Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Democrats have Downstate woes, rising suburban hopes
Next Post: Governor Flatline
Posted in:
* My Sun-Times column covers a familiar theme…
Outfit crime boss Michael “The Large Guy” Sarno was sentenced to 25 years in prison this week. Sarno ordered the bombing of a business that was encroaching on his illegal video poker racket.
I’m glad that Sarno’s going to prison. I’m also happy that Illinois finally wised up and legalized video poker machines for taverns, fraternal clubs and truck stops.
A legal, regulated video poker industry means wise guys like Sarno will be put out of business. Illinois’ ridiculous “For Amusement Only” tax stickers on poker machines will finally come to an end once the legal, regulated machines are put into place. Nobody plays video poker at a tavern purely for their own amusement. They play because they’re hoping to win an illegal jackpot.
I have no fundamental problem with people who want to plunk quarters into a poker machine while they sip a beer and watch a game at their corner tap. They’re not criminals.
The problem, you see, isn’t video poker.
The problem is that the Outfit has been able to rake in untold millions of dollars while Illinois turned a mostly blind eye. Yeah, a few guys with bent noses and a handful of tavern owners were busted once in a while, but nothing ever stopped.
Legalization is the only proven way to cut the gangsters out. Illinois quickly killed off the illegal numbers rackets when the state started its own lottery, for instance.
On Friday, Gov. Pat Quinn will hold a press conference to “encourage people to support education and capital construction programs by playing Powerball,” according to his office. Before legalization, the numbers games just lined the pockets of violent criminals. Now, they help fund schools and roads.
Legalization also worked when the United States decided to end Prohibition. The Mafia doesn’t control the liquor industry, multinational corporations do. And whatever else you can say about them, rival corporate CEOs rarely bomb one another.
It’s never easy to legalize a “vice.”
The opponents of legalized video poker are still screaming about the “massive expansion” of sinful gambling it represents, as if the tens of thousands of machines that illegally pay out somehow don’t exist.
While most opponents are quite sincere, all their opposition really ends up doing is helping the mob. People are going to gamble. If a game of chance is illegal, the mob will find a way to make money. Lots of money. And then other people are going to be hurt, or killed, or bombed or bribed or whatever. Bet on it.
Lately, Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle has been pushing hard to lower the penalties for possessing small amounts of marijuana. There’s no reason, she says, to keep locking people in steel cages with violent criminals simply because they’ve decided to put something into their own bodies.
Preckwinkle appears to be making progress with Chicago Police Supt. Garry McCarthy, who said this week that he’s “all in favor” of issuing tickets for possessing small amounts of pot.
And while this is a necessary first step, it doesn’t go nearly far enough. It would be like decriminalizing a can of beer instead of ending Prohibition, or handing out small fines for possessing a numbers ticket in the 1960s. It doesn’t stop the real, festering societal problem of the control of vice by pathologically violent criminals.
If you truly want to hurt the Outfit and the street gangs, the only proven method is to legalize, regulate and tax their vice products.
* Related…
* War against drugs has failed on many fronts, panel says
* Preckwinkle Decries War On Drugs At Palatine Breakfast
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 8:56 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Democrats have Downstate woes, rising suburban hopes
Next Post: Governor Flatline
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Nice article on something a lot of people aren’t even aware of.
I find it rather ironic that the Governor wants to fund “education” programs with the lottery. HA! If people are still playing the lottery, our education system clearly isn’t working! So, we better play the lottery more! LOL! It’s brilliant!
Perhaps we should also provide a college program that gives giant student loans to learn finance!
I’m on a roll! Happy Friday!
Comment by Amuzing Myself Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:02 am
Amen.
Comment by Ahoy Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:09 am
I was glad to see the twist at the end to include marijuana. After the second paragraph I had already jumped there and I’m glad Rich made the connection explicit.
We know how to end a lot of our problems and save a significant amount of money for the state. When will this finally be discussed in serious terms by serious people?
Comment by Colossus Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:09 am
Good article Rich!
The mob will eventually find something else, since they won’t be reeling in money from gambling machines, this will just slow them down until they figure out their next move, rather illegal activity that supports them.
Preckwinkle will save the county a lot of money by saving on processing and housing of inmates, in an already crowded expensive system already, especially for things people end up walking on (small amounts of pot).
Comment by 3rd Generation Chicago Native Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:11 am
While prohibition of alcohol was a dismal failure for several reasons, legalization has also been very problematic for our society. You will have the same kinds of problems with the legalization of marijuana. Be careful what you ask for.
