Mexico De-Criminalizes Possession of Drugs

On August 21, 2009, Mexico decriminalized the possession of small amounts of drugs, including marijuana, cocaine, LSD, methamphetamine, and heroin.  The amounts vary depending on the drug in question; up to 5 grams of marijuana to .015 milligrams of LSD.  Under the new law, these small amounts are considered for “personal use” and the possessor is not subject to incarceration or criminal charges, but the person will be encouraged to seek treatment. After the third stop though, treatment is mandatory indicating that the police can still record the stop or arrest.  

The immediate effect of the new law will be to free up law enforcement personnel from pursuing very small, victimless possession to pursue larger players in the chain of drug distribution.  There will also be a huge savings in incarceration costs and in resources devoted to prosecuted minor drug offenses.  It is unlikely that this small step to legalization will have any effect on the larger drug war playing out in Mexico.  Therefore, this baby step of de-criminalization raises the question of whether Mexico should have gone farther and decriminalized drugs in general.  

The drug war in Mexico is costing billions of pesos for an economy in Mexico that shrank more than 10% over the last year during the Great Recession.  The oil revenues from Pemex that flow into the federal government’s coffers declined last year due to reduced output at the fields.  Of course, the drug war is not just a matter of cost; it is also a matter of the type of society the people’s representatives vote for the people of Mexico.  

The benefits to complete decriminalization would mean that legitimate businesses could go into the business of selling what were formerly illegal drugs, and the government could then tax those businesses for revenue.  Rather than guns and lives being lost, and towns and villages being taken over by armed thugs or by the army, the battle would play out in the economy with competition for delivering a product to the consumer.  There might be customs and tax violations, but no one would be losing their life to keep a product out of people’s hands.  Also, there would be many fewer individuals in jail because drug offenses would not be illegal.  This would be a huge saving in terms of cost and in lost lives of those branded felons who can no longer work in normal society.  

What about society.  Could someone go the local market and buy drugs?  Yes, just like alcohol and cigarettes today. Would the entire society be perpetually stoned and unable to function, and would one want his or her neighbor to be in possession of drugs.  As to the first point, there is a rate of addiction for every substance, be it alcohol, cigarettes, marijuana, cocaine, or heroin.  Some people get “hooked” and some do not, and those who do will need treatment. The rate of addiction is not large, though.  Even the most addictive substances usually do not exceed a 3-4% addiction rate.  Thus, a society of addicts is a very unlikely outcome of de-criminalization.  Will the treatment costs for the additional addicts outweigh the benefits of saving lives and hundreds of millions, probably billions, of pesos in fighting the drug war year after year?  Most likely.  What about one’s neighbors being stoned?  If one’s neighbor is perpetually drunk because alcohol is legal, then there is a chance that one’s neighbor could become a drug addict.  One’s neighbor may need treatment, and may even steal to support his habit (although drugs will be very inexpensive due to the end of the drug war).  Some neighbors will become addicts, but given the base rate of addiction to most substances, and the normal regulation accompanying addictive substances (like alcohol not being sold to minors) that is most likely a much smaller price to pay than turning many parts of a country into an armed camp and having hundreds, maybe thousands, of people losing their lives each year to fight a war over drug importation and distribution.