Hi ya’ll. I’m writing a speech on legalizing hard drugs for a class. My argument is based on ethics (non aggression), economics (inflation and mobs), and political consequences/etc. I remember reading something on mises, I think it was by Walter Block. I remember it had something to do with I think heroin (or some other hard drug) addiction, and how if it were legalized, one could have a seemingly regular life. Not only that, but it cited some type of evidence.
Basically what I am looking for is an argument for addicts, and the state of things if hard drugs were to be legalized. An argument that if hard drugs were legal, addiction would be much easier to handle, and not rampant. I’m trying to compare it to nicotine, considering nicotine’s great addictive properties and health hazards.
Addiction would be easier to handle, access to safe materials would be much easier (sharing of needles, incidental injection of dangerous materials, figuring out quality of drugs you are buying as crappy drug dealers get forced out of business by higher quality competitors), access to medical assistance in event of problems would be much easier, people would generally be happier given they would be enjoying themselves (as moral or immoral as you may well consider it) not under threat of jail, and addiction numbers would likely drop. I don’t have the statistic offhand, but the numbers for heroin addiction before and after prohibition are shocking. There were something like 10,000 reported addicts at the time of prohibition and the number within a year shot up to over 150,000.
I can say with almost full certainty that I’m addicted to caffeine. If you want some more sources, you can use The Economics of Liberty. Just read through the chapter titles and you’ll be able to find them.
There was a Mark Twain quotation that said something about a man who doesn’t know how to read instead any worse off than a man who can read but decides not to. You can use something like that and say people who are addicted to drugs probably waste their life away, but people do that all the time without drugs, which is kind of a weak-ish argument, but a good filler if you want.
It’s the only book by Walter Block that I’ve read, so it’s the only one one that I can recommend. I’ve read some of his other shorter stuff; it’s all been pretty insightful.
On a personal note, Defending the Undefendable played an instrumental role in radicalizing my ethico-political outlook. Once you find yourself defending litterers and slanderers, you know that you’re about as libertarian as you can get.
When discussing drug legalization I always like to draw parallels with alcohol prohibition. All of the same problems associated with the war on drugs today were associated with prohibition of the 20s. Rise in gang violence, political corruption, addiction, otherwise good peaceful people being sent to jail… and for what? People continued to drink, just as today people continue to use.
I had it yesterday. The audience was a little taken back when I said “all drugs”. The raising of hands trick worked. Only one person raised there hand for 20 years, and no other hands were ever raised.