Comment by Just Saying Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:13 am
I don’t really have much of a problem legalizing various gambling. But I do pause when the justification is to take away income from undesirables, like gangs and gangsters.
The mob will never go out of business. There will always be something around for gangs to make an illegal buck off of.
Legalize liquor to eliminate the mob?
Legalize lotteries to eliminate the mob?
Legalize bingo to eliminate the mob?
Legalize gambling casinos to eliminate the mob?
Legalize video poker machines to eliminate the mob?
Legalize cash advance loans to eliminate the mob?
Legalize pot to eliminate the mob?
Legalize drugs to eliminate the mob?
Let’s just recognize that such individuals are like the cockroaches of our society. No matter how many times you spray them, you can never get rid of them.
Legalizing various vices just places a short term crimp in their income. They then bounce back. Like the cockroaches that they are!
Comment by Louis G. Atsaves Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:17 am
Colossus, there is a double benefit for the state. Not only would the state save money, but by taxing the now legal activity, it becomes a revenue producer, just like cigarette and alcohol sales. (assuming the state could manage it without losing money)
Now if only we could legalize EVERYTHING, our financial woes would be behind us!
Comment by scurvydog Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:18 am
I will be happier when they acutualy implement the law.
Comment by OneMan Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:18 am
And thoughtful people are willing to exchange the problems of organized crime for the problems of legalization, regulation and taxation.
– MrJM
P.S. And the next guy that I meet who wants to start a fight after smoking marijuana will be the first.
Comment by MrJM Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:26 am
Shouldn’t we be in favor of any program that allows people to voluntarily give their money to the state? This program reduces the need for the state to take our money from us by force through taxes and fees.
Comment by capncrunch Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:32 am
Amen, MrJM.
I have never seen a police report where the perpetrator in any battery incident was high on pot, but the vast majority were drinking.
Comment by transplant Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:36 am
Will a legal Illinois video poker machine go online anytime in the near future? What’s the ETA in months or years?
For a great yarn on the history of the Chicago numbers racket, read “Policy Kings” by Nathan Thompson.
Before the Outfit murdered its way in, the numbers were a homegrown, driving economic force on the South Side, financing stores, banks, car dealerships, etc. Once Sam Gianacana took over, all the money left the community.
Lots of great stories about the old South Side from Ted “Double-Duty” Ratcliffe.
http://policykings.com/
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:39 am
Great column, Rich. Glad you were able to recognize Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle for her position on decriminalization while reminding readers that decrim fines, like “decriminalizing a can of beer instead of ending Prohibition,” fall way short.
Prohibition creates distrust by turning ordinary citizens into criminals and leading enforcers astray. Internationally, prohibition alienates allies & potential allies. Domestically it wastes billions in expenditures while losing billions in revenues.
There is no reason why liberals and conservatives can’t work for full commercialization of marijuana and industrial hemp.
Comment by Kasich Walker, Jr. Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:39 am
Rich - Your argument for legalized gambling is probably the best I have heard, but what do you say to those who argue that the lottery, video poker, etc. are a tax on the poor? It’s sad when you see people who appear to be poor spending $20 or $50 dollars on lottery tickets.
Comment by Anon 7 Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:46 am
scurvey - I wouldn’t go for everything. Alcohol is a single intoxicating substance, as is THC. Heroin/meth/MDMA/LSD, all those are unique intoxicating substances and must be dealt with on their own merit. In this case, I believe that marijuana has been unjustly banned - that doesn’t lead logically to saying that we could be able to buy a can of small-c coke at the corner store.
capncrunch - I hadn’t thought of that angle before . I’m not thrilled about more gambling happening simply because I have a passing familiarity with the concept of probability, but I think you have an excellent argument for voluntary contributions to the state instead of forced taxation.
Comment by Colossus Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:47 am
Good column, Rich. It would be well to remind people occasionally that when the Lottery started in 1970, all the money that it was promised to pour into education funding was more than slightly diminished by the State taking an equal amount of GRF money OUT of education funding. It took a lot of people (some of them in the legislature) quite a while to realize the switch that happened there.
Comment by Behind The Scenes Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:48 am
Scurvydog, Capncrunch, Ahoy…quite the nautical theme today.
Comment by Colossus Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:48 am
Toni seems to be a much needed breath of fresh air for Illinois politics. She just seems to understand what so few are willing to admit. The war on drugs has been an absolute failure on every level imaginable. Frankly as someone who lives in central Illinois she’d get my vote if she ever ran for Gov
Comment by Farker Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:51 am
I’d feel better about this if the state would commission a study that concluded that gambling doesn’t affect the poor disproportionally.
