The Drug Legalization Quandry
31 October 1999
Intro
Not a day goes by without some news related to the illegal drug
trade.
5 year old is killed while playing outside his apartment
building by a stray bullet from a gang dispute over territory for
their drug businesses. Andean guerrillas kidnap hikers near drug
growing region.
Why is there a "war on drugs"? Why are drugs illegal? What are
the alternatives?
First let's look at the drug business and examine what aspects
of it have a negative effect on society.
We can fairly divide the business into four major pieces:
- Growing (natural based drugs only),
- Production/Synthesis,
- Distribution, and
- Consumption.
There may be finer pieces or multiple steps, such as part of
production near where the base is grown, transportation to another
place,possibly in another country, where more production is done.
Those aspects bear little impact on the points of this
discussion.
Described thusly it's like the business of many products we're
familiar with, such as canned corn, a polyester shirt, cigarettes,
and alcohol. So why does the drug business have such an adverse
affect? The real questions should be what effects does the drug
business have on society, why does it have these effects, and are
they really adverse affects. A very important distinction to make
is the difference between the effects of the business and the
effects of the product. The effects of the product only pertain to
the consumption piece.
We'll look at these questions for each of the pieces of the
business.
Growing
The agricultural aspect of the piece is similar to most other
crops. There is nothing inherently negative in this.
On a non-agricultural level there are two negative effects on
society. One is that forced labor is frequently used. Because the
business is illegal the profit is high (we'll look at that more
thoroughly later). To make the profit even higher workers are
minimally compensated. They are often motivated to remain under
such conditions by implied or direct threat to them or their
families.
The other negative effect is that the person or organization who
controls the agriculture is highly protective of the crop and
operation (due again to the profit) and may go to great lengths,
all the way to financing guerilla insurections, just to stay in
business.
Production/Synthesis
The three effects that this piece has on society is the possible
use of forced labor, the lack of safety precautions that may be
appropriate, and the extreme protectiveness of these operations. As
with the Growing piece, these are the result of trying to keep
costs to a minimum, thereby maximizing profit, and of staying in
business when the governments are trying shut them down.
Distribution
Besides the potential use of forced labor and the extreme
protectiveness of the distribution operation, the most widely
experienced affect this piece has on society is in the nature of
the competition. The competition in generally violent and routinely
this violence victimizes people who have no association with the
business. They were just in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Much of the gang problem society is experiencing is fueled by
its association with the drug business. Many gangs derive their
income by being part of the drug distribution. Profit from this is
generally responsible for the larger than life appearance, which
appeals to many youngsters of meager (and not so meager) means.
Consumption
The problems noted in this piece of the drug business are "that
drugs are bad for you" (we'll address this at greater length
later), some drugs are addictive, drug use can affect work
performance, drug use can affect personal relations and
responsibilities, drugs sometimes cause direct health issues due to
poor production, some drugs cause the user to lose so much touch
with reality that he or she commits other crimes without
comprehension or even knowledge of the wrong done, and some users
commit crimes as a means of financing their drug purchases.
The Profit Factor
A great many of the problems caused by the growing,
production/synthesis, and distribution phases of the drug business
are directly associated with profit. The purpose of any business is
to derive profit. However, legal businesses in the free world
operate in the realm of governed free enterprise. In this realm,
competition flourishes making the profit a combination of consumer
demand and consumer opportunity to purchase elsewhere. This tends
to keep profits from skyrocketing, because wherever a business is
making a high profit, there is room for another business satisfied
with less profit to move in and lure customers with lower prices.
Monopolies, price-fixing, use of threat or force to eliminate
competition, and other non-free enterprise practices are addressed
by the laws. Employees are likewise protected from abuses by the
law. With so much of the business in the open, the risk of getting
caught doing illegal activities is less worth the risk for the
profit possible.
However, a business dealing with an illegal product is already
outside of the law. At this point the notions of fair play and free
enterprise go out with the trash. With monopolistic control of the
business, prices aren't a result of competition, but are set as
high as people will still pay. Profits sky-rocket. And to increase
profits many other practices, such as forced labor and bribing
officials, are followed.
Why don't the businesses (not the product) of canned corn,
polyester shirts, cigarettes, and alcohol have such adverse effects
on society? A legal business has a harder time concealing illegal
practices, and in free-enterprise the profits aren't as great,
making the incentive to perform illegal activities less worth the
risk.
In Toto
Here's a synopsis of the effects of the illegal drug trade:
- Forced labor
- Unhealthy or unsafe work conditions
- Extreme protectiveness of business operations
- Bribed officials
- Violent rivalry among drug organizations, including gangs,
often with unassociated victims
- "Drugs are bad for you"
- Addiction
- Affects on personal relations, responsibility, and work
- Health issues due to poor production
- Loose of touch with reality in the perpetration of crimes
- Crimes committed to finance drug puchases
I think that the only effect that doesn't arguably have a
negative effect on society is that "drugs are bad for you".
We can classify these effects into two categories, one is the
effects due to the business, the other is effects due to the
product. The following are the effects due to the business:
- Forced labor
- Unhealthy or unsafe work conditions
- Extreme protectiveness of business operations
- Bribed officials
- Violent rivalry among drug organizations, including gangs,
often with unassociated victims
- and even Crimes committed to finance drug puchases
Leaving the following as the effects due to the product:
- "Drugs are bad for you"
- Addiction
- Affects on personal relations, responsibility, and work
- Health issues due to poor production
- Loose of touch with reality in the perpetration of crimes
A Legalized Drugs Gadankenexperiment
Let's look at the effects on society of a legalized drug trade.
