Mr Khan said:
Even if we were to take a fully free-market approach to these things, banning certain substances could still be seen as a net positive. While some people can live with addiction (that is, function normally or in an acceptable capacity) many cannot, and those who cannot work due to a drug habit become an economic detriment, whether through poor performance in the workplace or through being fired and becoming an economic non-actor, or worse, a criminal looking for drug money because they can't hold down a job. The only tilt in favor of total liberalization is that the drugs would be much, much cheaper to obtain, but zero income is still zero income, and is economically adverse, and these problems are only multiplied in societies that acknowledge the government's role as a provider of welfare. Since no man is an island, even under the bleakest of filters that see man only as an economic animal, wilfully damaging your own health is still bad for society as a whole, and their "right" to damage their own health then ends up infringing upon our rights to happiness (through economic success) or property (through the promoted thievery). Through a left, right, statist, or libertarian perspective, legalizing hard drugs is a bad idea. |
So is criminalisation... what's your opinion on decriminilisation on hard drugs with treatment provided to addicts instead of sentences?


















