[lp0_on_fire]

The cartels are involved with things other than drugs, too. It's also pretty laughable to think that even if the US "demand for drugs" evaporated overnight the cartels would just throw up their hands and say "guess we have to go legit now!".

[invalidname]

That's an over simplification. Imagine that drugs, gambling and prostitution were legalized (with restrictions), the cartels would fork off that business into their "legitimate" businesses. Pay taxes and work through there.

Eventually, these would become two separate businesses as enforcement would focus on the connection between the businesses and levy sanctions. History is full of such stories where bootleggers became respected business owners.

The cartel won't disappear, but it will shrink as its big sources of income would become irrelevant. That would mean law enforcement can be more focused and follow a smaller target. Violence will decrease and everybody wins. Additional taxes from these industry fund more policing of the remainder of the cartels.

[moralestapia]

This is the thing that all the "legalize it" guys don't get, at all.

[hombre_fatal]

What's the argument for that?

People have all sorts of reasons for wanting legalization beyond disempowering drug cartels.

Like keeping people out of prison for nonviolent crimes, building a culture of rehab over penalization, and creating legitimate drug markets instead of dangerous black markets, off the top of my head, that have nothing to do with whether cartels having other lucrative enterprises beyond drugs.

[dumpsterdiver]

The parent appeared to be suggesting that legalizing drugs would not solve the cartel problem, because the cartels have already displayed a willingness to engage in different forms of harmful activity. The argument wasn't "legalization is bad", but rather "legalization won't solve this specific problem".

[moralestapia]

>What's the argument for that?

Huh? Did you read @lp0_on_fire's comment? The one I replied to?