Crime, Drugs, and Our Borders

I was listening to the news yet again about the crime rates, the drug trafficking, and our borders. Everyone wants to spend more money to prevent/stop it. I listened to the so called experts say how we can stop it and it all called for spending more tax dollars.

OK, here is an idea, there is a demand and if there was not a demand, then the drug cartels would go out of business. So, why not legalize the stuff, put a tax on it? What would this do? It would mean, that now it can be produced legally in country, we can tax it, there is no longer a demand for the stuff to come from outside of our borders. Place fines just like with drinking and driving, being fired for being under the influence at work and so on. Hey, the prison population goes down too!

Think about it, there was prohibition and look what that brought and then the legalized alcohol and there was not the same crime rate anymore and the government was able to collect taxes on the stuff.

I am not a drinker, nor am I a drug user. But when you have a demand and it is not going away, why throw money into a bottomless pit? Turn it into a legal money maker. Crime will go down because it is not longer illegal, our prison population will go down, our borders will not be flooded with drugs and if so, they will not make as much money, and it cuts down on the illegal foot traffic as well.

Other countries have legalized certain drugs. Look at the Netherlands and Sweden to name a couple. It is proven that our current system is not working and it has to be done differently. Just my two cents!

I am not sure I agree with you on most of the thoughts...

Now, what would you do if you were not a trained investigator and had claims of illegal activity (of any kind) on your property? Would you try to get assistance from law enforcement? How would you do so if they ask for more specific personal information regarding those that are under suspicion?

Hello Johnny,

Are you talking if it was legalized or still under the current system? Of course if it was legalized then some current laws that are in placed would no longer apply? I would even say there are some laws currently in housing that would change as well (but that would be for the legal beagles to hammer out). If we are talking about the current situation, then it is a no brainer and I would follow current policies.

I know what I am advocating may sound radical, but in my travels I have seen where it has its benefits to make it legal. Alcohol is mind altering as well as the drugs. The current laws we have in place do not seem to be doing the trick and we are placing more of a burden on the tax payers in order to fight it. So, we have a drain on our economy, flip it and turn it into something which we can tax and maybe even make our streets safer. Our current system we are not winning the war, so we have to think different.

Believe me, I am not supporting drugs or alcohol, but we (as I see it) have to take a different approach on the drug problem. I know this is a controversial topic, but someone has to step out there and say hey lets take a real look at this because the demand has not stopped, no matter what has been thrown out there, so legalize it and see what it brings and if it hurts still then go back to the old way.

I am talking about activity that is currently illegal; or at least very confusing as to which law to follow.

Let's take marijuana for example. Some states have legalized it for medical use, while the federal government disagrees.

Let's say you are the manager of a section 8 or tax credit property that is federally funded and you have a resident that has a medical marijuana card. Even if you are in a state that allows it; the federal statute takes jurisdiction and the resident must be evicted and lose their assistance. The same holds true if the resident is not on a project based section 8 property, but is receiving a housing choice voucher.

The different rules put property managers in the middle of a tough situation.

Here in Oregon, marijuana is legal for medical use. In just a few short years, we now have nearly 80 THOUSAND "disabled" users under age 28. That's a whole lot of sudden disability. I would be in favor of medicinal use, but anyone who might have sprained their ankle once 10 years ago can still be eligible. The system, and the drug, stinks.

As for other types of drugs; I don't want to live next to a coke or meth user either. I've had residents who use drugs and they are simply hard to deal with. We get too many complaints about their behavior and they have too little respect for the rules.

Hello Rose,

I have expressed a thought on something which is very controversial and I know there will be many out there who have this thought or that and I may ask a question or make a statement and it is not one to say wrong or right. There are some which may think that my bringing this topic up that I am pro and this is not the case. It is how we can possibly solve the problem. It is something which is out there and the current policies that are in place is a drain on our country. I read the part of being next to a neighbor on drugs being hard to deal with and I say so are a lot of alcoholics. We have deaths on our roads from people driving under the influence. There drinking was not the problem, but driving while drinking is the problem. Alcohol is legal to use, but we still have people who drink and drive. Is it right? No, people have choices and some make the right ones and some not.

I will venture to say there are some personnel who are in high levels in corporations which their drug of choice is cocaine. Some of them we talk with and deal with and never know they are users.

