Drug Legalization

Audience, please vote based on presented arguments and not personal opinion. INTRODUCTION I am arguing that the purchase, sale, manufacture, transportation, and private usage of all "street drugs" should be legalized within the United States. There are two small exceptions to my argument. First, drugs should not be allowed to be advertised or sold to minors. Second, a person should not be allowed to force drugs upon someone who is unwilling (this includes second hand smoke). I also care to inform everybody that I do not use drugs. I have never used them once and I will never use them. I personally suggest that everybody should use their free will and choose to stay drug-free, especially children. I also personally suggest that schools, parents, and businesses use their free will to educate children about the harm that drugs cause. Drug abuse is a problem which needs to be solved by a person's free will and not by government force. I am not arguing this because I believe that drugs are not a problem or that they are not harmful. They are very harmful and drug abuse is a very big problem. I am arguing this because I believe government prohibition will never solve the problem. THE HARM OF CONTINUING GOVERNMENT PROHIBITION OF DRUGS Many people mean well by advocating policies, but they are ineffective and cause blowback. For the below reasons, I am against government prohibition of drugs: 1)Prohibition decreases the supply of drugs (because drugs are harder to obtain now), but not the demand (because many people are still addicted to drugs even during prohibition). When supply is lowered and demand stays the same, the only result is that drugs increase in value. 2)When people are willing to pay more money for drugs due to it's value increase, the drug industry and the black market both profit. How do you think they finance their operations now? 3)Prohibition was tried during the 1920's in the United States to prohibit alcohol. In result, alcohol usage stayed exactly the same, gang/street violence sharply increased. 4)Men and women in the coastguard have to risk their lives fighting against armed boats which carry drugs. Police in the streets have to risk their lives fighting against armed gangs which carry drugs. 5)There is a moral dilemma about prohibition also. What gives government the right to dictate what an individual does to his/her own body? Should we ban automobiles, airplanes, and unhealthy food because they cause many deaths also? THE BENEFITS OF ENDING GOVERNMENT PROHIBITION OF DRUGS Ending government prohibition will not completely solve the problem. But ending government prohibition will give more benefits than harm: 1)Since using drugs would no longer be a crime after prohibition ends, the police and government will be able to focus more of their efforts on other crimes (which actually involve victims) such as murder, rape, theft, fraud, malpractice, and physical abuse. 2)By allowing drugs in the market, they are able to taxed as all items are, increasing revenue for the government. Also, not having to upkeep millions of prisoners would not decrease. This increase of revenue can be used to make down payments on our twelve trillion dollar national debt. 3)By ending prohibition we would all be able to change our mindset on the issue. People battling a terrible addiction will no longer be known as criminals, but as victims. The drug problem will no longer be known as solved just because it is covered up by ineffective legislation. We would acknowledge the government's failure in solving the drug problem and we would be able to try a new solution. CONCLUSION People do not use drugs simply because they are legal. Many use them because of peer pressure, lack of knowledge, and/or poor parenting. Many use them to temporarily alleviate the pain of stress, anxiety, depression, and other personal problems. There are only two ways to stop someone from taking up drugs: 1)Removing ALL drugs from Earth. Which is not possible and poorly emulated by prohibition. 2)Face the problems which make people resort to using drugs. Which would be difficult, but possible. I am not arguing against prohibition for idealistic reasons. I am not an idealist. I am a realist. I recognize the problems drugs cause and I think it needs to be addressed realistically. I am not a social darwinist. I show genuine concern for the well-being of others. I want to be part of a generation which solves this drug issue once and for all. But before we can go about solving the problem, we need to recognize that government is not the solution. It is the problem. Ending government prohibition is only a small step towards ending drug abuse, but it is a step which must be taken in order to confront this problem.