I predict the opposite.
My point was mj isn't a victimless crime like many say. Have we forgot the 19 year old kid face down in the Red River with a backpack full of rocks at Wahpeton? Not exactly victimless. If people were not using that crap he would be alive today. Sure it's his fault for selling it, but the demand was there. People who used prior to his death have blood in their bong because they created the demand.
since no one else will, i will waste a couple of minutes of my time and spell it out for you. you made this post and the earlier article about death at the border associated with drug cartels. whether you want to believe it or not, legalization gets rid of both of these issues (assuming the drug cartels were associated with pot which i assure you they are not).
the kid wouldn't be dead if the shit was legal. the cops convinced him that he was going to jail for a long time for selling some weed to someone he probably thought was a friend and the only way to save his future was to start wearing a wire and doing some controlled buys himself. his supplier(s) probably caught wind of it, shot him and threw him in the river with a bag of rocks on his back. first things.. he likely would not have gone to jail for this. probation and a deferred imp for a first time offender would have been the likely result had he gotten the right attorney and a reasonable state's attorney and/or judge on the other end. nonetheless... if legal, none of it would have transpired. he sold some pot to someone, got lied to by police, murdered by the "cartel" and now he is dead because of it.
if marijuana is their business, legalization of marijuana takes the cartels out of the marijuana business. they would have to move on to something else or someplace else. do you see a lot of budweiser cartels in your neck of the woods? lots of people ending up in the river with a hole in their head and a bag of rocks on their back for illegally trafficking in kentucky bourbon? reconsider your argument and then ask yourself why that is?