I am a middle of the road voter and am becoming more uneasy by the day about this issue.
Comment by Ratman Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:52 am
===commission a study that concluded that gambling doesn’t affect the poor disproportionally===
People shouldn’t be treated as children just because of their finances.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:54 am
Those who believe that legalization and licensing has or will cleanse Illinois gambling of ‘wise guy’s are dreaming! Where do you think the bigcorps hire their casino guys? Video poker will continue to be run by mob-connected guys who have no criminal convictions (yet) who will pass the licensing checks. Do you really think the cash skim will end after licensing? it hasn’t in other states.
Comment by Nohopeforillinois Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:54 am
How much of a tax refund (in income tax, property tax an fees) would I get if we ended the war on drugs? 5%? 10%? More?
Comment by This Little Piggy Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:55 am
Piggy - none. That money is owed to service providers who have not been paid in over a year.
Comment by Colossus Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:56 am
== People shouldn’t be treated as children just because of their finances. ==
Be treated by whom as children? If you mean the state, the state treats people like children every.single.day….
Comment by Ratman Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:58 am
===it hasn’t in other states.===
Wrong.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:58 am
Medical marijuana could have been an extraordinary revenue boon for both state and local governments. If the legislature wouldn’t authorize a tightly controlled program for suffering citizens, marijuana policy in this state is unlikely to change soon. Like many subjects that get moralized, unfortunately, reason does not prevail.
Comment by archibald.jones Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:59 am
–Do you really think the cash skim will end after licensing? it hasn’t in other states.
For instance? What is the cash skim for organized crime on video poker machines in Nevada?
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 9:59 am
===the state treats people like children every.single.day===
And yet you support that concept.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 10:03 am
Medical MJ came the closest it ever has last year. I have very high hopes for that one this time around, and I think hard revenue numbers should take center stage in that debate alongside the medical considerations. Show in dollars and cents how this will help.
It’s great that we can have this conversation here in a serious manner. I just wish our elected officials could treat it in the same way. (See: Obama shrugging the question off during his Google+ hangout) You don’t have to be a hemp wearing dredlocked hippie to want legalization.
Comment by Colossus Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 10:03 am
Let me see if I understand video poker legalization correctly:
* Bars with the old poker machines are now engaged in illegal gambling and have been for years
* Those same bar owners are nonetheless qualified to be licensed for legal gambling. No character problems there.
* The mobbed up companies in the poker machine business will all disappear once legalization happens, which is no doubt why the current industry lobbied so hard for legalization.
I think I get it.
Comment by reformer Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 10:05 am
Colossus,
I’m with you. Snark was intended on my “legalize everything” comment. (And to think Illinois could actually solve its financial woes! Hah!)
Comment by scurvydog Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 10:05 am
I disagree with you on this and the debate is far longer than a blog posting and I want to abide by your no bumper slogan thing so I will just say again on this issue what I said yesterday about Mayor New Trier Grad’s gun plan which is that there are far more important issues to be working on right now than these things.
I also think this line is way over the top and Joe Walsh-esque “locking people in steel cages with violent criminals”. People know the rules, if they break them they face the consequences. If Ms. Preckwinkle is unsatisfied with the local accommodations for people who break the rules, she is more than welcome to do something about these “steel cages”.
Here is Obama’s drug czar with the administration’s view on this
http://www.texastribune.org/texas-mexico-border-news/texas-mexico-border/drug-czar-kerlikowske-legalizing-drugs-not-answer/
“[Traffickers] would not change their ways and turn to legal pursuits if drugs were legal,” he said. “Legalizing drugs makes them cheaper, makes them more accessible and therefore makes them more widely abused.”
He added that this country’s current problem with prescription drug abuse should serve as an example of why legalization could lead to a similar crisis.
“We actually have [prescription] drugs that are highly legal, highly taxed, highly regulated and highly controlled. We have found as a country [that] we are totally incapable of keeping those drugs out of the hands of young people,” he said.
And while some argue that marijuana causes less health damage than alcohol or tobacco, Kerlikowske said the societal costs stemming from abuse of those legal substances should serve as a cautionary tale.
“Money that’s collected in taxes on nicotine and … alcohol at the state and federal level does not even begin to compare to the social and criminal justice and health care costs as a result of nicotine and … alcohol abuse,” he said.
