“Expanding individual liberty is giving to every adult, left, right, or center.”
I don’t view drug legalization as an individual liberty issue.
Let’s define “liberty.” Here’s one textbook definition from dictionary.com: “freedom from control, interference, obligation, restriction, hampering conditions, etc.; power or right of doing, thinking, speaking, etc., according to choice.”
OK, so the freedom from control intereference, etc. we’re talking about here is I suppose my freedom. So how is MY freedom positively affected by initiating legislation that will ultimately restrict it by increasing my taxes and my costs? You see when you buy into the legalization argument, you pick up the negative side of the argument as well. I.e. increased levels of intoxication and addiction due to increased ability to access the drug in question.
By legalizing marijuana or any other illicit drug, you increase the addiction rate as well as the use. While it’s been argued that the societal costs of legalization are less than those of prohibition, it’s as much of a cost shifting as anything. And it’s a cost shifting that proponents of legalization are quick to ignore. Instead of my paying increased taxes to lock dealers up, I’ll instead get to pay increased taxes for treatment of addicts as well as the increased costs of testing to ensure that people in critical positions (e.g. locomotive engineers, pilots, cops, other drivers) are not doped to the gills. Not to mention the very direct, yet unquantifiable costs that I will pay if one of my family members gets hurt or killed because some knucklehead wants to toke up.
And this increase in cost will benefit me exactly how? So I can legally take a drug I don’t really care to take?
No, when you talk about “individual liberty” you’re not talking about MY individual liberty, you’re talking about the individual liberty of drug addicts.
Now, I’m willing to grant that even the individual liberty of drug addicts is worth something. But don’t come to me saying that I benefit from this, because I don’t. The only way I benefit is if I get something out of the deal.
Come to me with a deal that says: “we’ll eliminate the personal income tax in exchange for legalization of marijuana, cocaine, and heroin” and you might be surprised how willing I’d be to consider it. But come to me and say: “we want to increase your taxes and increase the danger to you by letting a bunch of addicts get their fix legally” and see how quickly I reject that as the lousy deal that it is.
Your conclusion doesn't follow from your premise. When the mind-altering drug alcohol was illegal, anyone who drank set out to get thoroughly drunk - witness the increased popularity of hard liquor relative to wine and beer. It's quite likely that legalization means LOWER overall levels of intoxication.
By legalizing marijuana or any other illicit drug, you increase the addiction rate as well as the use.
Again, your conclusion doesn't follow from your premise. Illegality incentivizes patterns of use that contribute to addiction (such as seeking maximum intoxication as discussed above).
While its been argued that the societal costs of legalization are less than those of prohibition, its as much of a cost shifting as anything. And its a cost shifting that proponents of legalization are quick to ignore. Instead of my paying increased taxes to lock dealers up, Ill instead get to pay increased taxes for treatment of addicts
No cost shift there - and legal drugs doesn't imply or require taxpayer-funded addiction treatment, while illegal drugs does imply and require taxpayer-funded enforcement and incarceration.
as well as the increased costs of testing to ensure that people in critical positions (e.g. locomotive engineers, pilots, cops, other drivers) are not doped to the gills.
You're suggesting they're not tested now?
Not to mention the very direct, yet unquantifiable costs that I will pay if one of my family members gets hurt or killed because some knucklehead wants to toke up.
We all currently bear that cost from legal alcohol - so do you support banning that drug, or will you feel better about your dead family member if it was alcohol rather than pot involved?