Legality of drugs and other substances

The purpose of the law isn’t to minimise negatives and maximise positives. The purpose of the law is to uphold the rights of people.

Drugs are a net negative for society.

Would this work better as a criticism of #4058? That way, the relationship between these ideas might be clearer, and there’d be the possibility of a criticism chain.

Related to #4062, making any part of the drug trade illegal just gives gangs and cartels a leg up over law-abiding citizens.

But that way, you pretty much ensure that only scumbags sell drugs. And they definitely don’t care about their customers.

Getting someone hooked on an addictive substance to get repeat business is predatory. It’s not an honest way to do business. Even if consuming drugs was legal, maybe the selling of drugs should still be illegal.

Those who advocate making most/all drugs illegal tend to think alcohol should remain legal, despite alcohol having many of the same problems as drugs.

Not prohibited by law.

The purpose of the law isn’t to minimise negatives and maximise positives. The purpose of the law is to uphold the rights of people.

Drugs are a net negative for society.

Legalising drugs will bring lawful competition to cartels and gangs, breaking geographical monopolies that perpetuate other (actual) criminal activity.

Define legal, please.

If they violate rights they should be punished by the law, that applies regardless of if they take drugs or not.

People on drugs violate the rights of others way more often.

Should drugs be legal?

All drugs should be legal because people have a right to do what they want, as long as it isn’t violating the rights of others.