Agreed. According to government estimates, our “war on drugs” has killed over 70,000 innocent mexican citizens (as of June 2013). A friend of mine wrote a great article on this: http://www.seanedwards.com/war-on-drugs/...

One thing I have to ask: why is any Objectivist a proponent of people intentionally degrading or destroying one's rational thought through drug use? I just don't get it. If the highest pursuit of man is to use logic at all times for decision-making, why would one condone a practice that has as its number one effect a deleterious effect on the mind and its logical pursuits?

I'm all for reducing the size of government, but I can't get behind a project that encourages the destruction of rational thought and is accompanied by so many social ills and is devoid of production. "The mind is a terrible thing to waste."

Existing "money laundering" laws make it illegal for banks to accept deposits from pot dealers. Colorado is trying to get federal permission to open a credit union that would serve them. So far it hasn't been granted.

This is not the same thing as Operation Choke Point (which technically does not make it illegal for banks to serve the targeted businesses, but merely threatens a federal audit for money laundering against any bank that does serve them).

1. Disagree that legalizing pot will cause the cartels to go under. If the coke/heroin/etc trade was not worth their effort they would not be in it. Legalizing pot will impact them.

2. I expect the cartels to pressure the non-cartel distorters, not shoot outs with the cops.

3. I hope I'm wrong, but we will have to see how thing shake out. Assuming the change happens.

4. Some people will grow their own to save money. How many will keep at it is a different question though. I think a lot of people will give that up due to the work involved. Growing doesn't fit well with the instant gratification mind set.

#1 is true as far as it goes. However, the demand for stronger substances is much less than for marijuana. A lot of people who try the harder stuff get their first taste from their local (illegal) pot dealer; "legal" dealers don't carry those things. Thus, to the extent "legal" pot costs less than black market pot, it makes the hard stuff much more difficult for both addicts and potential new users to find. Their sources won't be in business anymore.

#2 -- What do you expect the cartels to do, shoot it out with cops? The cops would love that, and would easily win. Actually the cartels ARE fighting the change to some extent -- by supporting politicians who want to keep pot illegal and penalties high.

#3 -- Extortion on the "legal" dealers won't work any more than it does on fully legal businesses. The local cops will either help the victims, or if the cartel does gain control, the feds will come in and shut that business down. (Organized crime involvement is one of the 10 problems the DEA has said will provoke it to act.)

#4 -- This I don't buy at all, because bills like Colorado's do more than legalize shops selling pot -- they also legalize growing your own, and many users will do exactly that rather than pay the new high taxes to legally purchase pot.

"Decriminalizing pot locally instantly destabilizes a situation that was none to stable to begin with. "
Yes. My prediction if marijuana were truly decriminalized at all levels is your item #1 would predominate and the cartels would go to other illegal activities and leave marijuana alone. I think criminalization causes the cartels and undoing it removes them, at least from this one area of the economy.

Marijuana should never have been made illegal to the level it has in the first place. However since it was, we have consequences to deal with when things are changed.

1. The cartels have illegal products beyond pot, and thus would not be "dead"

2. You make the assumption that the cartels will meekly let that revenue go. Something that they have certainly not done in the past. Inter-Cartel violence is over territory encroachment and the resultant revenue changes. Why do you think they will not act on that change.

3. The likely pursuit for the cartel if this change occurs would be extortion/protection on all the "legal" pot dealers right off the bat. With the longer term goal of driving them out of business. The extortion/protection gives them some of the lost revenue back while they drive the competition under.

4. To recover all of their revenue, they need only eliminate the "legal" competition and drive the price back where they want it.

I put "legal" in quotes for a few reasons.

First, just because TX makes it legal, it is still illegal under federal law. As scojohnson pointed, out, the federal enforcement agencies are still free to act, albeit under altered circumstances.

Second, if this change happens, then the cartels themselves become "legal" in TX, for that product at least. Making it much harder to prosecute them for their other activities.

Third, the governments, local, state, and federal, will attempt to control the pot market, just like everything else. And they will FAIL. When they fail, that will increase the chaos even more.

Bottomline ----

Decriminalizing pot locally instantly destabilizes a situation that was none to stable to begin with.

Do not expect a quiet and peaceful outcome.

The government is already doing that with firearms dealers and manufacturers, no trouble at all to expand that to pot retailers as well.

"shooting up a marijuana retail site and taking their cash"
I suspect the retailers would find some alternative banking system that will work with them, unless the gov't won't allow any bank-like institutions to work with retailers.

" Decriminalizing Marijuana alters the income for the cartels, something they will not be happy about. Likely to cause them to lash out to either A: maintain the revenue or B: protest the lost revenue. Police are certainly going to care about that since either one means increased violence"

If it's sold legally, the cartels are dead. Violence decreases. The criminals would find some other criminal activity to get involved with, but this one would be gone.

Since I don't perceive myself as possibly passive-aggressively put down this time, OK.
Not saying that I was for a fact.
Carnosaurs have their hissss moody moments.

allosaur let us please end this.thank you.
wiggy

I don't believe in oogie-boogie mystics either.

I wonder if the revenuers in Washington will get the same warm reception
they did in the Ozarks.

One of those unintended consequences politicians always fail to think of.

Taxes raising the price of legal weed so the illegal weed is cheaper....absolutely brilliant!!!

Protecting citizens' lives from violation of their rights by *others* I agree with. But being an adult is all about getting to make risk/reward decisions such as drug use for yourself individually, whether the drug in question is a plant or requires a chem lab to produce.

This is where I most strongly disagree with the argument that "the right to life is the fount of all other rights." It is not. SELF-OWNERSHIP is.

In effect that's not legalization at all (at least of sale, though at least end-users are pretty much off the hook now).

Any benefits of eliminating the black market won't be seen until the legal stuff is at least slightly cheaper than the illegal.

to each his own. people who believe in mystics elude me. but that is their choice.

It should not be a crime merely to possess any object which is not stolen or acquired by fraud. That includes plants, books, weapons, etc.

well yes, good point

I have to disagree with your assertion as to what would happen to the funds Kh. The government is incapable of a productive pursuit, so the money will still be wasted.

We know they won't give it back to the people it was taken from, thats for sure.

Sounds good, but I would leave God out of it. Let's stick to the practicality of treating all plants as.....plants. Otherwise the arguments may well deteriorate into religious diatribes which will put the whole idea off track.

You have to be able to think to believe or not believe in God.
I'm a Christian and do not consider myself a non-thinker.

his first premis is wrong "everything god made is good" since there is no god. another non-thinking politician.

Washington State has legalized recreational marijuana. It is heavily taxed. My home state now has some problems they did not predict.
Untaxed weed is cheaper and is the majority of the trade.
Legal dealers are finding it difficult to make a profit.
Law enforcement will have the task of going after untaxed sellers a buyers. This will be very unpopular.