Quote:
Originally Posted by Peregrino
We've been regulating precursor chemicals in the cocaine producing regions since the begining. I worked source interdiction in the 80's, other members here are still involved in the charade. The chemicals are legal, have legitimate industrial uses, etc., etc. And you can find the production sites by following the pollution upstream to the source, usually a clandestine  lab surrounded by piles of rotting waste and empty 55 gal chemical drums. In Bolivia, the chemicals used to be smuggled/diverted from Brazil by the commercial truck load. (One of the unintended consequences of the road building programs to "open up" the undeveloped interior of the respective countries.) Until we remove the incentive (US consumption and the money derived from it) producers will find a way to satisfy demand. It's basic capitalism - cost/benefit analysis. Increase the risk and/or reduce the profit and the problem changes too. Unfortunately, Mexico's violence problem is hostage to our inability to deal with the consumption demand. Given the current administration (and the overall ineffective actions of previous administrations) I don't see any changes coming down the pipe. The violence will get worse until honest people have had enough or WE address the root causes. Legalize the crap and treat it like alcohol. (And yes - I'm personally familiar with the destruction drugs do. You can't save the world; you can't even save a lot of the individuals who've immersed themselves in the poison. Cut the losses and move on!) My .02 |
I agree.
Look at the war on drugs and how effective it is. If I am correct we intercept less than 5% of what comes across the borders yet it costs us billions of dollars to maintain. I don't use drugs but sometimes ponder how much revenue could be generated by legalizing and taxing them.