Comment by Shore Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 10:06 am
===“Money that’s collected in taxes on nicotine and … alcohol at the state and federal level does not even begin to compare to the social and criminal justice and health care costs as a result of nicotine and … alcohol abuse,” he said. ===
So, you’d ban alcohol and tobacco, too, shore? Really? Ridiculous.
===there are far more important issues to be working on right now than these things. ===
We can do more than one thing at a time. Plus, just because you think something isn’t important doesn’t mean that I agree.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 10:09 am
I still remember my first encounter with a 19 yr old college kid who had just found out about libertarians. I’ve honed a few arguments since I naively got talked into agreeing that smack should be legal.
And I do believe Illinois can solve its financial woes. It’s my home, and I have a voice. I’m not going to threaten to leave or throw my hands up, I’m going to roll up my sleeves and make it happen. (Not saying you won’t, just doing a bit of chest thumping.) Nothing to fear but fear itself.
Comment by Colossus Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 10:09 am
@ archibald - Medicinal and sacramental exemptions for alcohol during alcohol prohibition were created and abused, so let’s avoid enforcement confusion by allowing all use an accepting full commercialization.
Marijuana should be sold alongside booze and lotto. Those sellers card minors and payoff the state.
Comment by Kasich Walker, Jr. Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 10:09 am
Ok lets look at this bit…
Keep in mind that the law specifies that no single machine owner (keep in mind the facility with the machine on site can not own it) can control more than a given % of total machines in the state… So for ‘control’ you would need to set up a host of companies to own the machines.
Got any proof of that? But lets say that is true. For one thing it will be easier to find than it is today, for example due to criteria 14 and 15 of the machines unless you get the machine companies to collude with you the state will have access to all sorts of data on the machine, so the state will know to the penny, how much was bet, when and the rest it appears in fact that law requires each bet to be recorded as a transaction. So the state would know how much every party involved (better, site owner, machine owner) got down to the penny.
Is the law perfect, no, no law is. But is it better than things are now. Yep
Comment by OneMan Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 10:16 am
Hmmmm….I think this calls for 2 weeks in a row with a little Bush Doctor music…Hit us with Peter Tosh’s “Legalize It” on the way out!!!
Comment by Mark Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 10:21 am
re: important issues
It’s easy to dismiss things you don’t want to talk about as not important. But I think this is a great reminder of why we have government in the first place. It is how we, as a community/state/society/nation come together and decide how to handle things. Do we want to spend a lot of money on enforcing laws against gambling, or do we want to alter the way we allow it to make sure that it will benefit society in some way since we can’t make it go away?
This is an important question to answer. We seem to have forgetten that the government isn’t some foreign entity imposed on us from outside. It’s us, and the laws we pass reflect who we are as a people. I like to think that we are a people who don’t shoot ourselves in the foot in the name of principle when there are objective facts that point us in a different direction.
Unfortunately, that opinion will probably preclude me from ever being able to hold elective office. I also hope we’re a people who will realize that ideologues don’t fix problems, they make more.
Comment by Colossus Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 10:25 am
@Shore
============
Traffickers] would not change their ways and turn to legal pursuits if drugs were legal,” he said. “Legalizing drugs makes them cheaper, makes them more accessible and therefore makes them more widely abused.”
=========
Kerlikowske might know what would happen to a “Drug Czar” if the Drug War ended tomorrow, but he doesn’t have a clue what traffickers would or would not do.
Ever hear of Samuel Bronfman?
Comment by Kasich Walker, Jr. Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 10:26 am
A fool and his money are soon parted. Sounds like a State of the State address. Anyone who engages in playing poker machines/slot machines, etc are fools. Very few people can make much money at all on gambling - and certainly NOT using video poker or slot machines. If you’all want to base a large part of your state budget on fools, that’s fine with me. If it helps to keep my taxes down (don’t gamble, never have, never will) I am happy bout that.
The discussion here about legalizing drugs has always seemed to be a bit misty to me. Talk of “medical marijuana” and lowering penalties on small amounts of pot are all fine. But that is only one drug. The streets are full of all sorts of dangerous drugs.
Heroin - are you for legalizing that?
Methamphetamine - are you for legalizing that?
LSD, etc are you for legalizing that?
If not, you are NOT for legalizing drugs, you are for legalizing pot. If you maintain criminality for “hard” drugs, the mob will continue to provide that service. If you ARE for legalizing those “hard” drugs, you will find the majority of the public will not agree with you. Vigorously. Mostly because they won’t agree with you that those hard drugs are as benign as marijuana is. So, the myth that legalizing “drugs” will reduce street violence is just that - a myth.
