Druggies will not just keel over in the ditch and decompose quietly into useful compost for the libertarian garden-of-eden. No, their numbers will increase and they will be a burden on society through criminality, accidents, and loss of productivity, even if somehow you manage to keep them from unionizing and electing their own candidates.
Studies of other countries and our own history shows that they
don't significantly increase in numbers, and we already have problems with criminality, accidents and productivity loss from their legal and illegal use. Alcohol and tobacco already suck a lot of productivity, cause accidents(vehicular and fire), and people steal and commit crimes to get them.
Just take a walk down the city street and count the stupid, weak, irresponsible people you can identify. If hard drugs become easily accessible, how many of them will succumb? Of course the number of druggies will increase.
I'd ask: How many would already fail a piss test? Probably many or most of them. More than 50% of High School Seniors in NORTH DAKOTA admitted to at least trying MJ. It was actually higher than the rate for alcohol and tobacco.
The bottom line is that life is hard and people need an outlet or escape. Self-respect and discipline keep reasonable people on track, no matter if drugs are easily available or not. But many if not most people lack both the self-respect and discipline, so they will easily succumb to chemical escapism. You do not believe that this is so? Read up on the opium problem in China, as Rabbi suggested.
I'd suggest reading up on Europe's experiences on legalization/decriminalization as a counterpoint.
Positing that legalization with easier access to safe and easily identifiable drugs will decrease use flies in the face of economic theory. Sorry not to bow to your "vast" experience.
He was talking abut psychological reasons, not economic ones. Economically speaking, the black market seems perfectly capable of supplying drugs at affordable prices already. The question becomes one of how elastic recreational drugs are in response to price changes.
We're arguing that it's actually very inelastic - users are willing to spend huge amounts of money/effort to get their drugs, yet usage wouldn't necessarily jump outrageously if it becomes cheaper. Users will keep using despite price variations, and non-users won't start using just because it's cheaper.
I'm not arguing that drug use isn't bad - just that our 'solution' is worse than the problem, especially given that it isn't working at stopping drug use. I'm watching COPS at the moment, and they're busting people with drugs left and right.
edit- The Rabbi, that's pretty much what I've been arguing. Legalize it, tax it, and use the funds saved from law enforcement and the additional tax revenues to fund treatment centers. Unspoken - but you could also run anti-drug campaigns to change the
culture away from drug use.
Oh yeah - they just busted a guy with a rifle stuffed down his pants. That's interesting.