Making drugs legal seems like a logical argument. Many people are using it to their own detriment and that of their loved ones. If government controlled it, it would mean the following (the argument goes); price control, taxes collected, quality control.
My argument is not so much against drugs being controlled, but against government being in control of anything. Firstly we have to note a few points about government; The wheels of government, generally, turns slowly; government is, generally, inefficient; government is, generally bad at planning; government is a spender of wealth, NOT a creator of wealth; politicians are, generally, self-serving in their motives.
Assuming that government gets control of the drug trade, will they grow/manufacture the raw materials locally or import it from the same countries who supply it illegally and outbid the current dealers? If it is grown/manufactured locally, will government be running these ‘factories’? It cannot be part of the NHS because the NHS is a service delivery agent, not a manufacturing facility.
Will these facilities manufacture all the different illegal drugs available at this time? And will they add new ones that may come into the market in the future? Just because government takes on a previously illegal drug manufacturing facility, does not mean competitors are automatically eliminated.
I’m assuming that in order for government to supply these products, said products will have to ‘be made’ legal. Since no one entity may run a monopoly in our economy, can potential providers not challenge this in court?
Is the ever wider, illegal, use of drugs not a failure of the legal and penal systems? Rather than allowing people to abuse themselves, and others, legally, let us fix the systems that are supposed to protect society.
Is the person who becomes addicted to drugs controllable? Is the person who uses drugs ‘recreationally’ controllable? Will both of these types queue regularly for their dose? Will both of these types be allowed to claim their dosage from government facilities, or will a ‘user’ have to be totally dependent on drugs before he/she can claim legally?
Once controlled and legalised, this market will be split into two. The addict, including those who cannot hold down a job and steals or robs in order to get the money to buy. They will have to be ‘fed’ for free, I assume. And the recreational users who do hold down a job. So will we end up with a legally controlled facility for addicts and an illegal supply chain for recreational users? Or will the government facility supply free to the addict and charge the recreational user. And are there enough paying recreational users to make this system profitable, because currently, paying addicts (in the illegal market) will become benefit claimants in a government controlled market.
Let’s not fool ourselves by the arguments for tax collection and the foolish idea that addicts will suddenly queue to pay for legal, quality controlled drugs.
