3:24 |  | Ryan Grim - Very good question, Mark. And for those of you not familiar with him, Mark’s one of the leading drug policy experts in the country and the BANE of some legalization advocates because he very persuasively argues that the cost of increased addiction would outweigh the benefits to the economy and the reduction in the prison population. Here’s more on him: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Kleiman
I don’t know about that, but I favor legalization, but doing so slowly. When a rush of drugs were introduced to the American mind in the 19th Century, we went on a decade-long bender that led to them being criminalized. Legalizing overnight would probably lead to a similar situation. So letting states make their own marijuana laws, then letting them make their own cocaine laws, etc., would gradually phase in legalization so the country doesn’t act like a freshman at college orientation the second drugs become legal.
I often get a different version of that question: You’re for legalization, okay, but what about crack? It’s a tough question because, of course, very real harm has been done by addiction to the drug. Has more harm been done by laws against? Maybe.
But addressing your question directly, yes, I think that particular excerpt would have been different, but I do address crack in the book. I argue – not originally; others have said this before me -- that drugs move through a community much like a virus does. At first, there's no resistance. Crack spread partly because people didn't realize how harmful it was. Once communities began to realize its downsides, "crackhead" became a pejorative phrase and kids had the best drug education possible -- eye-witness evidence of its destructive behavior. People still get hurt by it, but they do so knowing what we know about crack.
I've often seen the time of seven years mentioned as the period it takes for a drug to enter a community and directly or indirectly come into contact with almost everyone. As people become accustomed to the drug and recognize its downsides, use tapers off, as happened with crack in the '90s. So tightly regulating and educating people about crack might do just as much to keep its use down as outright prohibiting it.
|
|
