Mexico Decriminalizes "Personal Use" Amounts of Marijuana, Cocaine, LSD, Methamphetamines, and Heroin

[nerdgirl 0]

“Mexican President Felipe Calderon has signed into law a bill passed by the country's congress last spring. The new measure decriminalizes possession of small amounts of marijuana, cocaine, LSD, methamphetamines and heroin, setting limits for what constitutes ‘personal use’ quantities. At the same time, it provides free treatment for those with drug addiction.

“The hope is that the law will distinguish casual users from addicts. Before, those arrested for drug possession -- even for small amounts -- were handed long jail terms. Studies show that drug use is on the rise in Mexico, calling into question the efficacy of deterrent policies. In addition, the ongoing violent drug war against cartels, which has killed an estimated 11,000 since Calderon took office in 2006, also played an influential roll in the government's shift from punishment to treatment.”

More from the BBC, suggesting another motive:

"[Mexican prosecutors] say it [the decriminalization law] is designed to prevent corrupt police from seeking bribes from small-time drug users, and to encourage addicts to seek treatment.

"The move comes amid a drug war in Mexico that has claimed more than 11,000 lives in the last three years.

"Those found in possession of the equivalent of four joints of marijuana, or four lines of cocaine will no longer be viewed as criminals. Instead they will be encouraged to seek government-funded drug treatment, which will be compulsory if users are caught a third time."

Reportedly, “The maximum amount of marijuana for 'personal use' under the new law is 5 grams — the equivalent of about four joints. The limit is a half gram for cocaine, the equivalent of about 4 "lines." For other drugs, the limits are 50 milligrams of heroin, 40 milligrams for methamphetamine and 0.015 milligrams for LSD.”

Do you think this change in the Mexico’s law will enable the government (& military being deployed domestically) to focus on big-time traffickers?

Is there any evidence that internal/domestic Mexican demand is driving the Mexican narco-traffickers? (My inclination is to be skeptical … but don’t have anything more than my inclination on which to argue that point at this time.)

Or will it exacerbate the problem?

What do you think will be the impact on US-Mexico border control efforts and violence along the border?

I'm wondering how pleased (or not) this makes all sorts of parents who sent their kids to UCSD, University of Arizona, UT-Brownsville, etc.

/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[warpedskydiver 0]

Don't worry in the eyes of the Policia US citizens will still be guilty of DWG

Driving, Drinking, Dancing, or Drugging While Gringo.

[nerdgirl 0]

That may be ... I'm more interested in the way it may play out w/r/t Mexico's domestic counter-narcotics efforts and the US counter-narcotics efforts.

/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[nanook 1]

Quote

Do you think this change in the Mexico’s law will enable the government (& military being deployed domestically) to focus on big-time traffickers?

It's hard to say without knowing how much attention the gov't actually paid to the small time users. I would guess that taking away the drugs' illegality will not free up extra police as they will be now paying attention on other crimes that drugs attention previously took up.
With the decriminalization, I believe that it may decrease overall arrests, but more violent crimes may rise with the hard drugs being legal for everyone. So non-violent crimes will decrease considerably, and overall crime may drop, but an increase of violent crime would prevent overall crime from decreasing to the point hypothesized by decriminalization.

I'm interested in the effect it would have in the U.S. Afterall, Mexico is a main corridor for U. S. drugs. For one, Mexico's demand may increase a bit because it is a decriminalization. That is less drugs not crossing over our borders because of it. Total output needs to increase over the borders to keep up with present demand. Prices due to scarcity will increase in Mexico and will rise sharply here in the U. S.

I am going to take a WAG and say drug trafficking will increase considerably and rise drug trade violence in the U. S. and maybe more so in Mexico.

The U. S. will have to have more agents at the U.S./Mexico borders to prevent the casual users from crossing over as personal portage will increase considerably. Also, since everyone can come over the border and legally do any drug they want, it may change crime demographics in both cities. Possesion crimes may decrease in San Diego, but there may be more addicts leading to shift of crimes.

_____________________________

"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

I'm more interested in the way it may play out w/r/t Mexico's domestic counter-narcotics efforts and the US counter-narcotics efforts.

I doubt it'll have any impact.

We are all engines of karma

[likearock 2]

Quote

Quote

I'm more interested in the way it may play out w/r/t Mexico's domestic counter-narcotics efforts and the US counter-narcotics efforts.

I doubt it'll have any impact.

I agree, it probably won't have much. However, it will free up some costly prison space. The U.S. could learn from that example.

[1969912 0]

So he signed it. I had read that he probably wouldn't. Looks like Mexico as a vacation destination will be even more popular than it already is.

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[rickjump1 0]

Quote

So he signed it. I had read that he probably wouldn't. Looks like Mexico as a vacation destination will be even more popular than it already is.

This is part of an article out of the Washington Post dated 21 Feb '09.
Washington Post
The State Department routinely updates its assessments of hot spots around the globe, issuing official "warnings" and "alerts." Warnings are the worst, reserved for nations posing higher risks for travelers, and cover countries such as Haiti, Iraq and Congo. "Alerts," like the one issued for Mexico, do not recommend that visitors avoid an entire country but instead advise them to employ extra caution and avoid specific locales and behaviors. In Mexico, those behaviors include driving at night, buying drugs and visiting the state of Durango........

