While drug control laws tend to reduce the incidence of drug use, their enforcement is not without cost to society. Among the most obvious costs is the development of black markets in drugs and the criminalization of users. Modest control laws can substantially reduce drug use without incurring serious social costs. However, increasing the severity of control laws adds less and less to the benefits achieved and more and more to the costs to society. Ultimately the costs outweigh the benefits. We should aim for optimum levels of control by weighing both the benefits and costs of our drug control laws.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BerridgeVirginia undated Opium Eating and Life Insurance; Opium Eating and the Working Class of the Nineteenth Century: Establishing the Facts; Fenland Opium Eating in the Nineteenth Century, (mimeo).
2.
KramerJ.C.1976“From Demon to Ally—How Mythology has, and may yet, Alter National Drug Policy.”Journal of Drug Issues6:390–406.
3.
LomaxE.1973“The Uses and Abuses of Opiates in Nineteenth Century England.”Bull. Hist. Med.47:157–176.
4.
LowingerP.1973“How the People's Republic of China Solved the Drug Abuse Problem.”Med. Opinion pp 81–92.
5.
O'DonnellJ.A.JonesJ.P.1970“Diffusion of the Intravenous Technique Among Narcotic Addicts,” in BallJ.C.ChambersC.D., The Epidemiology of Opiate Addiction in the United States. Springfield, ILL.: Charles C. Thomas.
6.
WestermeyerJ.1976“The Pro-Heroin Effects of Anti-Opium Laws in Asia.”Arch. Gen. Psychiat.33:1135–1139.
