Should laws allow the sale and use of recreational drugs?

There are three principal criteria for measuring the impact of drug abuse on society: (1) the number of emergency room visits that result from physical or mental problems associated with drug abuse, including accidents caused by those under the influence of drugs, (2) the number of hours of work missed because of drug abuse, and (3) the number and types of crimes committed in connection with the buying and selling of drugs.

Three tests for the addictive quality of a substance are (1) Self-administration: Does the user repeatedly self-administer the drug? (2) Tolerance: Does a tolerance for the drug develop? In other words, is more of the drug necessary to produce the same effect on subsequent uses? (3) Symptoms of withdrawal: Are there symptoms of withdrawal?

Proposed solutions for the problem of drug abuse include ways of reducing demand, for example, education for young people, and stiffer penalties for offenders, and ways of reducing supply, for example, preventing the manufacture and distribution of certain drugs.

Pro: Law-enforcement agencies cannot prevent citizens from using recreational drugs. Citizens lose respect for laws in general when they see that many laws go unenforced.

Con: All recreational drugs have the potential for causing adverse acute and chronic physical and psychological symptoms in their users.

Pro: Society wastes money on the enforcement of its laws against the use of recreational drugs. That money would be better spent on other projects.

Con: Society would have to maintain a class of its citizens on drugs, lest the physical need for them pressure addicts to commit crimes. Political battles would rage over the cost to the taxpayer of providing economic support to drug addicts.

Pro: Illegal drugs are often associated with violent crimes. Suppliers of illegal drugs typically win and control markets by using violent tactics. And often, the users of illegal drugs commit crimes to obtain them. The price of drugs usually exceeds the incomes of addicts. And not all users are motivated to work overtime or take a second legitimate job to pay for their habit. And when drugs impair job performance to such an extent that they cannot stay steadily employed, or when they have no income at all, addicts are likely to consider theft, which promises a high return on a small investment of time.

Legalizing the sale and use of recreational drugs will reduce the number and severity of crimes in three ways:

(1) It would reduce or eliminate the violent crimes perpetrated by the suppliers of drugs. The drug trade typically uses violent means to win control over certain territories, and such violence would disappear as legal channels for drugs open up and as the prices for drugs decline. Moreover, the ready availability of drugs at low prices would reduce considerably the incentive some people have to get into the sale of illegal substances.

(2) It would reduce the number of crimes perpetrated by the consumers of drugs. Since the prices of psychoactive agents would decline as the dealers in illegal substances lose their monopoly on sales, users would have less need to resort to theft as a way of supporting their addiction, even though for some the need could never be eliminated.

(3) At present, both the supplier and consumer of illegal drugs work together to keep their transactions hidden from the view of authorities. As a consequence, when a transaction goes awry, the parties have no legal recourse. With legalization of drugs, a consumer who becomes a victim of fraud would have the ability to seek a remedy with a consumer protection agency or, if necessary, in the courts.

Pro: Government has no right to decide whether citizens will use recreational drugs. As long as public safety is not the issue, the choice regarding the use of drugs is one that individuals ought to make.

Pro: Were recreational drugs legalized, the glamour and intrigue of engaging in a forbidden activity would disappear, and the use of these agents would decrease.

Pro: Were recreational drugs legalized, the state could tax the sale of these products. Communities would benefit from the boost in revenue for the government.

Con: To many people, the legalization of recreational drugs would signal society's approval of using them. Many citizens would think that when a government condones the use of these agents, it attests to the safety of using them. Some people who would not have used them when they were illegal would feel free to use them. After the legalization of recreational drugs, there would be more addicts than there are now, and society would suffer the effects of the physical and mental problems of a swelling population of drug users.