Legalization?
Would the legalization of cannabis reduce violent crime
and take the profit away from gangs? Here is an article from
a Canadian paper...
"Edmonton Journal Alberta
Instead Of More Resources For Police, We Really Need Fewer
Laws To Enforce
Everyone remembers the tale of Al Capone, the ruthless
gangster who ruled Chicago in the 1920s. A courageous G-man
named Eliot Ness formed "the Untouchables, "
a tough and incorruptible team that smashed the mobster's
rackets one by one.
Then, in an ingenious move, Internal Revenue Service accountants
nailed Capone for tax evasion and sent him to the Big House
for 11 years. Law and order were restored. Children laughed
in the sunny streets of Chicago, the music played and the
credits rolled.
At least that's how we remember the story thanks to
the old television show and far too many movies. Sadly,
little about this story is true. Even more unfortunately,
the Capone myth continues to be the model for our thinking
about organized crime and how we should deal with today's
chopper-riding gangsters, the Hells Angels.
An extensive, multi-part investigative series published
in The Globe and Mail revealed that the Angels are violent
cocaine traffickers with deep roots in Ontario and across
the country. Who knew?Apparently not the Globe's
editorial writers, who penned a shocked and appalled editorial
calling for -- wait for it -- tougher laws and a crackdown.
Maybe Kevin Costner and Sean Connery will reprise their
roles.
Really, I don't want to mock the Globe. I'm sure
most Canadians would agree that the solution to gangsterism
is more cops and laws because that's the Al Capone story.
Send in Eliot Ness and get the accountants to follow the
money. That's what took down Scarface and it can do
the same to these punks. After all, this is what the police
constantly tell us. Just give us more money and power, they
say.
What the police don't say, however, is that we've
been giving them more money and power for years and although
they've been stuffing the prisons with bad guys, there
are lots more bad guys running around on our streets. There's
a reason for that. It's the same reason why much of the
story of Al Capone as we know it is false.
"Capone neither 'ran' Chicago nor the Chicago
rackets, " writes historian Michael Woodiwiss
in Organized Crime and American Power. That's because,
like most organized crime, the so-called Capone gang was
not the formal, hierarchical organization we imagine
when we think of organized crime. It was instead a loose,
decentralized system of alliances and business relationships.
Capone's bootlegging, gambling and prostitution
operations "were not controlled bureaucratically, "
writes historian Mark Haller. "Each, instead, was
a separate enterprise of small or relatively small scale.
Most had managers who were also partners. Co-ordination
was possible because the senior partners, with an interest
in each of the enterprises, exerted influence across a
range of activities."
At this point, the reader may be nodding off. Organizational
structure?Who but an MBA could possibly care?It's
a lot more thrilling to talk about gin joints, Tommy guns
and takedowns. But as it turns out -- MBAs will be delighted
to hear -- organizational structure was critical to the
Capone story. The loose associations of the Chicago underworld
formed a resilient, multi-dimensional web in which any
man could easily be replaced. Not even the great Al Capone
was essential. "Capone's removal as a criminal
force in Chicago made no difference to the extent of the
illegal enterprise in the city, " writes Woodiwiss.
ORGANIZED CRIME RUNS ON DECENTRALIZATION
Now, if Capone's organizational structure were unique
to 1920s Chicago, none of this would be terribly relevant.
But as it turns out, decentralization is the rule in organized
crime. The reason for this is almost Darwinian: Formal
hierarchies collapse if key figures at the top are taken
out, whereas decentralized networks shift and adapt when
someone is killed or imprisoned.
The Colombian cocaine trade is a perfect illustration,
having moved in 30 years from domination by Pablo Escobar
and the Medellin cartel to a complex array of tiny, loosely
affiliated groups.
The same evolutionary forces were at work here in Canada
when Quebec Hells Angels leader Maurice "Mom"
Boucher launched a war to monopolize the drug trade and
make himself lord of the underworld. Bikers died by the
score and most of the survivors are in prison, including
"Mom."
As the gangsters say in hard-boiled novels: Not smart.
The Ontario Angels have learned the lesson and they run
a decentralized system of alliances and relationships
that Al Capone would certainly recognize.
Capone would also recognize the Angels' main money-makers:
drugs, prostitution and, to a lesser extent, illegal gambling.
Whether it's 1920s Chicago or Ontario in the new millennium,
organized crime exists mainly to satisfy black markets.
True, gangsters also engage in extortion, fraud and theft.
But the really big money is, and always has been, in supplying
forbidden goods and services.
Capone always insisted he was "just a businessman"
and he was right. Organized crime is a business. It happens
to be an illegal business in which disputes are settled
with uglier means than lawsuits, but it is still a business.
Gangsters might break criminal laws, but they have to obey
economic laws, including the fundamental law that demand
creates supply. They only sell what people want and cannot
get legally. Jail them and someone else takes over. There's
always someone else because black markets are, almost
by definition, fantastically profitable, and nothing
motivates human beings like fantastic profit.
That is demand creating supply. Even more than decentralized
organization, it is the reason why, when the Feds took down
Al Capone, nobody went thirsty in Chicago. It's also
why, even with "Mom" Boucher locked away, Montrealers
have no problem finding a line to toot or a fatty to spark.
And it's why giving the police in Ontario more money
and power may fill the prisons with Hells Angels, but it
won't touch the underlying criminality.
To do that, we have to accept that organized crime is an economic
problem and look for an economic solution.
In 1933, Chicago hit upon such a solution. It didn't
involve the police. It had nothing to do with accountants.
And yet it wiped out the black market in alcohol and put an
end to the glory days of the gangsters.
It was the repeal of Prohibition.
Most Canadians may not be prepared for such radical stuff
but the inevitable failure of the cops-and-crackdowns
approach will give them plenty of time to contemplate alternatives."
|
