John Hospers’ position states that all drugs should be legalized as long as there is an age limit on who can buy and receive these drugs. He believes there should be no laws at all against the use of the drugs, meaning that there is no limit to how much of the drug can be taken as long as the use of the drug does not harm anyone else. There are harms related to the illegality of drugs, such as crime, but “no one knows how much they would be reduced if drugs were legalized” (Wilson,

339). A great amount of money is involved also. In order for law enforcement to continue this war on drugs, billions of dollars must be spent each year. This is a large amount of money, but using this money in order to crack down on drug use is only to protect society. There are a few reasons why drug legalization could be a decent idea, but the harms that would result are too great, and therefore, John Hospers’ view about legalizing drugs does not hold strong.

Many may argue that people who have an addiction will function better in the workplace if their drug of choice is available to them whenever they want it. Many accidents may occur if the workplace is not drug free, so this is a poor argument. The lives of the workers around this drug user could constantly be in jeopardy. People do not want to come to work everyday fearing for their lives. Another problem is that “drug-dependent people have very short time horizons and a weak capacity for commitment” (Wilson, 340). If this is the case, how can a person that is under the influence of drugs be expected to last at a job for a long period of time? He or she will not contribute anything to society if addicted to a drug. “Of course, society could decide to support all unemployable addicts on welfare, but that would mean that gains from lowered rates of crime would have to be offset by large increases in welfare budgets” (Wilson, 339). Many innocent people could result in not only physical, but also emotional pain if drug use is legalized for any reason.

It is not possible to use a drug without posing a threat to others. Even if the person taking the drug does not intend for anything to happen, he or she may indirectly harm anyone he or she may come into contact with. Drugs have negative effects on the person taking them that alter thoughts and actions. Thomas Szasz, in his article “The Ethics of Addiction”, argues “for unless we are willing to hold ourselves responsible for our own behavior, and hold others responsible for theirs, the liberty to use drugs degenerates into a license to hurt others” (Szasz, 331). People who use drugs do not have control over their own lives, so if this is the case, how could a drug user have control over the way he or she treats others? For example, if a mother is on drugs, how is she supposed to

Some topics in this essay:
Ethics Addiction”, James Wilson, John Hospers’, , John Hospers, legalizing drugs, Thomas Szasz, drugs legal, john hospers’, legalization drugs, hospers’ view, negative consequences, illegality drugs, wilson 340, drug legalized, drug legalization, talk children using, hospers’ view legalizing, john hospers’ view, view legalizing drugs,