Atsaves is also right. Legalizing all those vices will not make the mob disappear. These are hardened criminals, not some poor misguided folk who just need a gentle push to take on honest employment. They WILL find some other criminal activity to engage in that will make them lots of money. That. is. what. they. do. They will NOT quit being bad guys committing crimes to enrich themselves even if all “drugs” are legalized. To think otherwise is the very definition of naivete.
Comment by dupage dan Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 10:27 am
One Man
I recognize that no one company will control the new video games. Do you recognize that some of the existing operators are likely to get a piece of the pie?
Comment by reformer Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 10:28 am
Nohopeforillinois, you really are clueless. Try to take a breath before you post again here.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 10:29 am
===Do you recognize that some of the existing operators are likely to get a piece of the pie? ===
If you think the Gaming Board is gonna do that, you’re nuts.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 10:30 am
It’s a great article, and I read it first thing this morning. I think it’s more moral to have people get drugs under medical supervision, because they would have direct access to treatment, rather than going to the street to buy drugs, where no drug dealer offers treatment. I still hope, though, that Chicago will do what Evanston did and decriminalize small amounts of cannabis. It’s a small step, but it might lead to more reform.
Maybe one day a governor will encourage people to smoke weed to bring in revenue.
Comment by Grandson of Man Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 10:30 am
Possession of less than 2.5 grams of cannabis is currently a class c misdemeanor. Reducing it to a petty offense would have two benefits for the offender:
1) It would no longer be considered a criminal offense and could be expunged or sealed
2) No jail time would be allowed
For the police officer the benefits would include not being required to take the offender to a facility to be processed and released. The cannabis would still need to be retained for any future court proceeding.
Comment by William Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 10:39 am
Dupage Dan -
I’ve only been speaking for the legalization of marijuana, and addressed your conflation of marijuana with hard drugs earlier in the thread. This isn’t the slippery slope you see.
While the streets may be full of drugs, our prisons don’t have to be full of marijuana offenders. I’m not saying its a magic bullet for the state’s finances (there is not magic bullet). But legalizing marijuana would free up existing resources to focus in on those drugs that cause much more harm, create another revenue for the state, and stop turning your friends and neighbors into criminals.
How is this a bad thing? I can’t wrap my mind around defending the logic behind or the way we enforce marijuana laws.
Comment by Colossus Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 10:41 am
@DuPage Dan –
I’ll go Milton Friedman Lib, as in Libertarian, on this one: legalize it all.
But it’s not all or nothing, except perhaps for those who want or expect nothing
Comment by Kasich Walker, Jr. Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 10:44 am
@GoM
Evanston or any city can “legalize” cannabis but until the state does, a city ordnance is basically meaningless. Any trooper, deputy or even Evanston PD officer can arrest someone for possession under the ILCS.
Comment by William Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 10:46 am
==While prohibition of alcohol was a dismal failure for several reasons, legalization has also been very problematic for our society. You will have the same kinds of problems with the legalization of marijuana. Be careful what you ask for.==
Prohibition probably didn’t prevent any alcohol-related societal problems. For my relatives who grew up in Chicago, including my grandmother who was a beautiful flapper (and who dated a mob bodyguard for a summer), visiting speakeasies was as mainstream as roller skating and going to the beach.
Comment by yinn Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 10:53 am
Yinn - My grandfather tells stories of his father running a speakeasy in their basement when he was a child. He used to work the door, asking for a password with a shotgun in his hand at the age of 9.
Prohibition is not the solution.
Comment by Colossus Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 10:56 am
KW Jr,
Milton makes a strong arguement. I am a fan of his. I don’t always agree with those who I admire. Part of the arguement is that mobs won’t have access to cash if all drugs are legalized. Criminals will be criminals - they’ll find something else to do. Of that I am certain. The Netherlands has seen some of what has happened with a more lax drug policy - in ain’t all rosy. Increased potency of pot has some folk who are tolerant of pot to be less supportive as the stronger pot has more impact and seems less benign. Notice, also, that hard drugs are not legal and won’t be anytime soon. The idea to legalize pot was seen as a way to reduce movement to harder drugs and folk supported that but are now less supportive since they see an influx of much stronger pot. The rosy scenario as put forth here just isn’t true.
Comment by dupage dan Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 11:11 am
== And yet you support that concept. ==
I don’t have a vote in Springfield, Rich.
If this blog has taught me anything, it has taught me things that are regressive and affect the poor disproportionally are to be avoided.