There is a downside to most any point for or against, but which one will do the most for us and which will do the most harm? We as a society really need to evaluate what we are doing how long we have been doing it an has it achieved its goal?

The system as we have it now is not working and it is costing us. Did you know in Sweden they have a park where the addicts are and that they state give out needles so that there is not the spread of disease? They get the money to pay for these needles through the sale of legal drugs. If they did not have this, then the tax payer would have to pay for it.

I know bringing this up ruffles some feathers and that is OK if we start looking at how to fix the problem in such a way where the tax payers are not being burdened with it even more!

@Rose;

Your state is a good example of the level of confusion between which standard to follow if you are on a federally funded tax credit, or project based section property.

In your state, Medical Marijuana is legal; but it is NOT under Federal law. Let's for a moment take into consideration you may be a property manager for a property that is federally funded, or you may have a resident that is receiving the benefits of a Housing Choice Voucher (also federally funded). What do you do when this resident is also using medical marijuana? When the authority administering your funding and compliance (or the HCV for the resident) finds out; you will have to evict the resident under fedaral law.

Isn't it great when the state and federal government puts us in the middle of a huge debate to deal with???


Alternatively, what do you do if your property is not federally funded and find out that you have a resident that is using marijuana, either without a MM card, or with one that was not received legitimately? What do you do when you find out that a resident is growing it, either for their own private use, or for distribution?

It's definitely a confusing topic! On top of the State vs. Federal law issue, the courts here flat out refuse to hear cases regarding marijuana use in housing. Even the fair housing bureau refuses to take action on complaints regarding it.

In addition to state laws not being consistent with federal laws, Oregon landlord/tenant law, criminal law, and civil law are not even consistent with each other. It's very subjective there are many interpretations.

If a resident has a prescription to "use" medicinal marijuana, it does not give them permission to smoke in a smoke-free community, or to disturb the right of their neighbors to enjoy the premises. There are other ways to "use" medicine besides smoking.

If someone is using, I wont know unless they violate their rental agreement, in which case we will take action on the violation. I don't care if they are card holders or not, especially if they have never asked for a reasonable accommodation.

Growing marijuana is damaging to the premises and is prohibited, card or not. Additionally, while a disabled renter is a part of a protected class, marijuana growers and caregivers (distributors) are not.

Oregon used to have a needle exchange program as well. I am not sure if it still exists.

We had a corporate training not long ago and had an attorney present and he told us that Medical Marijuana use would be a reasonable accomodation under ADA law; but the need for it (not the nature of the need) would have to be documented and signed by an MD type before even considering.

This holds true in areas where smoking is prohibited, even by local government ordinance.

I am not sure how reasonable an accommodation would be in regards to MM use on property; or which statute should be followed.

I absolutely agree with Nate. I will be the first to say I'm pro-legalization, although I have never nor do I plan to smoke marijuana. While I understand this could be a terribly convoluted problem for us community managers, I for one am tired of paying to incarcerate non-violent offenders. My staff and I were just this morning discussing how broken the legal system in. Someone gets arrested for drugs, depending on the situation it could be a felony. They do their time are released, and then what? Can you hire them? I would love to give people a second chance but I can't hire anyone with a criminal history. I don't blame companies as I understand the liability, I blame the system. It's set up for failure. A non-violent offender gets arrested for a felony amount of drugs. They spend their time in prison, accumulating debt as they go. They're released and expected to pay the fines incurred during their arrest and time in jail. How are they going to pay those fines? I can understand why so many re-offend, what else does the world have to offer them? A place they can't get a job and are thought of as third rate citizens. According to the law they have paid their dues and served their time, but they are still punished.

@Rose, I don't want to live next door to a meth or crack addict, but the fact that those things are illegal doesn't keep them from moving into our communities. A well written lease allows us to handle these issues; we don't need the laws to. As many of the officers I work with say, we have more resources to deal with issues in our community than they do.

I agree with most of what has been said in this thread. While I am against recreational drug use, I am not sure how making more of these drugs legal on any level just so we can generate tax revenue is somehow going to make our lives safer. Would you want someone behind the wheel in the car next to you and your kids under the influence of alcohol, much less any other drug? I can see the possibility of reducing crimes related to the drug use, but even that is remote and pales in comparison to the potential safety issues on our roads.

Currently all we have available to us as property managers is strict guidelines to apply when reviewing applicant packages to accept or decline an application.

