I don’t see value in legalizing such harmful substances.
The argument is basically that legalizing the drug:
- Wouldn’t really increase usage (due to illegality not being a disincentive)
- Would decrease secondary illegal activity (due to decreased costs, increased visibility, and regulation)
- Would improve safety of the substance* (due to increased visibility and regulation)
- Would improve the ability to treat the issue as a public health concern (due to increased visibility)
Of these, I think #2, #3, and #4 are pretty self-evident. #1 would require some data to support it, I’d think, and maybe it’s already there. Surely there’s some Portuguese drug study people could point to.
* Assuming the substance is in fact what people would choose in a legalized environment. There’s an economic concept called “substitution of inferior goods”. When what people really want (cocaine) becomes too expensive to reasonably obtain, and living without it is not a feasible option (addiction), they start using crap (meth). Presumably, in a legalized environment, many or most meth users would become coke users, once both are more-or-less equally cheap. Not that this is a great improvement, but it’s something to consider.