So if gambling, like increasing the sales tax, affects the poor disproportionally, and the state wants to increase gambling, I get confused.
This confusion can be cleared up by the state commissioning a study that concludes that gambling doesn’t affect the poor disproportionally.
That’s all I need and I’ll feel much better about this.
Comment by Ratman Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 11:15 am
Ah, yes, the much stronger pot that is going to give us the reefer madness. Right, I discounted that. To jail with the offenders, and a black mark on their permanent records! No jobs for you!
/snark
Comment by Colossus Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 11:17 am
I’m with Ratman on this one. I’m curious about it, that’s for sure. I mean, if we are supposed to tax the middle class and poor more because they “don’t pay any taxes” and it could be shown they are supporting the government in different ways, then that should factor into the debate.
Comment by Colossus Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 11:19 am
Colossus,
Descending into silliness does not move the debate forward. I said nothing about reefer madness. You can’t address this issue as tho you live in a vacuum. You have to secure the support of the population. Many people are squeamish about legalizing any drug. The liberal people in Holland are no seeing, WITH THEIR OWN EYES, some of the problems with legalizing the relatively benign drug marijuana. There is less support for it not as a result. This is a reality. If you don’t face reality you will not succeed. Perception is the key here. Caustic wit won’t help your cause. Just sayin
Comment by dupage dan Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 11:23 am
- Heroin - are you for legalizing that?
Methamphetamine - are you for legalizing that?
LSD, etc are you for legalizing that? -
All of those drugs spent a considerable amount of time being legal in this country, and abuse rates haven’t really changed since they became illegal. There are a vast number of legal opiates that have the same effect as heroin, these are actually abused more than heroin. Many amphetamines are also legal and extremely easy to come by, again, abuse rates not significantly different than illegal drugs. LSD is not addictive and was widely used with great success for therapeutic purposes before being criminalized. Plenty of folks, including Steve Jobs, credited using LSD as being one of the most significant experiences of their life. I really wish people would stop basing their opinion on what they learned in D.A.R.E and the breathless reporting on the scourge of drugs in this country. The war on drugs has been a complete and dangerous failure, and it’s time we take a new approach.
Comment by Small Town Liberal Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 11:27 am
When it comes to cannabis I am all for decriminalizing it and then moving towards legalizing it and standardizing it and taxing it. However any argument that our prisons are full of people who were just in possession of small amounts of cannabis are BS.
Comment by Fed up Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 11:28 am
===it has taught me things that are regressive and affect the poor disproportionally are to be avoided. ===
Only if they’re mandatory. Gambling isn’t mandatory.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 11:31 am
The Netherlands aren’t addressing the bedrock decriminalization of cannabis, they are figuring out their regulations and how it will be handled. From my reading, much of the issue centers around drug tourists from neighboring countries and zoning coffeshops out of school areas. I’m not thrilled about the latter (because zoning things out doesn’t solve problems, it just pushes them out of sight), but the former seems to be less of an issue for us. We only have two neighbors that would account for significant and steady visitors, and I don’t see drug tourism becoming a problem.
Support of the people for legalizing in America? It’s there, buddy. Been growing every year for the past 40 years and is now past 50%.
http://www.pollingreport.com/drugs.htm
I understand the prohibitionist viewpoint, I just don’t think it is supported by the very reality you claim to value. Hyperventilating about the higher potency of something that is impossible to kill you isn’t a rational basis for utilizing the War On Drugs(TM) resources against marijuana users or sellers. Bring up a silly point, you get caustic wit.
PS - My ex-father-in-law thought I agree with him on politics for the first two years I knew him, he never picked up on the sarcasm. Then again, he also thought Stephen Colbert was serious when he started out, coincidentally during those same two years.
Comment by Colossus Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 11:49 am
wordslinger, thanks for the plug for my good friend Nathan Thompson’s book Policy Kings. The book was a labor of love for Nathan. He spent almost ten years researching material for this book.
Quincy Jones, whose father was a carpenter for the Jones Brothers, the biggest and baddest of the Chicago Policy Kings, holds the movie rights for this book. Hopefully, this movie can be made. Not only does it cover policy or the numbers racke, but gives a great overview of Bronzeville history.
Comment by onevoter Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 11:50 am
Yeah, I heard all about those touting LSD as some kind of wonder drug that opened their minds. I have used it on several occasions, although not recently. Hogwash. Not convinced in any way that LSD is anything more than a substance to be used to alter your consciousness for some fun. BTW, I don’t base my concerns about a drug because it may or may not be addictive - nothing in my posts has ever reflected that.