Like I said before; until the states and the feds get on the same page as to which drugs can be legalized; we need to enforce the more restrictive of them at our properties as they stand. The question is at what point do drugs on the property cross the line of interfering with the rights of all residents? Do we say it is okay to USE as long as it is within the federal guidelines and not POSSESS or manufacture/grow for distribution?

I know that some countries (and the State of Nevada, I THINK) also legalize prostitution, if this is the case; do we allow it to occur on property after it is reported and confirmed?

There is a section on here (Happy Hour) where I posted my topic and it was talk about anything, other than housing. It is where I posted this because I know the complications of housing and I know the current laws as they are and we discussing it from the housing level do not address the big problem. Just really busted my butt that here we are 50 years later and still have not broke the code: Here is something which I am not the author of and is being discussed in Harvard: it breaks down the cost of the war on drugs to our nation and the states:

State and federal governments in the United States face massive looming fiscal deficits. One policy change that can reduce deficits is ending the drug war. Legalization means reduced expenditure on enforcement and an increase in tax revenue from legalized sales.

This report estimates that legalizing drugs would save roughly $41.3 billion per year in government expenditure on enforcement of prohibition. Of these savings, $25.7 billion would accrue to state and local governments, while $15.6 billion would accrue to the federal government.

Approximately $8.7 billion of the savings would result from legalization of marijuana and $32.6 billion from legalization of other drugs.

The report also estimates that drug legalization would yield tax revenue of $46.7 billion annually; assuming legal drugs were taxed at rates comparable to those on alcohol and tobacco. Approximately $8.7 billion of this revenue would result from legalization of marijuana and $38.0 billion from legalization of other drugs.

Now we can let the legal boys deal with how to deal with other wording and impact on housing and so on. Now there is also another word and that is not legalizing, but decriminalizing.

Do not get me wrong as I state again I am not for drug use or for that matter the use of alcohol to the point where it is abused. I am looking at this from a military point of view as when you go in you have to have a strategy to win. We are not winning and it is draining us dry, so we need to change. There would be no problem if there was not a demand, and there is a demand and it is not going away!

I understand the theory and concept of legalization. For discussion purpose. Now fast forward to the real world.

* to think demand would drop is utter non-sense.
* to think a black market would not GROW is non-sense

Hell - everyone will have a medical card. Perhaps Medicare would fund it, crazy

We have just spent 10+ years fighting the tobacoo industry and fighting each other in regards to Smoking period. This would just open a whole new can of worms. Where the underlining issue is who would have more rights. In an apartment complex, which is what we are focused on here. Your going to what enforce "smokeless" pipes. You just got done spending money cleaning up from cigarettes.

Decriminalization I agree. Legalization would blown-up in our face.

We are a product of our society and the values of one generation compared to another is different. I watched the military change because it is a product of our society. What I was subject to when I went through training people would have the book thrown at them today.

The kids of today will be our leaders tomorrow and I spend time chatting with these kids to findout where their heads are at and there are something which I say wow, they got it right and then there are others where it scares the hell out of me.

Our kids when they become voting age there are things which they will want to change because there are those that say we have not gotten it right and when it comes time and they are in the drivers seat they will make those changes.

I am not a know it all, but I try to see where we are going, and the answer is in our youth. Some of our values are not the same as our youth. What I am writing about here is being discussed in our places of higher education. Remember this blog 10 years from now if not sooner.

Look at the numbers again and think about where we are currently and what we are spending and what we can be saving. It will all come down to a business way of thinking! Check these numbers out again:

State and federal governments in the United States face massive looming fiscal deficits. One policy change that can reduce deficits is ending the drug war. Legalization means reduced expenditure on enforcement and an increase in tax revenue from legalized sales.

This report estimates that legalizing drugs would save roughly $41.3 billion per year in government expenditure on enforcement of prohibition. Of these savings, $25.7 billion would accrue to state and local governments, while $15.6 billion would accrue to the federal government.

Approximately $8.7 billion of the savings would result from legalization of marijuana and $32.6 billion from legalization of other drugs.

The report also estimates that drug legalization would yield tax revenue of $46.7 billion annually; assuming legal drugs were taxed at rates comparable to those on alcohol and tobacco. Approximately $8.7 billion of this revenue would result from legalization of marijuana and $38.0 billion from legalization of other drugs.

