They argue that, if marijuana, cocaine, heroin, and other drugs were legalized, several positive things would probably occur: (1) drug prices would fall; (2) users would obtain their drugs at low, government-regulated prices, and they would no longer be forced to resort to crime in order to support their habits, (3) levels of drug-related crime, and particularly violent crime, would significantly decline, resulting in less crowded courts, jails, and prisons (this would allow law-enforcement personnel to focus their energies on the “real criminals” in society); and the drug production, distribution, and sale would no longer be controlled by organized crime, and thus such criminal syndicates as the Colombian cocaine “cartels,” the Jamaican “posses,” and the various “mafias” around the country and the world would be decapitalized, and the violence associated with drug distribution rivalries would be eliminated. By contrast, the anti-legalization camp argues that violent crime would not necessarily decline in a legalized drug market. In fact, there are three reasons why it might actually increase. First, removing the criminal sanctions against the possession and distribution of illegal drugs would make them more available and attractive and, hence, would create large numbers of new users. Second, an increase in use would lead to a greater number of dysfunctional addicts who could not support themselves, their habits, or their lifestyles through legitimate means. Hence crime would be their only alternative. Third, more users would mean more of the violence associated with the ingestion of drugs. These divergent points of view tend to persist because the relationships between drugs and crime are quite complex and because the possible outcomes of a legalized drug market are based primarily on speculation. However, it is possible, from a careful review of the existing empirical literature on drugs and violence, to make some educated inferences.
A room full of lawyers had the potential to become as hospitable as an aquarium full of piranhas. But conversation was polite when the managing partners, chairmen, and presidents of 21 Utah firms gathered in the boardroom of the Salt Lake Chamber for Utah Business magazines fifth Industry Outlook round table. Attendees included Robert Anderson, VanCott, Bagley, Cornwall McCarthy; Dennis Astill, Strong Hanni; Peter Billings, Fabian Clendenin; Lou Callister, Callister, Nebeker McCullough; Blaine Carlton, Ballard, Spahr, Andrews Ingersoll; Paul Durham, Durham, Jones Pinegar; James Duzan, Trask Britt; Ray Etcheverry, Parsons, Behle Latimer; Russell Fericks, Richards, Brandt, Miller Nelson; David Gee, Parr, Waddoups Brown, Gee Loveless; James Jardine, Ray, Quinney Nebeker; John Kirkham, Stoel Rives; John Lund, Snow, Christensen Martineau; Ralph Mabey, LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene MacRae; Thomas Mecham, Kirton McConkie; Robert OConnor, Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich Rosati; Jonathan Richards, Workman, Nydegger Seeley; Steven Snarr, the Williams Companies; Alan Sullivan, Snell Wilmer; Glen Watkins, Jones, Waldo, Holbrook McDonough; Gary Weston, Nielsen Senior. Special thanks to Scott Matheson, Jr., dean of the S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah, for serving as panel moderator.
IN OUR SECOND ANNUAL SUMMIT with leaders in Utahs legal community, there was certainly no dearth of interesting questions to tackle. Post-Enron and Arthur Andersen, one topic was probably inevitable: legal ethics. And with the current state of the economy: issues about clients wanting more bang for their buck, including discussion of whether there are areas of the law that should be being handled more often — or even exclusively — by nonlawyers. Add to that some heartfelt discussion of pro bono cases and whether the middle class is currently underserved by the legal practice, and this group provided a thoughtful, insightful morning. Participants included: John A. Adams from Ray, Quinney Nebeker; Robert M. Anderson from VanCott, Bagley, Cornwall McCarthy; Ted Barnes from Clyde, Snow, Sessions Swenson; Peter W. Billings, Jr. from Fabian Clendenin; David Connors from LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene MacRae; Denise A. Dragoo from Snell Wilmer; Paul M. Durham from Durham, Jones Pinegar; Blame L. Carlton from Ballard, Spahr, Andrews Ingersoll; Raymondi. Etcheverry from Parsons Behle Latimer; David E. Gee from Parr, Waddoups, Brown, Gee Loveless; James S. Jardine from Ray, Quinney Nebeker; John S. Kirkham from Stoel Rives; Debra J. Moore, president-elect of the Utah State Bar, from the Utah Attorney Generals office, R Keith Nelson from Richards, Brandt, Miller Nelson; and Keven M. Rowe from Jones Waldo. Special Thanks to Scott M. Matheson, Jr., dean of the S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah, for moderating this months Utah Business roundtable. What are the challenges that youre facing individually right now and that you think lawyers are facing generally in representing your business clients?
AZ divorce
No comments »