During prohibition in the 1920's, new prisons and jails had to be built to house .
the criminals by converting the drinking into a crime against the state. Prohibition undermined.
respect for the law, corrupted the minions of the law, created a decadent moral climate -.
but did not stop the consumption of alcohol. .
.
I agree with this statement, made by Milton Friedman from the Newsweek in 1972. Consequently prohibition is an attempted cure that only makes matters worse, for both the addicted and the rest of us. That's why, even if you observe the present policy toward drugs as fairly justified, considerations of realism make that policy most unwise. Legalizing drugs might increase the number of addicts, but prohibition is not going to stop it from happening, therefore I think they might as well quit wasting there time and money looking for drug criminals and traffickers and start spending it on other things such as health benefits and education, things like that. If drugs were legally available, any possible profit, or the motivation for profit and violence that goes with illegal trafficking would be eliminated.
Today, drugs are incredibly expensive and highly uncertain in quality. Addicts are driven to associate with criminals to get the drugs, become criminals themselves to finance the habit, and risk constant danger of death and disease. Legalizing drugs would extremely reduce these risks. Although an argument might be advanced that, drug addiction itself becomes a medical problem, there can be no question that any person who leads themselves (not anyone else) into a dependency upon something that will destroy their body has not committed a criminal act. .
.
With the large sum of money saved from selling drugs could go towards promoting several different programs on the effects of addictive and mind-altering drugs. They could also utilize these funds by creating more hospitals for people who are affected by drug addiction.