So, if this is being discussed in our universaties and most of the students are leaning toward changing because of the numbers and these same students are our political leaders, doctors, lawyers, and our law enforcement personnel. Maybe they will go like Portugal and decriminalize the drug laws. Wow, this subject is almost as hard hitting with some people as religion and it is great to see the different views and thoughts!

Legal or not, drugs or alcohol are not good for a landlord. I spent a stint as a drug enforcement and education NCO while stationed in Germany with the US Army. The Commander and I tried to banish drugs from the unit and had some success, but never got rid of the problem. This was in the early 80's. While I have no credentials as an expert on drugs, I do know the harm they can cause to normal people like ruining their careers and their lives.
What has to be faced by everyone in general, and property managers in particular, is the times we are living in. Drug use is rampant, and won't be going away.
But, I want to discuss in my post "another" drug problem. Namely, the misuse and abuse of Prescribed Drugs. These are handed around or sold the same as cocaine and meth. You would be amazed at how many elderly are doing this. We have a tenant who goes occasionally to be rehabbed and dried out off of doctor prescribed drugs, hers, and her friends as well. We need to stop the doctors from writing any and everything just to get rid of an elderly person out of the doctor's office. In elderly properties, this is a huge problem.

Nate - I can support your analysis that times will change because the pending generation will be in a position to not only suggest but make the change happen, the power to VOTE.

Sure the numbers due suggest a dollar factor. Here we totally overlook the one big onion on the plate that would NOT benefit from this - pharmaceutical companies. Second only to INSURANCE, this lobby group has true proven power to set the rules. We already are clearly aware of how they manipulate this country with pricing. {Canada gets the same product cheaper - Why?}

These monsters will want a piece of that action. Under the banner of protecting their market share. Direct prescription sales (effecting Doctors | Hospital etc) will drop.

Each new generation brings a different level of tolerance and set of values. One that they mold, just like we did. Today's leadership is not interested in change - because it is not their ideas. The next generation needs to focus on changing leadership first. We need Limited Terms on politicians.

Numbers suggesting a savings - enforcement don't take into account the additional problems and cost factors needed when implementing change.

Appreciate the thread - but from my seat - nothing but more problems on a different level will rear it's ugly head. Decriminalize - yes, Legalize? Until we learn how to control the limited Medical Exemptions (ie Oregon post - anyone can qualify) we need to approach this very slowly. If at all...

Hello John,

Yes, decriminalize is one of the things that is on the plate and they are discussing which one would make the most sense. Now as far as the big pharmacy boys and lobbyist, this is going to change over time as well. You see there is a movement that is looking at the power the lobbyist from all self interest sectors have within our political system and making candidate’s term like our presidents, but maybe with a little twist to it is my understanding.

The one big thing is for most is resistance to change, the fear of the unknown, and the past where we have had people that had taken nations through very dark times when they thought they knew what was best for their nation.

Not trying to beat a dead horse, but this war as it has been going for years on drugs is not winning and we have not gained any ground and it becomes more of a drain on our economy through many forms and there needs to be another method looked at.

I could go on and play devil’s advocate here, but I will not because there will be those that will think I like the drug scene and I do not, but I sure as hell am tired of seeing more money wasted there than on trying to cure cancer, diabetes, heart disease, and other ailments out there. Can you imagine what all we could do with the money we are wasting right now on this fight against illegal drugs?

The last thing is in economics you first have to have a demand for your product, and if there is no demand, then there is no business. So, I am all for looking at a smarter way and making it happen and not sitting back and waiting for something to happen. So, we do not get it right the first time, but keep attacking until we get the bugs worked out. Of all the great things that we have done, to me this is a simple task when compared to placing a man on the moon, or the missile we can fire from over 100 miles away and put it through a window of an exact address.

Most youngsters look at people our age and think we do not understand and they challenge authority. I dare say 30 years from now we will not be the same nation of today and our values and opinion of our own country will be different as well!

I'm in a similar boat as Stephani - don't smoke pot, but think that it makes no sense to deal with it like we do. And Nate, you are not crazy for thinking that, as the idea of legalization, or de-criminalization, is a fast-growing idea, even for those that are more conservative. Simply, the negatives to the existing war on drugs is infinitely worse than pot itself. (Not speaking for harder drugs). Putting funds previously from the war on drugs and focusing on programs to help addicts would be much better spent, and is currently very successful in Portugal.