My opinion: Mexico would be a great place to visit if you wanted to get stoned, kidnapped, or killed in the same day.

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[lawrocket 3]

It's great how drugs are "legalized." Possession for personal use isn't a problem. Selling is still a black market - with everytrhing that goes with it.

This will simply increase demand, further empowering the cartels and increase the violence.

This is a fine way of making a problem worse.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Kennedy 0]

Considering the level of corruption in all levels of Mexican government and collusion between government and cartels, this is really not going to have a significant effect. If anything, this is just a small way to make matters worse.

When in MX, always keep a $20 bill in an easy to reach pocket. When stopped by the uniformed banditos, the correct answers are "Si, commandante" "No, commandante" and "Por tu ninos" while handing over the $20.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[jclalor 12]

Reportedly, “The maximum amount of marijuana for 'personal use' under the new law is 5 grams — the equivalent of about four joints. The limit is a half gram for cocaine, the equivalent of about 4 "lines." For other drugs, the limits are 50 milligrams of heroin, 40 milligrams for methamphetamine and 0.015 milligrams for LSD.”If my memory from the 80's serves me correctly those are some fat joints and fat lines.

[BIGUN 1,234]

If we legalize the demand side; don't we give formal approval to the supply side? In other threads, I've been told that a joint is no worse than a beer, therefore, we've given permission to drive around with four beers readily available for consumption. At what point is one impaired. Where is the test for driving under the influence.

Next thing you know; we'll not only be hearing that we should have health care reform because other countries have free health care; we'll be hearing how we should be legalizing "small amounts of drugs" because other countries do it. What effect would these "smaill" amounts of drugs have on a free or even subsidized health care program.

Bread and Circuses.

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[Eiley 0]

Quote

Quote

Reportedly, “The maximum amount of marijuana for 'personal use' under the new law is 5 grams — the equivalent of about four joints. The limit is a half gram for cocaine, the equivalent of about 4 "lines." For other drugs, the limits are 50 milligrams of heroin, 40 milligrams for methamphetamine and 0.015 milligrams for LSD.”

If my memory from the 80's serves me correctly those are some fat joints and fat lines.

That's exactly what I was thinking! Cheech & Chong-like cigar joints and lines that would test the most adamant hollywood imbibers

nothing to see here

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

Reportedly, “The maximum amount of marijuana for 'personal use' under the new law is 5 grams — the equivalent of about four joints. The limit is a half gram for cocaine, the equivalent of about 4 "lines."If my memory from the 80's serves me correctly those are some fat joints and fat lines.

Generally speaking, based on what I've picked up from drug abusers, one gram of marijuana will make you a blunt - bigger than a joint, smaller than a Cheech and Chong special. I can't remember the last time I saw an actually white joint, other than on NCSU campus.

We don't have much powder in my city, it tends to get cooked up into crack cookies faster than you can say "whachu need, homie?"

Thankfully, we don't have much heroin or LSD use in town, and meth tends to stay out in the rural areas. The only time I see meth heads is at the local WalMart.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[billvon 2,874]

>I've been told that a joint is no worse than a beer, therefore, we've given
>permission to drive around with four beers readily available for
>consumption. At what point is one impaired. Where is the test for driving
>under the influence.

I don't get that concern. Right now you can drive around with as many (closed but recappable) beer bottles that you like. Think Grolsch bottles. But you still can't have a BAC higher than X%.

> What effect would these "smaill" amounts of drugs have on a free
> or even subsidized health care program.

Probably the same effect that cigarettes and alcohol have on health insurance.

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

If we legalize the demand side; don't we give formal approval to the supply side? In other threads, I've been told that a joint is no worse than a beer, therefore, we've given permission to drive around with four beers readily available for consumption. At what point is one impaired. Where is the test for driving under the influence.

The joint depends on the weed just as much as "a beer" depends on the brand and size. You can smoke one bowl of mind eraser and forget your own name, or you can smoke a fat blount of the local marijuanoregano and barely feel a buzz. Kinda the quality imported stout vs. cheap domestic light.
And let's keep in mind, driving with alcohol in the car is legal, as long as it is in unopened manufacturer-sealed containers.

And as for DWI, the same tests for alcohol DWIs work for all other imparing substances. The HGN will only show up for some drugs, but the other two SFSTs, with an additional check or two, will determine impairment.

Quote

Bread and Circuses.

What else is new?

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[BIGUN 1,234]

Quote

Probably the same effect that cigarettes and alcohol have on health insurance.

Perhaps. But, would it be the same as if there were a greater percentage of population who use cigarettes and/or beer and/or Marijuana and/or LSD and/or meth and/or Heroin because the government now endorses it?

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[virgin-burner 1]

take the netherlands for example which did something similar some 30 years ago; drug usage over the population has gone down dramatically, in fact, most dutch wouldnt even smoke a joint, let alone do "hard" drugs. on the plus side of things, many tourists come there to, yup, get high, spend money on hotels, food and what not! criminality is relatively high, but that may have other reasons, considering the netherlands had a lot of colonies in rather poor countries, of which the citizens decided to get back to the "motherland"..

“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.”
-Hunter S. Thompson
"No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try."
-Yoda