There was that fire a couple years ago that was the result of a growop. It burned down the growop house and a bunch of surrounding homes. Those families lost everything.

Also, I will quickly and generally state that the treat the hard drugs problem as a criminal one is the wrong way to do it. It is a health problem first. Heroin, crack, meth are serious health problems and making these people criminals does nothing but shut them off from normal society and essentially force them into a life of criminal behavior in order to get their fix.

There is a program in Switzerland I believe where the government provides free heroin to addicts that meet certain criteria. The results have been astonishing in that crime has dropped dramatically, ie: robberies, theft, etc. This program has allowed addicts to remain in "normal" society and to function as people and not force them into a life of criminality. I could blabber on and on, but I really think the hard drug problem needs to be looked at as an issue of health and not as one of crime.

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by Hilch

That isn't true, not even one bit! The reason BC is a major supplier is because the environment is primed for growing "perfect" plants. It doesn't matter what the penalty is it will always be grown in BC, the price will just go up.

The climate in B.C. isn't much different than Oregon, Washington, and Idaho which borders it. The highest quality Marijuana is grown by hydroponics using hybred cloned plants. The outside climate doesn't matter at all. B.C. became the hub of the market because of its lack of meaningful penalties. You can spend as much as you want on enforcement but, if you can be caught with 50 pounds of bud(like a coworker of mine did) and only get probation the reward far outweighs the risk.

Originally Posted by Hilch

How is that war on drugs going for the USA anyways? Do you feel Reagan's policy helped deter people from using a drug like marijuana?

The war on drugs has failed because America has failed to secure its borders. I'll bet you marijuana use is higher in B.C. because of the weak penalties. Also the price has been raised by enforcement. This has helped organized crime. They often trade harder drugs for B.C. bud. If B.C. bud's prices were not artifically inflated it would take too much of it to make the swaps worth while.

Originally Posted by Hilch

And let's be honest Reagan's policy had nothing to do with marijuana being bad and everything to do with giving more power over hippies who wanted to stop his real wars. Maybe do some research on how things turned out for alcohol prohibition.

The only thing that came out of the war on drugs was giving organized crime a blank cheque. Growers, dealers and criminals thank every single person who wants to keep marijuana illegal, just more money in their pockets.

Other than a brief operation in Granada I'm not aware of any Reagan wars those noble Hippies were needed to stop. As popular a President Reagan was I doubt that he felt threatened by Hippies.

Reagan obviously seen drug use as harmful to Americans and a waste of ones life. I agree.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I think you're mistaken.

Marijuana related enforcement across the country accounts for 50 percent of the total enforcement budget. I don't have a figure for BC, but it's not a stretch to believe that percentage would be far greater in this province.

I don't even care about reducing the money spent, I just think there are far more efficient ways to spend the money.

Even if you don't think things like these targeted assassinations are a result of the marijuana trade, talking to people in the interior, they'd welcome a reduction in grow-op related violence.

Small changes have significant impacts. Removing something that isn't worth spending hundreds of millions of dollars from the criminal sphere could constitute one of those 'small' things.

not even close, I doubt the cops here spend a 10th of their budget on marijuana, hard drugs yes, weed no.

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by Mtt48

The legalization of marijuana has a lot of benefits. When I was growing up, it was so much easier to buy weed than buying cigarettes or booze. Why? Because you had to go to a store that was regulated and had rules indicating who they may and may not sell to. This would at least have the benefit of making it more difficult for young people to obtain. I have also read studies that show that marijuana has a much greater effect on young people and their brain chemistry which can cause problems later on in life. There is an added benefit that regulation would provide to children in their formative years.

Marijuana is easy to grow so having a legal source is only going to make access easier for young people. The illegal sources just won't go away while there is a market.

Originally Posted by Mtt48

Also, all of these growops around the city are a serious problem. There was that fire a couple years ago that was the result of a growop. It burned down the growop house and a bunch of surrounding homes. Those families lost everything.

Hydroponics produce higher quality and higher yields. It isn't going away anytime soon. There is still the American market as well as Canadians who want a better buzz. If anything the result will be more basement growops as more Canadians become accustomed to marijuana and seek greater highs.

Originally Posted by Mtt48

Also, I will quickly and generally state that the treat the hard drugs problem as a criminal one is the wrong way to do it. It is a health problem first. Heroin, crack, meth are serious health problems and making these people criminals does nothing but shut them off from normal society and essentially force them into a life of criminal behavior in order to get their fix.

Actually it is a criminal problem first and a health problem second. Nobody comes down with a case of heroin addiction out of the blue. They were doing something illegal and stupid and got caught. Moreover the addiction causes all sorts of further criminal behaviour including selling drugs which in turn creates more addicts.If you want to see addicts as ill then you should at least acknowledge that they are also dangerously contagious and shouldn't be walking the streets.

Originally Posted by Mtt48

There is a program in Switzerland I believe where the government provides free heroin to addicts that meet certain criteria. The results have been astonishing in that crime has dropped dramatically, ie: robberies, theft, etc. This program has allowed addicts to remain in "normal" society and to function as people and not force them into a life of criminality. I could blabber on and on, but I really think the hard drug problem needs to be looked at as an issue of health and not as one of crime.

This logic is akin to giving bank robbers government VISA cards with the promise of paying their balance for them at the end of every month. It will decrease bank robberies initially but, the money needed to sustain them will grow with their greed. Also it will do nothing to deter future bankrobbers. In fact the life style might look more attractive.

[Hilch]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

Other than a brief operation in Granada I'm not aware of any Reagan wars those noble Hippies were needed to stop. As popular a President Reagan was I doubt that he felt threatened by Hippies.

Sorry I was thinking of Nixon, the President who used the term "war on drugs" first.

Also even if the plant is grown indoors the enviroment outside still matters when growing marijuana. You could have all the same equipment and if you were to grow in BC vs Arizona there would be a difference in your yield and potency. Growers in other countries and provinces/states envy BCBud and gets its name because of quality not because of loosened penalties.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

Drug testing should be manditory for all employment. That would make work places safer while drying up the 95% of the money in the drug trade. It would then be managable for law enforcement to deal with the rest.

Holy control freak......

You're going to test for drugs while alcohol, being legal (just as destructive to society) is fine to use outside of work? That is so hypocritical.

How many work place deaths are the result of drug use?
How many work place deaths are the result of alcohol consumption?

I highly doubt your plan is going to work unless you want to live in a totalitarian system. We have that pesky private property/business and all that.

[Vulcan]

This logic is akin to giving bank robbers government VISA cards with the promise of paying their balance for them at the end of every month. It will decrease bank robberies initially but, the money needed to sustain them will grow with their greed. Also it will do nothing to deter future bankrobbers. In fact the life style might look more attractive.

Bank robbers steal the bank's money, there is a victim involved. Drug addicts mostly harm nobody but themselves, unless they need drugs and can't pay for them, than they become bank robbers. Putting people in jail for the victim-less crime of using drugs is stupid and expensive. Giving addicts access to their drugs, keeps them from robbing banks.

I'm in favour of legalizing pot and taxing it just for the financial aspects of it, never mind the moral aspect.

Controlling hard drugs through government dispensation would cut down on crime, also save government money and make our streets safer.