Below are some questions that are asked by the Department of Justice in a pamphlet they publish called Speaking Out Against Drug Legalization. The DoJ sends this out and suggests that people read these questions, and then ask them of those of us who call for legalization of drugs.
1. Should all drugs be legalized?Yes.
2. Who will determine which segments of the population will have access to legalized drugs?The honest businessmen who sell them in their community, rather than the criminal slimeballs who sell them now. Who determined which segments of the population had access to alcohol during Prohibition? Al Capone and his friends.
3. Will they be limited only to people over 18, 21?Are they limited only to people over 18, 21 now? Doesn't drug prohibition actually encourage dealers to work through juveniles?
4. Will cocaine, heroin, LSD, and PCP be made available to people if they request them?a) All of these drugs are available now to anyone who wants them. Is coffee available to people who request it?
b) The War on (Some) Drugs has, in its ceaseless, mindless, imbecile propaganda demonized all these drugs to the point that genuine information about them is very nearly unobtainable from objective medical experts.
Cocaine is a stimulant; in its traditional low-concentration form of chewed coca leaves, its effect is much like strong coffee. Like caffein, though, in highly concentrated form it can cause temporary psychosis.
Heroin is essentially identical to morphine; it was developed as a morphine substitute by Bayer Pharmaceutical in Germany more than a century ago. In the late 19th century, many people were addicted to morphine and other opiates, which were readily available at nominal cost. The only reported health problem from this addiction was lethargy, as you might expect -- these substances being sedatives. The severe health problems among modern urban heroin addicts are all due to drug prohibition: the unpredictable quality of the drug, dangerous adulterants, needle-sharing, and high cost. (A legal dose of morphine is about $2; an illegal heroin "fix" -- containing about the same amount of drug made by a nearly identical process -- is about $100 on the street.)
LSD is a self-limiting drug, according to all scientific studies, and nearly all users have stopped taking it -- or take it only very rarely -- within a year or so of their first "trip." No study has ever shown any lasting physical or psychological damage from its use, although -- as with alcohol -- judgment and perception may be severely impaired while the user is under its influence.
And so on. The War on Drugs has imposed a virtual blackout on objective medical research and publication that would help individuals, parents, doctors, and counselors realistically discuss these substances and the (widely-differing) risks involved in their use.
5. Who will sell drugs, the government, private companies?The government has consistently demonstrated that any business it controls will be run on the basis of cronyism and political expediency -- witness the defense contracting industry or the Alcoholic Beverage Commission. Moreover, government invariably uses "sovereign immunity" to protect itself against lawsuits from those who have been injured by its operation. Only if private companies sell drugs in a free market can they be held responsible for the quality and purity of their product.
6. Who will be liable for damages caused by drug use, and the activities of those taking drugs?Who is liable for damages caused by driving an automobile, or the activities of those who are drunk? The individual driver or the individual drunk.
Who is responsible for the health and actions of a drug user? The individual drug user.
7. Who will collect the revenues generated by the drug sales?Perky young Brenda at the Wal-Mart checkout.
8. How will a black market for cheaper drugs be controlled?What "black market"? How is a black market for cheaper beer controlled?
9. Who will bear the costs to society of increased drug use?First, why do you think drug use will increase? There are now, for example, about as many occasional marijuana users in the US as there are cigarette smokers. Anyone who really wants these prohibited drugs is quite able to obtain them now.
Second, you are assuming that there is no "cost to society" of drug prohibition. But after more than thirty years of an increasingly vicious "Drug War", which has succeeded in giving us the highest percentage of our population in prison of any country in the world and rendered most of the Bill of Rights null and void, these drugs are still readily available -- even to prison inmates. Never before have so many paid so much for so little in the way of positive results. America's greatest asset -- the freedom of its people -- has been sacrificed to this pointless prohibition. This is more of a "social cost" than any conceivable amount of drug use.
Third, you seem to think that there is something called "a cost to society" of this or that. There isn't. There are costs to individuals involved in every human action, but only a fool or a demagogue would pretend to be able to aggregate them in some mystical significant way. Which are you?
10. How will absenteeism be addressed by business? who will bear the costs of lost productivity, consumers, stockholders?Businesses have widely varying policies for dealing with alcohol abuse, chronic absenteeism, and other personnel problems, ranging from immediate dismissal to theraputic sick leave. The managers of each business are best qualified to determine policy and take action they deem appropriate in each individual case.
But again, you are assuming that ending prohibition will result in greatly increased drug use. Tell me, frankly, is the fact that it is illegal all that is preventing you from shooting yourself full of heroin every night? Of course not. Well, why do you assume you're different from everyone else?
11. Will the local drug situation in a community dictate which drugs are sold where?Communities typically exercise control over the sale of alcohol, tobacco, and even gasoline. Presumably, the situation with drugs would be no different.
(It is of course irrelevant whether I as a libertarian think any particular sort of restrictions -- or indeed any government-imposed restrictions at all -- is a good idea; local communities will legislate on the subject, for good or ill.)
12. How will society care for and pay for the attendant social cost of increased drug use, including family disintegration and child neglect?The government itself, through ill-conceived policies including the War on Drugs, has caused more family disintegration and child neglect than could possibly result from drug legalization. When cocaine and opiates were readily and legally available in the 19th century, this availability caused no epidemic of family disintegration.
And again, why are you assuming that there will be a great increase in drug use with the end of prohibition? There was no sudden increase in alcohol consumption after the lifting of alcohol Prohibition.
13. Who will bear the costs of the expansion of social service and welfare programs that may be necessary to care for increased drug addicts through drug legalization? would taxpayers bear this expense through increased taxes, would funding for other programs such as education be reduced?Again, why are you assuming a great increase in drug use? And why are you assuming that government programs are necessary to care for those with addiction problems? Government programs are notoriously wasteful and ineffective in dealing with alcohol abuse, while private organizations have a much better cure rate.
14. Will people still need prescriptions for currently controlled medications, such as antiobiotics, if drugs are legalized?The FDA is responsible for the unnecessary death of thousands of Americans each year through its bureaucratic delays and imposition of unneeded costs on pharmaceutical manufacturers. It should be abolished, independently of any other consideration.
15. Can anyone, regardless of physical or medical conditions purchase drugs?Inability to purchase drugs such as marijuana for medical purposes is at this very moment causing much utterly unnecessary suffering and even death. Why should we trust bureaucrats and politicians to decide who can and cannot buy some drug?
16. How will we deal with the influx of people to the United States who will seek legal drugs?It is only due to international pressure from the US that most of the world has imitated our insane drug prohibition in the first place. If drug prohibition were ended in the US, most of the rest of the world would breathe a sigh of relief and go along with us.
17. Can we begin a legalization pilot program in your neighborhood for one year?Yes, by all means, provided, of course, that the Constitutional guarantee of free and unrestricted commerce between the States is strictly observed. Your program will permit catalog sales, I assume?
18. Should the distribution outlets be located in the already overburdened inner city?Major distribution outlets are already located there now, and one of the major causes of this "overburdening" of the inner cities is drug prohibition itself. But why should you (or I) decide where these outlets should be? We don't decide where major distribution outlets for bluejeans or hamburgers are to be located.
-- Craig Goodrich
August, 2000