The Star Tribune has run several editorial columns and letters recently about the morass of gun-inflicted violence in which America is mired. Every suggestion, reasonable or not, for restricting sales or possession of guns instantly generates controversy and resistance. On the other hand, obviously there does exist a consensus in favor of crime control, as urged by a retired policeman [Star Tribune letters, Jan. 29.]
But there’s a less expensive and more practical means of crime control than the former cop’s demand for more prison cells to cage more criminals.
The sensible solution is to end prohibition of cannabis and dismantle the broadly counter-productive policy of drug prohibition.
According to Census Bureau figures, after alcohol prohibition was repealed in 1933, the rate of murders and assaults committed with firearms fell dramatically, year after year, for the next 10 years, until it was cut nearly in half.
Why did it happen? Because restoring legitimate liquor sales ended the turf warfare of organized criminals who’d been supplying bootleg liquor.
By taking the business out of the gangs, you put the gangs out of business—not entirely, but enough to make a dramatic improvement in public safety.
There’s plenty of political mischief in the currently deadlocked debate on gun control. Every day, lives are lost so that politicians can save face, or at least save their prospects of re-election. And yet a straightforward, feasible policy to potentially cut gun offenses in half is sitting in plain sight. On the “drug war,” public opinion has concluded it’s “a bust.” As the New York Times said, in recommending the re-legalization of cannabis: It’s time to end prohibition—again.
Oliver Steinberg
