Home > Politics, News & Issues > US Law & Justice > Drug Laws & Prevention
Created on: December 27, 2006 Last Updated: April 19, 2007
I personally find all currently illegal drugs loathsome; they stunt the mind, inhibit the body, and curtail productivity. I would never consume such substances myself, and I would advise others against doing so. Yet, compared to the adverse effects of their illegalization, the harm of drugs themselves is small indeed. Drug-taking is extremely unhealthy for the persons engaging in it, but not for anybody who abstains from it. The "War on Drugs," by contrast, harms everybody subject to a government that undertakes it. I have no sympathy for drug addicts; I wish to argue the case of the innocent, moral, productive people who have never used such substances in their lives but are nonetheless harmed by the coercive illegalization of drugs.
There are ethical problems with drug-taking, but the ethical problems with the War on Drugs far exceed them. Let us presume that someone has decided to ruin his life by consuming harmful drugs. That decision alone would likely deny him the voluntary association of respectable people; these respectable people would thus not be damaged by any adverse consequences to the drug-taker's health, career, and personality. By the very fact of strongly disapproving of drug-consumption on an ethical basis, one shields oneself from the adverse consequences of drug-consumption. This would be the case on a free market; the only damage from drug-taking would come to the drug addict himself, not to respectable others.
Yet this is not the case under a government-waged War on Drugs. The War on Drugs is waged with taxpayer money, which especially means the money of respectable, well-to-do people, who are taxed higher under the perverse "progressive" or punitive tax system. Thus, to regulate and thwart the activities of the addicts, the government expropriates substantial property from moral, productive people who do not even think about consuming illegal drugs. To punish the self-destructive, the government must also punish the self-improving and deprive them of the fruits of and the incentives for their self-improvement.
The War on Drugs is generous to drug addicts and punitive to all others; the drug addicts are arrested at others' expense and given "free" food and "free" lodging at government prisons: free to the imprisoned, that is, but paid for by the taxpayers. Why should moral people pay to sustain others for those others' immoral conduct? Why should the drug addicts be given state handouts and be spared the requirement to earn their own living
Below are the top articles rated and ranked by Helium members on:
The harms of drugs versus the harms of the 'War on Drugs'
The war on drugs is an industry that purports to serve society, but in many ways creates more criminals. Illegal drug dealing
by Dan Weaver
Whatever happened to the War on Drugs? Apparently, it has been replaced by the War on Terror. However, two recent events
by Stone Handy
The Harm of Drugs vs the War on Drugs.
There is no doubt there are harmful effects from the abuse of drugs, legal and illegal.
by BT Cassidy
This requires a brief answer to two questions first; what are the harms of drugs and what are the harms of the war on drugs.
The "war on drugs" is a as much of a political hot potato over here in England as it is in America. In June 2004, cannabis
View All Articles on: The harms of drugs versus the harms of the 'War on Drugs'
Featured Partner
One Note At A Time has partnered with Helium, giving you the chance to write for a cause. Browse One Note At A Time's featured titles, pick an issue and write! You can also learn new perspectives on issues that you care about.more