Applying the Principles
- Legal Principle:
- Competent adults must always have autonomy about what they put in their bodies. Taking a drug, by itself, creates no victim, so long as they own the substance and have permission to do so by the owner of the premises.
- Prohibition of drugs does not work – it creates a black market that makes criminals wealthy, lowers the quality and safety of the drugs and how they are consumed, and requires the theft of the general public to pay the cost of policing, prosecuting and punishing those involved. All the money spent on the drug war is money that could have been spent on identifying, arresting and prosecuting the small percentage of people who commit actual victim crimes. Sophisticated drug dealers, many of whom commit actual crimes, do not want an end to prohibition because it would spell the end to their lucrative trade.
- A drug user must not create a substantial risk of harm via, for example, driving a car whilst impaired.
- As always, the legality of an activity says nothing about whether it is advisable. Drugs can be addictive and harmful. Those that decide to do harmful drugs have no right to force others to financially subsidise the negative health consequences of their bad decisions.
- Moral Principle
- Merely taking a drug is no breach of the moral principle. Nor is that an endorsement.
Conclusion
Competent adults control their bodies, including which drugs they consume. Prohibition violates individuals twice: by controlling their bodies and asking them to pay for the cost of enforcement. A free society is far less chaotic than endless fighting to impose our personal health or moral views on each other.
