[arctichomesteader]

FWIW, the ATF makes it very expensive and difficult to pay the tax on distilled alcohol, so moonshining will continue to be widespread. More government is rarely a solution to anything like drug or alcohol issues.

[cgregor]

When was the last somebody got shot over a moonshine deal gone bad?

[arctichomesteader]

Originally Posted by cgregor

When was the last somebody got shot over a moonshine deal gone bad?

Well unless the body was found...

[68vette]

ATF information:
The post-Prohibition era saw an initial slowing of the practice, but it didn’t take long before federal taxes imposed on liquor spurred a strong comeback. Illegal whiskey could cost one-fifth to one-tenth as much as the sanctioned product.
And while violence has always been part of the moonshine business because of the money involved, in rural areas such as the Southern Appalachians, there was no mob influence, and so the violence was primarily personal in nature.

Violence has very little to do with the legality of a crime. Otherwise, it would be perfectly ok to mug little old ladies as long as you didn't hit, shoot or stab them. The issue is people always find a way to undermine the government when it comes to taxes. If it's legal and you don't pay the government, it is then illegal.

[arctichomesteader]

Look at the regulations and costs involved on distilling and you'll see why the small scale distillers are operating illegally. The feds don't want small distillers to be legal.

[cgregor]

Violence has a lot to do with the perceived profitability of the crime, which was why organized crime bought tommy guns back in Prohibition and why drug dealers kill these days. Remove the profit incentive, and you remove a lot of the behaviorally challenged.

[68vette]

How do you remove the profit incentive? Make drugs legal? That will only have a small or short term effect. The grower or producer can make more profit if they don't give the government a cut of the profits.
From the Denver Post: referencing pot use in Colorado and Washington.
“There’s going to be a black market here,” said Cmdr. Pat Slack of the Snohomish Regional Drug/Gang Task Force, which covers an area outside Seattle. “There will be drug rip-offs and drug debts that haven’t been paid. All of that is going to stay.”

Under Colorado’s voter-approved law, it is legal to possess up to an ounce of marijuana. Authorities are concerned that means illegal dealers and buyers believe they can avoid prosecution. These dealers and their customers also tend to be targets, if robbers know they are flush with cash.

Arapahoe County, outside Denver, has seen “a growing number of drug rips and outright burglaries and robberies of people who have large amounts of marijuana or cash on them,” said District Attorney George Brauchler.

His district has seen at least three homicides linked to pot in recent months and a rising number of robberies and home invasions.

Again, how do you remove the profit incentive?

I agree, remove the incentive and the drug dealers go away, but that is easier said than done. There will always be an incentive for profit.

[cgregor]

You regulate it the way alcohol and tobacco are regulated. Growers grow the stuff, manufacturers process it, distributors market it.

The price drops precipitously simply because it's now so available.

The government taxes it at every step of the way, just as they do with the currently decriminalized ethanol and nicotine delivery systems-- quality control, workplace safety, production licensing, inventory tax, sales tax and so forth.

Unlike tobacco and nicotine, the government distributes and markets the product. This removes the profit incentive, so there is no compulsion to develop a youth market or create an aura of "forbidden fruit" to lure new customers (the ad industry spends about $12 billion a year just advertising alcohol, if I remember correctly, and tobacco companies constantly review their strategies for attracting newly eligible smokers who have reached legal age). Since the state does not need the business to survive, it will not be prone to encourage yet another substance abuse problem. Look at how state liquor stores operate-- they sell as much as they want to, but they do not advertise. Neither are they going out of business.

No drug dealer is going to get rich undercutting a state-set price.

True, there will be the side-effects, just as you hear about truckloads of cigarettes being hijacked, given fake state tax stamps and "butt-legged" elsewhere, but that's not going to be nearly as big a problem as what the illegality of those substances creates at this time. When was the last time you heard of a truckload of cigarettes being hijacked? Me: 1970.

[delmioquartiere]

Originally Posted by cgregor

No drug dealer is going to get rich undercutting a state-set price.

Interesting, the price in CO in the now legal pot shops is $400 and ounce and on the street $400 an ounce. At best you/CO have given people a choice not in price but in who you purchase from. How long do you think it will take for the "illegal" growers to drop their price down to $300 because they aren't regulated and grow on land that isn't theirs and could care less about the condition they leave that land in with lots of nasty things that go into the water supply. How can you ever sell for less than the cartels?

They have one thing invested in a large grow which is about 56 days from seed to huge pot bush,that's why it's called weed. That one thing is freedom which they could care less about and if caught they have many more that will replace them.

[cgregor]

Clearly the state is not operating the trade, but letting the market push the limits. If Colorado took over the industry and offered weed for sale at $40 an ounce, you'd see the illegal trade practically vanish. But government is BAD for us!