Here in Mexico, thoughtful people continue to include the possiblity of legalizing drugs in discussions about how to address narcotráfico. If I'm not mistaken, el Presidente Calderón has been a bit waffly on the subject, though his latest stance is a clear "no." The Church, of course, is a-flutter at the idea of legalization.
But the discussion continues among thoughtful people of several different stripes. In a post on his blog, Política, campañas e ideas, Luciano Pascoe summarizes eight questions and their answers which are pertinent to the legalization issue from a Mexican perspective. They are:
1. Will legalization promote the use of drugs?
In no way. To the contrary, it is a good idea to acompany legalization with a national campaign at all levels to show the risks of drugs for health. It is also essential to support addicts without considering them criminals, but rather sick people who are sitting ducks for narcos and for some police who blackmail them. [I would add that national campaigns that make drug users look weak and uncool and unattractive would possibly be at least as effective as scare tactics among younger people at least.]
2. Is the idea to propose an agreement with the narcos or to pardon them?
No. To begin with, narcos are the first in line to oppose legalization of drugs. It is the narcos themselves who get the most benefit from illegal traffic in drugs. The narcos are the only beneficiaries in fact, the only ones who have succeeded in amassing enormous fortunes and a power which puts at risk the stability and very existence of the state.
The proposal should be accompanied by assurances that the narcos suffer the strongest legal punishment possible and that the fight against them continue relentlessly.
3. Does the proposal to legalize drugs undermine the fight of the police and the Army against crime tied to narcotráfico?
Aside from being in favor of legalization, the work which police, judges, judicial authorities, soldiers and institutions throughout the country do deserves great recognition. However, their work is condemned to not succeed to the extent that the strategy followed is mistaken, but the women and men who are in the battle are worthy of respect. To legalize drugs is also to end the hundreds of murders against the guardians of order.
4. Is the Federal Government's strategy mistaken?
The Federal Government has failed to to prevent and put a stop to consumption, to put an end to organized crime, to save the lives of public servants at all levels, to provide the citizenry with security and to lower the enormous number of murders. Isn't this a failure up and down the line?
Regarding the number of deaths, the figures from 2008 are chilling. They include more than a thousand women, men and children who had nothing to do with narcotráfico. Violations of human rights have multiplied. It's evident that the strategy of warlike confrontation to combat narcotráfico has failed.
In contrast to other parts of the world, the problem which it is most urgent to resolve is the elevated rate of violence and crime in which the country is immersed, a consequence of narcotráfico. As of today, only two states of the Republic have escaped the phenomenon of executions (Tlaxcala and Baja California South [Baja is a big resort/retirement area. It seems that the narcos want to do some protection of such areas.]), and according to official statistics, the number of executions under the Calderón administration has climbed to more than 8000.
5. What would the legalization of drugs achieve?
For one thing the idea of legalizing drugs is directed to ending the main source of the enormous power of groups involved in narcotráfico, power which they get from the cash from the illegal sale of drugs. Without money, they would not be able to buy so many weapons, nor to corrupt or threaten the authorities. Clearly we understand that legalization won't put an end to organized crime, but it would mortally wound it.
In addition, the resources obtained from the payment for legal drugs could generate money for treatement and prevention. Currently less than five percent of the money spent to combat narco is used for such efforts.
6. What's happening in countries where the consumption of some drugs is permitted?
For sure, the consumption of drugs hasn't declined in those countries, but it also certain that the governments haven't undertaken intensive campaigns to avoid addictions because they aren't a public health or crime problem. However, where drugs are permitted, there is no organized crime related to their consumption.
7. Has the consumption of illegal drugs killed many people?
No. More people are killed by overconsumption of alcohol and an out-of-control taste for sugar (diabetes, obesity, cardiovascular problems) than by consumption of drugs. Of course none of these addictions is recommended, but to make them legal makes it easier to measure them and to combat them by the right routes: responsibility of people for their own health and that of their families.
For example, regarding problems associated with the consumption of alcohol, no one in his right mind considers viable the idea of prohibiting its consumption. Rather it is arued that it would generate a huge problem with illegal contraband and a black market which would give rise to a surge in mafias involved in the production, sale and distribution of alcoholic beverages, just as has happened with drugs [and of course happened with Prohibition in the USA and continues to happen with drugs perhaps a bit out of the consciousness of the "middle class" in the USA.]
8. If drugs are legalized, will their consumption increase exponentially?
It's possible that in the face of decriminalization of drugs, the number of consumers would increase because people would be very curious to know their effects or perhaps would seem to increase because we've actually underestimated the number of users, but there's no evidence that there would be an exponential increase.
Presently, it is very easy to get drugs, including for children and teenagers to do so. To legalize drugs would make it easier to control sites of sale and, of course, to impede those who shouldn't have access.
Luciano Pasco concludes his article with the following:
Un debate sin información es –solamente- una guerra de egos.
A debate without information is only a war of egos.
A BIG QUESTION: What would happen in the US if Mexico were to legalize drugs unilaterally?