But as a proportion of the (dropping) violence, you're right - more are more is drug related.
Nothing new about that - in the US nearly half of all prisoners are incarcerated on drug charges.
Yet nobody seems to learn. The Feds just keep moving from one drug panic to the next - each time creating a new crop of black market violence and non-violent prisoners. This week it's Oxycontin - next week, something else.
Maybe by your definition I'm part of the problem, but I see a big difference between the level of scrutiny required for a business vs. government.
A government can imprison me, fine me, take away my business, take my passport, keep me from getting on airplanes, and kill me. It can tell me what I must and must not eat, and what drugs I must and must not take. It can tell me who I may have sex with, and how, and who I can marry. It can take away my children. It can send me and my children to war.
No business can do ANY of that.
If I don't want to deal with a business, I don't.
If I don't want to deal with the government, I ... go to prison.
So there are lots of things that I find acceptable for a business to do (because, who cares), that are NOT acceptable for a government to do.
SnapChat is a business. They have to make money somehow if they want to stay in business.
I don't have much sympathy for people who upload their personal stuff to a sharing service and then complain when their stuff gets shared.
Even in the complete absence of written ToS or contract, it seems to me the basic idea of a photo sharing service is to share photos. So nobody should be able to complain when their photos, which they voluntarily uploaded to a sharing service, get...shared.
If your photos are so effing special and valuable and secret that you are going to freak out about this, don't upload them to a photo sharing service.
I find it ironic that many of the same people who on other days complain about excessive copyright rules and terms, are the same people who complain "OMG somebody might make a few pennies off MY PHOTOS!".