Too old for D.A.R.E. - can’t comment on what I didn’t attend. While I agree that a different approach should be considered I don’t think the debate is helped with sarcastic comments as some have made here.
If you’all are for legalizing ALL drugs you have a long, tough road ahead of you. I wouldn’t shut down the drug task forces just yet. I don’t see a major change in the public’s perception of the harder drugs and there will be a big push back.
In the meantime, maybe we shouldn’t be glorifying these substances by using anecdotal stories from folk like Jobs {who reportedly parked in handicapped parking spots and used a loophole only a rich influential person could use (damn those 1%ers) to avoid having to have a license plate on his car}. Altho I am a Mac fan I am not all that impressed with Jobs as a person. Not a prime example of a good global citizen if we use some liberal standards.
Comment by dupage dan Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 11:58 am
The “criminals will be criminals…they’ll find something else if drugs become legal” is no justification for the nonsensical Drug War.
Kerlikoske knows what will happen to the Drug Czar office if the drug war ends, but speculation about what drug runners will do is about as valid as Bush claims of WMDs in Iraq or Israeli fears of a nuclear Iran.
Any argument against legalization based on what has been reported relatively recently about the Netherlands’ reclassification of high potency “skunk” weed fails to consider the distorting political pressures and impact of being the lone legal non-medical use location.
Comment by Kasich Walker, Jr. Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 12:04 pm
Colossus,
Your link was almost entirely about pot. Down towards the bottom are some questions about other drugs and it appears most folk still believe that drug enforcement laws and imprisonment is the way to go (although support for treatment is there, too). So, when you say people are “for legalizing” and you don’t specify if you are referring to pot and/or hard drugs, you are clouding the issue. That is part of the problem, here. Peole keep saying they are for “legalizing” but are not clear if it is for pot or hard drugs. Clearer use of the language would clarify your position.
Comment by dupage dan Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 12:04 pm
For the record, I’m with dupage dan @11:58, with the following caveats:
1) Haven’t tried LSD ever, and it’s not for lack of opportunity. I just don’t care to dabble in hard drugs.
2) I did attend D.A.R.E. in my youth. The program is still running, though the officer who presented it to us is no longer in charge. He’s in jail on cocaine charges.
3) Not a Mac fan at all. Android all the way. You can keep Siri, I’m drooling over Majel. If my phone and tablet suddenly sounds like the Enterprise computer, Android will have a much more rabid fan base than Jobs could ever dream of.
Comment by Colossus Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 12:04 pm
OK. Anything that people do that’s illegal and doesn’t kill anybody else, legalize it and tax it. Can we have a state football pool without encroaching on the NFL’s trademarks? That would rake in a ton. Of course the way the NFL is, they would assert they own the rights to gamble on their games.
Comment by Excessively Rabid Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 12:06 pm
My apologies, I forget to clarify that I am only speaking about marijuana with each post, though I think a quick look through my posts would take care of that.
Comment by Colossus Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 12:06 pm
KW Jr,
Your moving into the whole WMD thing is an unecessary, and futile, attempt at provocation. If your argument is failing, change the subject. Keep to the subject, please.
Comment by dupage dan Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 12:07 pm
I did read your other posts, Colossus, and see that you focus on pot. Since some who post here are not clear in their language it is hard to see what their position is - and they use the vague terms as often as not. Unfortunately, I don’t always have the luxury of being able to reread everyones previous posts in their entirety when I respond.
Although I am reluctant to agree with the legalization of pot if there is one to be chosen that would be the most logical. Non-addictive, no evidence of any harmful “overdose” episodes and lower long term side effects, make it a good candidate for legalizing. Forget the whole MJ thing, it’s abused by folk who falsify claims. Just legalize and tax. Allow for research so that claims of benefits for various medical conditions can be explored and exploited.
I just won’t buy what some claim here - that the streets will be safer or our minds will be expanded so as to grok the universe. Or that our tax/revenue woes will be resolved. Hogwash.
Comment by dupage dan Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 12:19 pm
- In the meantime, maybe we shouldn’t be glorifying these substances by using anecdotal stories from folk like Jobs -
DD, I’m not glorifying, just pointing out that the mania against drugs is largely anecdotal and there are plenty of stories from the other side out there. And while your opinion is that LSD has no value outside of fun, I urge you to visit http://www.maps.org/ or http://www.hofmann.org to see some of the reasons others have a different opinion. I’m not saying legalize everything and put it in the water, I’m just saying this hysteria is getting us nowhere and there needs to be a complete change of course.
