The General Argument

There is only one good reason for drug prohibition, which is that some of us will be worse off if drugs are legalized. Why would any of us be worse off? With drug legalization there will be more drug abuse, and drug abuse is bad for people.

By “drug abuse” I mean use that (a) harms others or oneself or (b) creates a risk of harm that is great enough either to constitute a wrong to others or to be imprudent. Within the range of harms I mean to include the loss of valuable opportunities and resources as well as damage to a person's physical or psychological health, functioning, or well-being.

Since drug prohibition itself makes drug use harmful in a number of ways – by creating significant risks of criminal liability, for example – it is necessary to distinguish legally created harms from what I will call independent harms, which are those that drug use would produce even if drugs were legal. Drug prohibition can be justified only as reducing independent harms since legally created harms would be eliminated by legalization. What independent harms, then, does drug prohibition reduce? This depends on the drug in question, but grouping all currently illegal drugs together we can say that drug prohibition now reduces risks of premature death, accidental bodily injury, violence, vandalism, marital instability, child neglect, and failure at important educational and occupational tasks. This is the argument for drug prohibition, and so against drug legalization.