I can see the point of why it would be easier to save and gain money. I am also aware that the judiciary system in California is tough and thus it is one of the main causes in the overpopulation of its penitentiary facilities. 150,000 inmates are at the moment in the prisons and the bill aims to reduce this number by 55,000 over 3 years by shortening sentences, releasing people inculpated for minor sanctions and other mechanics. Prisons are often reaching the double of their designed capacities making the living conditions in them hard to manage; classrooms and gymnasiums had to be converted so that they could allow prisoners to sleep in. This reform would save from $803M to $906M per year and is endorsed by Governor Schwarzenegger. However, this problem does not only concern the state of California but the whole country, and as a matter of fact a lot of nations suffer from this problem. In 1972, there were 172,000 prisoners in the USA while now this number has skyrocketed to 1,403,091 people.
The bill on the legalisation of the marijuana would make of California the first state to legalize its use in the USA. A poll in April 2009 revealed that 56% of the Californians were favourable to it while in October 44% of the Americans would not mind this step. Proponents argue that it would diminish crime linked to the traffic as the ban has bolstered an aggressive underground economy while opponents argue that it would increase the problems linked to social behaviour notably on the road.
This bill, if passed, in conjunction with the prison bill would allow California to significantly reduce its prisons population and increase its finances thanks to a tax on the commercialisation of marijuana.
I am a bit dubitative at this double decision as I do not really know what would be the impact of such measure on the society. Does this mean that the cartels controlling drug traffic are going to be out of business without trying anything and thus crime will fall? Does this mean that people susceptible of a federal offense will take more liberties confident in the fact that minor crimes will be less punished? Will there be more troubles linked to the consumption of marijuana? Or are these more laxist measures supposed to perpetuate the ideal of happiness in the country blessed by God?
These events combined with the failure of the education in California do not announce a bright future to me. I do not really see how it would be beneficial for the society to profit from these bills. Is it a sign of the degeneration of the American society or of an evolution?
-C
I agree with many of your questions and concerns that you pose. As a Californian, I am concerned about the release of prisoners and the possible increases in crime and substance abuse. However, I think that legalization of pot on the one hand will be multi-faceted to helping the California budget. Enforcement is incredibly expensive particularly on the border and the trafficking issue results in many homicides and government failures. Plus the tax income will boost the budget plus fewer drug prisoners will take up cells. I think this measure alone is sufficient without the other.
ReplyDelete~PB
i understand the point of this law concerning drug traffic but i m wondering if it s not going to increase competition in the traffic of harder drugs and thus increase crime since the dealers are going to lose a part of their market.
ReplyDeletewhat i m concerned about too is how people are going to deal with smoking pot, drinking and doing the rest of their life. I dont think it s going too catastrophic but since we ve been raised in a society were it is bad to smoke pot, i wonder how it is going to be for people being raised in a society where it is legalised.
Why would there be greater traffic of harder drugs with this legalization? Most people who use marijuana eventually move to harder drugs, yes. Is that the connection you are referring to? However, it is also a choice of people trying to stop using harder drugs. It could also work the opposite way. Pulling people away from harder drugs now that a once illegal drug is now legal and available.
ReplyDeleteLifestyle would have to addressed. It would have to be approached somehow and that method will be difficult and expensive to enforce. Just think of the frat parties now. Sigh.
not at all, i m not saying that legalisation will make people switch to harder drugs. Although that s not a bad point. I was saying that drug trafficants will have to find an alternative to the reduction of their traffic of marijuana, maybe by increasing the quantity of harder drugs and lowering their price or anything else for that matter.
ReplyDeletemy main question was about lifestyle and i m curious about how a society raised in a pot-legalised place will grow up and what will be its take on the rest of the drugs. I was combining this point with the failure of the education in california and the more laxist measures in prison, it seems to head toward something a bit anarchical.
You are right about the possible lowering of prices on harder drugs but generally demand is very inelastic and doesn't change much with price.
ReplyDeleteI think that there will be problems with pot-legalized society. I do not know how they should combat those problems. Possibly regulation like alcohol but enforcement is quite difficult.
~PB
regulating the consumption of marijuana is one thing but its effects seems to appear much quicker than the one of the alcohol.
ReplyDeleteto me these effects also seem to be stronger than the one of the alcohol, of course it depends on the consumption.