We'll look at it in the light of the effects due to the business
and those due to the product.
We'll use the alcohol business as a model for the drug business
- All or most drugs are legal for adults; they are sold from
licensed dealers; and carry a drug tax.
The most easily seen differences are that forced labor,
unhealthy work conditions, extreme protectiveness, bribed
officials, and violent rivaly are all drastically reduced, if not
eliminated. The current state of the alcohol business versus the
state during prohibition in the US is the obvious example.
Crimes committed to finance drug puchases will probably decrease
drastically too. With a free-market drug business, prices will be
sharply reduced compared to their illegal counterpart making it
easier for people to finance their drug purchases without resorting
to crime. And perpetrators of such crimes will be much easier to
catch as area "drug" stores can be monitored for people matching
the description of an offender. After all, now we know where people
go to buy their drugs.
Also, in such a controlled atmosphere children will have less
access to drugs. When I was young I had easier access to drugs than
to beer. I would venture a guess that that hasn't changed.
Considering the effects due to the product, with drugs legalized
all production and synthesis would be under the perview of health
standards. This would minimize problems due to poor production.
Addiction, and affects on personal relations, responsibility,
and work won't see any great easing with legalized drugs.
And there's the distinct possibility that drug use will
increase. However, this is the same dilemma faced with alcohol
abuse. While it has a devastating effect on some, as a society we
seem to be able to cope. And this is an issue even with the illegal
drug trade. With legalized drugs, people will be able to more
openly seek help for drug abuse.
And that tax... it could be used to help finance drug abuse
treatment.
There is still the issue of drugs that are known to deeply
affect rational behavior. Maybe we keep these illegal. In this
experiment that means there is a much smaller effort needed to
police this. Plus, with many drugs legal it's probable that many
people won't be lured to try those illegal drugs. Another option is
to make them legal, but confine their use to particular "parlors"
where people could check themselves into a padded cell with a small
dose of the drug and leave when they are sober again. What other
benefits will we see? How about a freeing of billions of US dollars
currently being spent by many countries to finance the war on
drugs. That money could be used for education and health.
I've purposefully left out discussion of "drugs are bad for you"
as there is a whole different issue surrounding it.
"Drugs are bad for you"
This is the only issue which differs from the alcohol business.
While some may consider alcohol bad for you, it is legal and
subject to all of the other issues we've discussed. And so far the
impact on society has been controllable. Certainly we've gotten
harsher on drunk driving and are protecting battered spouses
better. However, making alcohol illegal hasn't been a consideration
when dealing with these issues. So what does this amount to?
First, I should say that drug use is an adult thing. I don't
believe children have the capacity to make such high impact
decisions regarding themselves. Of course, at what age a person
reaches such maturity varies greatly from person to person.
Second, I am considering the aspect of drug use that one does
him or herself. This is a decision a person makes for him or
herself. Any direct consequence which causes someone else to be a
victim, such as having a car accident involving others while under
the influence of drugs, is to be judged for other decisions
involved, like mixing drugs and driving.
There are two groups of thought regarding the notion that "Drugs
are bad for you". One group feels that adults can make decisions
for themselves. Sometimes they make bad decisions, but unless there
is a victim as a result, the decision is the adult's
perogative.
The other group feels that many adults are incapable of deciding
what's good or bad for themselves. This group thinks that they know
better and feel it's appropriate to force their judgement on
others.
It is this latter group that drives the current anti-drug
legislatation and efforts. For whatever moral or health reasons,
they feel that adults shouldn't use drugs. Therefore, instead of
letting adults decide for themselves whether or not it is morally
or healthwise okay, they are imposing their values on others. So
the issue doesn't come down to whether or not there are victims,
but just that even without victims they feel that they know better
than others and that it's wrong for others to use drugs.
I understand that the war on drugs is costing billions of US
dollars, and that it's estimated that only about 5% of the drugs
entering the US are intercepted. I doubt that the relationship
between money spent and effectiveness is linear. So, it will
probably take much more than 20 times the current spending to shut
the drug trade down. Is this really how we should be spending our
money given all of the other problems we have - saving adult drug
users from the evils of using drugs? I think everyone probably
agrees that anything which victimizes another person is wrong. But
beyond that right and wrong varies drastically from person to
person. Alcohol, nudity, dancing and even buttons are issues of
right and wrong for various people. And that's perfectly fine for
people to decide for themselves. But I think it's hard to truly
call this a free society when someone else decides what victimless
activity or item is wrong for everyone else.
How can any group have the audacity to claim they know better
than all the other people? How does a society even decide which
group's view of right and wrong for victimless activities and items
is the correct view of right and wrong? Wouldn't the truly mature
and right view be that in a free society all adults are equal and
that all adults should be allowed to decide for themselves what
victimless activities and items are right or wrong for
themselves?
From what I've seen from the history of prohibition in the US
and it's similarities to the present day drug trade, that those
who've decided for the rest that drugs are wrong are actually
causing much more pain to many more people than if they had the
respect for other adults to just let them make up their own minds.
A legal drug business would be much better overall for society. How
much longer are we going to watch innocent people die so that all
of those "incapable" adults can be "saved" from making the "wrong"
decision to use drugs?
