Debatable Issue

¶ … DRUGS BE LEGALIZED? Should Drugs Be Legal?" is the core debatable issue of this paper. Two papers representing different sides of the debate are summarized below. The papers represent different dimensions of the issue, not necessarily contradicting each other. An Analysis of the Benefits of Legalized Drugs Meaghan Cussen presents an argument in favor of legalizing drugs. In "An Analysis of the Benefits of Legalized Drugs," the author highlights various social and economic reasons to back these arguments.

Cussen's leading argument highlights how penalizing drug use violates basic constitutional rights as they give the government control over an individual's body, who wants to "pursue his own happiness." The author highlights how legalizing drugs would help prevent such compromise of civil liberties. Another argument promoting legalization of drugs is the establishment of a free trade market. Here the social benefits of legalizing drugs are demonstrated in an equal opportunity to gain by any individual who wants to participate in the trade.

The author mentions how legalizing drugs will reduce crime rate and provides various reasons to back the statement. Reduction in the cost of drugs following legalization will reduce the need to commit crime to buy drugs. Further, legalization will prevent terrorist regimes from maintaining a hold by introducing the free trade market condition. Also, introduction of a legal infrastructure will make it easy to settle disputes between gangs, hence introducing a better alternative to problem solving than taking up crime.

The arguments of social reform due to legalization talk about how legalizing drugs will make a provision for use of healthier substances and tools such as needles, hence promote health. Further, the youth involved in the drug trade are also exposed to other dimensions of crime in the black markets. Legalization will eradicate this exposure to crime. Furthermore, the author differentiates 'crime' from 'drugs' by segregating criminal behavior (which should be penalized) from drug use (which should not) as not all drug users end up committing crime.

Economically the tax payers' money is more efficiently utilized with drugs being legalized than otherwise as per Cussen. Further, the economic demand for drug use is not expected to grow after legalization as drugs are "necessity," not "luxury" as argued by Cussen, and hence have less flexibility in demand to grow. In the trailing arguments of the paper the author segregate the attribute of drugs being "immoral and destructive" from being "legal." Cussen argues,.".

The legalization of drugs does not mean that government and society would sanction their use." The arguments labeling drugs as "immoral and destructive" are suggested as "unquantifiable" against "economic analysis" of drug legalization. The 'war on drugs': a view from the trenches Robert Silbering's article "The 'war on drugs': a view from the trenches." mentions arguments explaining the reasons for a drug problem, further suggesting drugs legalization as no solution to the problem. Silbering's arguments add another dimension to the debate on the issue of legalization surrounding drugs.

The author starts by devaluing the arguments in favor of legalization of drugs,.". I am reminded of the manufacturer who sells his product at a loss." In a brief roundup the author highlights prudence by mentioning knowledge of all the aforementioned arguments in favor of legalization of drugs (such as those by Meaghan Cussen.) The initiating arguments against legalization of drugs mention the complexities that may be involved in legalizing drugs. Silbering mentions the vagueness of legalization as age restriction may still be implied on legalizing drugs.

There are certain drugs (such as heroine and cocaine) that may still not be legalized. Hence such restrictions surrounding legalization of drugs will add more competition and violence in the black market for drugs. These complications are termed as "surrender" in the face of a drug problem by Silbering, rather than the "answer" to it. Silbering acknowledges that the "war on drugs" has not been won due to the dereliction of duties of the leaders to.