Changing Times

Axios:

All the old vices — from sex to gambling to drugs — are quickly becoming legal, as both society and the criminal justice system rethink their values.

The big picture:

This amounts to an under-the-radar shift in how society treats what have long been thought of as victimless crimes — behaviors that might not harm anyone who isn't participating, but that are considered to offend social morals.

What's happening:

• When the NFL season began last month, fans in more than two dozen states and the District of Columbia were legally allowed to place bets on games. Five more states are projected to allow it by the end of the NFL season according to the American Gaming Association.
• The Manhattan district attorney's office announced earlier this year that it would stop prosecuting sex work and unlicensed massage, joining a number of other jurisdictions that have moved to partially decriminalize sex work.
• Last November, after the passage of a ballot initiative, Oregon became the first state to decriminalize possession of small amounts of all illicit drugs, while four more states — Arizona, New Jersey, South Dakota and Montana — joined 11 others that have legalized the recreational use of cannabis.

Background:

• The definition of "vice" is always shifting because society's morality is always shifting.
• Generally, part of what makes a vice a vice is that a lot of society considers it questionable, but a lot of society also participates in it.

By the numbers:

• An estimated 45.2 million people — more than 12% of the country — plan to wager on the NFL this season, up from 32% the year before, according to the AGA.
• In a 2019 Pew survey, 18% of U.S. adults reported they had used cannabis over the past year — a drug that is still illegal under federal law.
• A 2020 poll by Data for Progress found 52% of respondents at least somewhat support decriminalizing the buying and selling of sex between consenting adults, compared to just 24% in a similar 1978 poll.

Between the lines:

• Legalizing or at least decriminalizing activities that millions of Americans engage in — and millions more tacitly tolerate — can reduce arrests and prosecutions that disproportionately affect people of color, while also freeing up police and courts to focus on crimes that harm more people.
• If regulated and taxed, it can also divert substantial revenue to government coffers. Legal gambling generates nearly $700 million in tax money at the state level, while legal marijuana has generated nearly $8 billion in tax revenue since states first began allowing recreational use.
• Bringing an activity out of the black market can also starve criminal organizations of revenue and help protect individuals who will engage in it — a key argument for decriminalizing sex work.

The other side:

• Opponents question whether vices are truly "victimless crimes" and raise concerns about the unintended consequences of allowing activities that, if taken to the extreme, can produce both individual and social harm.
• A 2020 study found recreational cannabis legalization in Washington state in 2012 was followed by an uptick in the likelihood that teens would use marijuana, though other research has found no clear connection.
• Between 3% and 6% of U.S. adults are considered to have a gambling problem, and one study found the rate doubles among people who live within 10 miles of a gaming establishment.
• Experts also have long worried that legalizing sports betting can lead to more opportunities for fixing games, eroding the integrity of the sport.
• Sex work presents the biggest questions of all. Some experts doubt that selling sex can ever be truly consensual and fear that decriminalization inadvertently puts sex workers at greater risk from clients.

What to watch:

... whether legalization and decriminalization are followed by additional support for the social and personal consequences of vices.

Even advocates for Oregon's drug decriminalization worry far too little funding has been allocated to treatment and recovery.

The bottom line:

50 years after President Richard Nixon declared the War on Drugs, American attitudes toward and laws about activities that have long been classified as vices are changing — and with it, the assumption that it's the government's role to police public morality.

Hope For The Fall

When the loudmouth loses his megaphone, and when the guy who won't stop shoving his face in front of us loses his place on camera, there is the sweetest feeling of respite and delicious irony. 

Today's Nostalgia

The more things change, the more they stay the same?

It shouldn't come as a big surprise that people start thinking in terms of "vast conspiracies" when the things most of us want to see change don't change.

These Changes

I worried that the bust in Michigan (Hutaree Militia) could be seen as another Waco; with all the usual sturm und drang from the drama queens on "conservative" Clown Radio.  But one aspect is emerging that I find pretty interesting: this Hutaree outfit is considered by most of the 'militia community' as a bunch of nuts.  Let's try to set aside the patent Pot-Meets-Kettle  and just consider the fact that the other militias dislike the Hutarees to the point they've been working with the Feds to help nail these freaks.

Let that one soak in for a bit.

Now suppose for just a moment that Obama pulled the trigger on this particular bunch of coconuts because it's a perfect setup for him to sink a wide-open 3-pointer from way downtown.

1) he bags a dangerous group determined to attack us; demonstrating that law enforcement is sometimes the best way to combat terrorism - no matter where that terrorist threat originates. (and BTW, these asshats ARE terrorists)

2) he co-opts the 'militia movement' by enlisting their help - which kinda takes them away from the Repubs and brings them back over to the side of law and order...

3) ...which means that at least some of these other militia groups will help - purposefully or otherwise - but will help to "re-legitimize The Government".

Look for signs of fracture within the militia movement.

David Frum

The guy pretzles himself in a big way.  From his blog. 

This is a guy who's done his share of throwing fuel on the partisan fire - going as far towards the logical extreme as anybody else - and here he is saying, "Gosh, why's everybody so pissed off all the time?"

But just when I think he's gonna say something reasonable (like, maybe this won't be so bad - maybe we should wait and see), he goes back over the top and jumps straight into Blame-The-Media-No-Matter-What mode.  Except, now, he's blaming the Conservative Bias of The Media(?)  WTF?  I'm having a hard time remembering the last time I heard any of these guys even acknowledge the existence of Conservative Media.

I’ve been on a soapbox for months now about the harm that our overheated talk is doing to us. Yes it mobilizes supporters – but by mobilizing them with hysterical accusations and pseudo-information, overheated talk has made it impossible for representatives to represent and elected leaders to lead. The real leaders are on TV and radio, and they have very different imperatives from people in government. Talk radio thrives on confrontation and recrimination. When Rush Limbaugh said that he wanted President Obama to fail, he was intelligently explaining his own interests. What he omitted to say – but what is equally true – is that he also wants Republicans to fail. If Republicans succeed – if they govern successfully in office and negotiate attractive compromises out of office – Rush’s listeners get less angry. And if they are less angry, they listen to the radio less, and hear fewer ads for Sleepnumber beds.

I'd sure like to see somebody pick up on this.  It's just possible we're seeing a Bill Buckley moment here.