Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

RainDog

(28,784 posts)
4. Law Enforcement claimed crime would increase
Mon Jun 9, 2014, 02:17 PM
Jun 2014

This guy has it ass backwards, iow, and REPEATS the very same assumptions of law enforcement to argue against legalization, here:

What if we legalized marijuana in some of America’s most violent cities, such as Detroit, Oakland and Milwaukee? Would we see the same result that Denver is experiencing? I strongly doubt it. If anything, wider availability of drugs such as marijuana could increase overall crime levels in these cities. That’s hardly something most Americans would welcome.


So, the joke is that this person, acting as if he is responding to a claim made by legalization proponents, is repeating (racist) claims made by opponents.

People noted the decrease in crime to indicate the law enforcement scare warnings against legalization have not happened - they, again, made the initial correlation, not supporters of legalization.

There's no reason to think greater availability through legal routes, limited to adults, would increase crime, but this is exactly the sort of thinking this person engages in, and also elides marijuana legalization with "availability of drugs such as" when bills have all addressed marijuana, not "other drugs."

iow, this is just another example of why the Washington Times has nothing worthwhile to say about this issue.

Reefer Madness as the status quo, iow. Nothing new here. Same old same old.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Drug Policy»TAUBE: The myth of the me...»Reply #4