You cannot legalize without subsidizing.
Drug addicts are unemployable and spend all their money on their habits.
Legalizers assume that there are zero consequences to society telling addicts that their life decisions are valid and should be guaranteed by law.
Legalization means more unemployable addicts who will survive by either directly robbing and assaulting productive human beings, or by giving votes to politicians who will indirectly rob productive human beings through taxes and through insane employment laws.
And all addicts are inherently violent - for every "nonviolent" drug addict there is usually at least one friend or family member who has been menaced or assaulted, and who is too embarrassed to file charges.
Anyone who tries to stand between an addict and his fix will soon learn how "nonviolent" he is.
Amen!
No argument with your basic point. The question is how do you minimize the cost?
There is a hard core of addicts who will not get help, who will never shake the monkey on their back. The less we spend on them, the better. Jails are very expensive places, a precious resource if you will. Junkies don’t merit jail unless and until their violent conduct forces the issue.