The governmental prohibition of certain drugs with recreational uses is effective at reducing the harm associated with use of the targeted drugs

The governmental prohibition of certain drugs with recreational uses is effective at reducing the harm associated with use of the targeted drugs
Subjects
Drug prohibition	Drug use
Harm
Linking arguments
Ending the governmental prohibition of certain drugs with recreational uses will reduce the costs of drug use for society The governmental prohibition of certain drugs with non-medical uses is harmful

Supporting arguments

Alcohol prohibition in the United States was effective at reducing the harm associated with the consumption of alcohol. This experience is likely to be true of other drugs as well, meaning that drug legalization will increase the harm associated with their use.  Related argument: Alcohol prohibition in the United States was effective at reducing alcohol use and the harm associated with its manufacture, distribution and use.

Drug prohibition enables government workers, such as police officers, social workers and probation officers, to guide users into treatment programs in order to reduce use. These programs are more effective than voluntary treatment.  Related argument: Involuntary treatment for drug use is more effective than voluntary treatment.

Drug use causes deleterious effects on the children of users, specifically child abuse and neglect. Government intervention can effectively reduce this effect by prohibiting drugs.

Drug use causes people to drive less safely, which can harm innocent people. Government intervention can effectively reduce this effect by prohibiting drugs.

Government agencies enforcing drug prohibition have succeeded in reducing the purity of drugs. This results in a safer product for users.

People, including those who sell drugs, sometimes promote their use, and provide misleading information about the risks of drug use. Governments can and should provide more accurate information in order to counter this effect and assist people in protecting themselves from the dangers of drugs.

People who use drugs are likely to be less productive at work, and are more prone to workplace accidents. This has negative outcomes for society, and can be prevented through the government prohibition of drugs.

The periods of United States history when drugs were less tightly controlled were also periods with greater usage rates and more harm associated with use.

Opposing arguments

Drug prohibition causes a great deal of harm that would not exist or be lessened in the absence of prohibition. This harm outweighs any benefits to drug prohibition.  Related argument: Drug prohibition causes significant harm.

Prohibition does not work as well as harm reduction, which is a highly effective way to reduce the harm associated with the use recreational drugs.  Related argument: Harm reduction is effective at reducing the harm associated with the use of recreational drugs.

Casual drug possession and use is tolerated in Portugal. This has been highly effective at reducing the harm associated with the use of recreational drugs. Portugal's policy success is instructive for other countries.

Drug prohibition forces users to use unregulated markets to purchase drugs. This puts them at higher risk of fraud, theft and assault.

Drug prohibition makes it more difficult for users of intravenously-injected drugs to access clean syringes. This leads to them re-using syringes, which spreads HIV and other bloodborne pathogens.

Drug prohibition means that there is no effective regulation of drug purity and dosage, making drug use more dangerous for users.

Drug prohibition pushes those who are addicted to the targeted drugs into underground economies, which makes it more difficult for them to seek effective medical treatment for their addictions.

When recreational drug use is banned, users are often arrested and convicted, leading to a long-term decline in employability and other important measures of wellbeing. This results in users and former users remaining in a stigmatized underclass with limited abilities for advancement.