The Question: should law prohibit the recreational use of drugs?

o Prohibitionist say yes

o Legalizers say no
The prohibitionist
o Drugs & Harm to Users
Is it proper role of the government to prevent people from harming
themselves?
The argument for saying yes
P1: drug use is very harmful to users.
P2: the government should prohibit people from doing
things that harm themselves.
C: therefore, the government should prohibit drug use
But p2 is extremely implausible, given the many very
harmful things that the government allowsbad diet,
abusive relationship, tobacco, etc.
Potential responses:
Isnt drug use more harmful than those things the
government allows?
But drug use harms your quality of life, too.
Does drug use cause a special kind of harm?
None of these responses seems to pass muster.
Other types of harm:
What about harm to personal relationships?
o Being rude to others can have the same effect, but
theres no law against being a jerk. And we dont
think people should be jailed for ruining their
personal relationships.
What about financial harm?
o We dont arrest people for losing their own money.
What about harm to ones character?
o Sure, drug use might cause you to lose your
sympathy and sense of duty. But we dont put
people in jail who merely have little to no sympathy
or sense of duty.
Drug use only carries with it the chance that it will lead to the
aforementioned harms it is not a guarantee
A reasonable principle:
IF it would be wrong to punish people for directly bringing
about some result, then it would also be wrong to punish
people for some other action on the grounds that the action
has a chance of bringing about the result indirectly.
Drugs and harm (to others)

Drug use erodes the users capacity to value freedom and

personal responsibility.
Drug use erodes the users capacity to operate in many of
lifes spheres.
The exception is driving while using drugs. Why?
o You risk physical bodily harm
The injustice of drug prohibition
If drug laws are unjust, then over half a million people in
America are unjustly imprisoned.
o Why think they are unjust?
Because it is unjust for the state to punish
people without having a good reason for
doing so.
o But Huemer endorses a stronger principle
Because the state is not merely punishing
people for no good reason, it is punishing
people for exercising their natural rights.
o If you believe in rights at all, then
A) how could you deny that individuals
have rights over their own bodies and
minds?
B) how could you deny that drug use is an
example of the exercise of such a right.
o How could the prohibitionist respond to B?
Either the prohibitionist says youre not in
control when youre altering your mind with
drugs, so youre not actually exercising your
natural rights. But, we dont punish people
for things outside of their control.
o There are grave injustices at stake in this debate.