The "War on Drugs"

[Regulus]

The “war on drugs” benefits government by providing a boost to public sector employment (border patrol, police, prison guards, etc. etc.) and various revenue streams (fines, asset confiscation, etc. etc.). Now does the “war on drugs” benefit the people of the republic? With respect to negative life changing substances (heroin, crystal meth, crack, etc. etc.) it may be that we need the government to actively take a role in stopping their distribution; however, when you look at cannibas, do you find any evidence to suggest that it harms society as a whole or just the individual who decides to light up? If the latter is the case, then we should be free to have that choice, just as we do with smoking tobacco or having a cold beer.

[jmorris84]

Search for Milton Friedman war on drugs on youtube and there, you will find one of the best answers to this question that I have ever heard.

[xahrx]

@Regulus

Now does the “war on drugs” benefit the people of the republic?

No.

@Regulus

With respect to negative life changing substances (heroin, crystal meth, crack, etc. etc.) it may be that we need the government to actively take a role in stopping their distribution;

This presumes the government actually can do that. It’s been trying for decades and has yet to succeed. And this is the case with all drugs. We do not live in a vacuum and all drug use and abuse can be seen to affect other non user’s lives negatively sometimes. That is not the issue. The issue is the government has no damn right limiting actions that are not per se harmful to others or their property, and even abuse falls into that category. What’s more, even from a utilitarian view, the costs of the prohibition itself are too high to justify the nearly nonexistent results.