There is a relationship between the intensity of drug enforcement and the potency of an illegal drug. Research suggests that the two are complementary, as illustrated by the evolution of cocaine into crack.[^1] This is called the "iron law of prohibition." There is a [passionate debate](https://undark.org/2023/10/16/iron-law-drugs/) is over the term "iron," it being an example of a [[7. Burdensome Details|burdensome detail]], not over the evidence of a relationship between enforcement and potency. While some studies support a parallel relationship between enforcement intensity and potency, others suggest that potency is driven by additional factors. The Law illustrates how political rhetoric from a specific time period embeds itself as a universally accepted truth. It also illustrates some interesting economic mechanics between policy and production. A related phenomenon is how enforcement activities interfere with bird conservation. [Traffickers relocate into bird habitat](https://www.sequencermag.com/drug-trafficking-is-encroaching-on-bird-habitat/) after being displaced by enforcement actions. Similarly, in opioid mitgation, [increased supply-side enforcement increases overdoses](https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2023.307291). [^1]: Cowan, R. (1986). How the narcs created crack. _National Review_, _38_(23), 26-31. ### Boundaries * **One pathological boundary that has been imposed top-down by our democratic system is drug prohibition**. Total prohibition, in the form of the drug war, drew a boundary that created a very lucrative niche that only the most ruthless, violent actors could fill. The drug war prevented small-scale, non-totalitarian solutions to drug problems from ever being attempted, including the kind of small group rituals that allow people to use drugs in healthy, prosocial ways. * **note:** Cf some evidence in the iron law of prohibition