Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[WillowLuman]

Now will his arrest actually help things?

Or is this one of those situations where it is ultimately meaningless?

No matter who you're fighting, taking out the leader of the operation is bound to have some effect.

[LeoLeonardoIII]

Some effect, yes, especially since there are bound to be some things he didn't leave in the hands of his cronies: certain bank accounts, etc. But it will probably result in some shuffling and continue like the Mafia, which from what I've heard, can suffer the loss of several leaders without really doing so much damage on the ground. 

More important would be grabbing certain keystone members who know a lot of things and people. The guys who know where the bodies are buried, you could say. Or planting agents in those roles.

[Sheb]

Well, it does give you a tactical opportunity to move in and re-take some neighborhoods while the organization is shaken. Also, I guess a lot of the mid-level leadership is now scared that there is a police informant in their rank.

[brifoss]

Sad thing is not a single pound of drugs less will be moved because of that. I wonder how much that hunt cost just since he escaped from prison.

[Frumple]

Ehn... not so much sad as unsurprising. It's not the cartels that are driving drug trafficking, just like it's not corporations or investors that create markets or provide jobs. It is -- and has always been -- existent demand. So long as the demand isn't impacted, volume will not reduce -- probably not even over the short run, and definitely not over the long.

... and you can't really reduce demand by imprisoning drug lords. Not meaningfully. It'll take either a very extreme cultural shift (both in the countries where demand centralizes and where production occurs) away from recreational drug use (hint: This isn't going to happen.), drug legalization of various sorts shifting production into better controlled areas, or something legal -- probably some form of designer drug, or a spread of them -- that provides a superior competing product, for less. Then -- and almost certainly only then, no matter how many cartel members you kill or imprison -- you will see demand for cartel products reduce, and consequentially cartel power begin to wane.

"How to kill the cartels" is... well, basically it's just simple economics. If you starve them, they will die. If you take away their food, they will not revive, later. If you kill the members and dismantle the organizations, all that happens is another group will grow to fill their place -- their sustenance (drug demand) is still there, and until it's not, the problem will remain.

[Zangi]

Demand for illegal drugs --> Demand for illegal drug supply and distribution --> Lotsa Moolah --> High labor availability
Not enough jerbs that pay living wage --> Higher labor availability
Illegal --> lotsa moolah

Legal drug supply and distribution --> Lowers demand for illegal drugs --> Lowers demand for illegal drug supply and distribution --> Less moolah

Thats my simple take on the whole drug thing.  Yea... economics.

[WillowLuman]

The problem then becomes that you have large businesses who depend upon selling products that reduce people to addicts. They wouldn't be as likely to go around staging mass executions and torturing people, but it's still a bit horrifying.

[LeoLeonardoIII]

lol inb4 Blizzard

[Frumple]

The problem then becomes that you have large businesses who depend upon selling products that reduce people to addicts. They wouldn't be as likely to go around staging mass executions and torturing people, but it's still a bit horrifying.

We already have those. They're called the alcohol and tobacco industries, as well as a great chunk of the pharmaceutical industry, and that's without even touching psychological dependencies.

[Knit tie]

Sic semper tyrannis and PTW

[WillowLuman]

The problem then becomes that you have large businesses who depend upon selling products that reduce people to addicts. They wouldn't be as likely to go around staging mass executions and torturing people, but it's still a bit horrifying.

We already have those. They're called the alcohol and tobacco industries, as well as a great chunk of the pharmaceutical industry, and that's without even touching psychological dependencies.

I know we already have those, and they're horrifying as well. In fact, they might among be the greatest obstacles to any kind of legalization effort, for fear of competition. Just look at their stance on cannabis.

[Zangi]

The problem then becomes that you have large businesses who depend upon selling products that reduce people to addicts. They wouldn't be as likely to go around staging mass executions and torturing people, but it's still a bit horrifying.

We already have those. They're called the alcohol and tobacco industries, as well as a great chunk of the pharmaceutical industry, and that's without even touching psychological dependencies.

Maybe one day... we find the wonder drug that gives people the good feels without the side effects, physical dependency or psychological dependencies.   
Oh right, we won't.  Because then people will want still want that wonder drug for the good feels, easily dipping into psychological dependency.

Alternatively, humanity becomes happy enough to not need drugs, alcohol and tobacco to cope with life.  Never happening either.

[WillowLuman]

Humanity as a whole already doesn't need those. You say this as if you think a majority of people are alcoholics or drug addicts.