[tathougies]

> Violence related to drugs is mostly caused by prohibition

The rising violence rate due to the marijuana trade in California (and other states) does not agree with your made up reasoning. Although, in principle, I agree that your reasoning ought to make sense. Unfortunately, my principles and empiricism are often at odds, so it's best to side with the latter.

[dragonwriter]

> The rising violence rate due to the marijuana trade in California (and other states) does not agree with your made up reasoning.

It actually does, because federal prohibition has not been lifted (even though there is non-assured enforcement forebearance).

The fact that anyone in a significant ownership, leadership, or management position in any business in the industry is technically guilty of a federal felony with a 20-year minimum sentence (and, just by being sufficiently successful, that can bumped up to a life-without-parole minimum) [0] has a fairly substantial impact on the willingness of otherwise legitimate businesses and businesspeople to participate in the industry and thus on what kind of business people do participate, even when the feds aren't actually prosecuting at the moment.

[0] the “drug kingpin” (formally, Continuing Criminal Enterprise) statute and it's later-added “super kingpin” provision.

[cwkoss]

Also, much of violence is related to legal marijuana businesses being unbanked. Large amounts of cash always attract crime.

[dragonwriter]

> Also, much of violence is related to legal marijuana businesses being unbanked

Right, except for the critical fact that there are no legal marijuana businesses, that is certainly an important effect of the continued federal prohibition.