Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88
The "severity" of crime potential distills down to one factor---the impact it is likely to have on the ordinary citizen. The fact that there are more murders associated with cocaine over meth (20 instead of ten) has no meaning, because the bulk of those murders will affect only victims who are involved in the criminal activity itself. and it is a tiny number of crimes anyway. So that is a factor that discounts to zero in terms of the general public.
In fact, the murder rate in the USA is really quite irrelevant to the general public, because nearly all victims are engaged in some kind of association with the murderers, which is pretty easy for me and you to avoid in our everyday social intercourse. Risk aversion is a no-brainer.
|
The only thing that provoked any thought from me ,here, was your opening statement, so I will muse on that. Impact twixt these two drugs...hmmm. I think meth is probably easier and cheaper to produce and obtain than coke, in any form. It's impact on our population has been hard to miss. All one has to do is look around and you will see emaciated scarecrows running on drug induced energy. Meth is a huge problem, and it is not specific to any demographic. It's everywhere. I suppose this equated to comparing roving gangs of armed thugs to a standing army. One is vicious and predatory, hitting at random wherever they see fit for any reason they see fit, and the other is well equipped, organized, and takes it's orders from a central source. Both are destructive and deadly, both have serious impacts on our society, there is large, easy, money in both as well, when we take the comparison back to the drugs themselves. I think the focus is more on crack than meth. As I said, we are not using our armed forces to combat meth. So, in the vein of how much money we are throwing at the drug problem, the societal impact of crack is more far reaching than that of meth. As to what these two specific drugs actually do to people, that's a dead tie.