Drug Laws are Arbitrary
As reported by the BBC, a recent study surveyed scientists and health experts in the UK on the comparative health risks of different recreational drugs. The study concludes that the health risks of the drugs are totally uncorrelated to their legal status. (US drug laws are broadly similar to those in the UK.)
Among the study’s highlights: Alcohol is one of the most harmful recreational drugs, coming in just behind heroin and cocaine. The comparatively low-risk drugs include LSD, marijunana, and ecstasy, all of which were judged less harmful than tobacco. The authors also point out that (to paraphrase) drug users aren’t as stupid as the drug warriors think they are, and these glaring discrepancies serve to discredit everything the government says about drug risks.
The operative assumption of all legal paternalism is that individuals are misinformed and/or irrational and cannot be trusted to act in their own best interests. Yet even if this is true, the same problems plague the decisions of those individuals who are state officials. In fact, as the case of drug laws illustrates, the judgements of state officials are uniquely comprised by the myriad political forces which act on them. I am reminded of James Madison’s statement that “If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.”. The idea of a society ruled by philosopher kings has great appeal to many people. Unfortunately, philosopher kings and angels are both creatures of myth.
Leave a Reply