Comment by Small Town Liberal Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 12:21 pm
@DD
While ignoring parallels between recent foreign policy and drug war decisions, consider turning a blind eye to Czar Kerli’s “criminals will be criminals” crystal ball.
Comment by Kasich Walker, Jr. Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 12:33 pm
STL, I agree that the anecdotal stories abound on both sides and prevent decent debate about the issues. Whenever I read one proposal or another I am leery because so many have a particular socio-political bent that is hard to discern. Making a huge change like total legalization is, IMO, unlikely due to the fact that many people are fearful. If legalizing pot could show that is could work that would go a long way to calming folks fears. Thanks.
Comment by dupage dan Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 12:51 pm
YINN
Would drug legalization cause a big increase in use? Let’s look at history.
The Nat’l Institute on Alcohol Abuse & Alcoholism (NIAAA) tracks annual per capita alcohol consumption from 1850-2007. The data show that consumption generally rose in the years prior to Prohibition, and then declined during the early years of Prohibition.
Once it was repealed, consumption grew steadily from 1934 -1947, after which it declined slightly for about a decade before resuming its climb from 1959-1983.
Consumption has skyrocketed by 137% since repeal. It was 0.97 gallons per capita in 1934 and 2.31 gallons in 2007.
Consumption averaged 2.56 gallons from 1911-1915. It took 37 years after repeal to reach that level again in 1971.
http://www.niaaa.nih.gov/Resources/DatabaseResources/QuickFacts/AlcoholSales/Pages/consum01.aspx
Comment by reformer Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 1:02 pm
@Yinn
Assuming the data from the niaa link is accurate, the info provided for the 3 years prior to prohibition and 2007 show a decrease in consumption of “spirits” with increases in beer and wine. That may be more a function of advertising dollars spent.
Maybe legislators currently questioning full legalization of marijuana would accept advertising bans similar to those applied to tobacco.
At the very least, Americans should be able to grow what they want for use on the their property & that of consenting adults.
Geeze. It’s a plant.
The ban on industrial hemp is as pointless as banning cotton.
Comment by Kasich Walker, Jr. Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 1:22 pm
Rich -
On the flip side, the sensible alternative is to challenge (or require) communities that do not want LEGALIZED video gaming in their community to prohibit video poker machines altogether within their confines.
As I think you are trying to point out, we are only arguing over who - the state, tavern owners, The Outfit - gets a piece of the pie and how big.
There’s still pie, and if the state ain’t eating it, someone else is.
Its not like the tavern owners or The Outfit are reporting their income to the Illinois Department of Revenue.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 1:58 pm
== If you think the Gaming Board is gonna do that (give existing video poker machine companies a piece of the pie), you’re nuts. ==
I hope that prediction proves correct that the people now running the coin operated amusement industry don’t end up running the video poker industry.
Comment by reformer Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 3:05 pm
–wordslinger, thanks for the plug for my good friend Nathan Thompson’s book Policy Kings. The book was a labor of love for Nathan. He spent almost ten years researching material for this book.
Quincy Jones, whose father was a carpenter for the Jones Brothers, the biggest and baddest of the Chicago Policy Kings, holds the movie rights for this book. Hopefully, this movie can be made. Not only does it cover policy or the numbers racke, but gives a great overview of Bronzeville history.–
Ir could be a great movie in the right hands. A true-as-dirt, not-that-long-ago shoot-em-up between Sam Gialcana and the Outfit and The Joneses, Ted Roe and the Policy Kings in 1940s-50s Chicago.
What’s Michael Mann up to? It would seem right up his alley.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 3:14 pm
===what do you say to those who argue that the lottery, video poker, etc. are a tax on the poor?===
Just another reason why we should have a progressive income tax. I recognize that the poor do spend more on gambling/cigarettes/alcohol/drugs, but keeping the stuff off the market causes a bigger problem. So the poor are going to have to take one for the team or learn to dodge the bullet. Meanwhile, we make sure that the rest of the tax code doesn’t weigh more heavily on the impoverished.
===The mob will never go out of business. There will always be something around for gangs to make an illegal buck off of.===
There are illegal activities that are supported by some of the populace, like drugs and gambling. But then there are other illegal activities, like racketeering and burglary, that are purely menaces to society. By forcing the mob into actions that are purely menaces to society, you take away the support from the fringes of society. And that is going to lower the amount of people who join up and force the mob into using more difficult methods of making money.
Comment by Timmeh Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 5:27 pm