Arguments Against Drug Law

The law is flexible as it changes to correspond with existing trends in anticipation of future needs and to remain acceptable to individuals in society. Possible reasons that require change in the law include economic circumstances, new research, health issues, increased community awareness, pressure from interest groups and significant incidences. As the online drug trade and the illegal use of pharmaceutical drugs are rapidly becoming widespread, the law, which has been unsuccessful at averting the accessibility to prohibited drugs or in declining levels of use, is now struggling to maintain the pace of synthetic drugs. In response to concerns about failures of current government policies and criminal authorizations, moderation of drug policies

Reinforced by research evidence, reasonable arguments for supporting the current law on illegal drugs are rarely offered. The clearest arguments are religiously based or moral views that the use of particular drugs is immoral; that people who use those drugs are corrupt and consequently, drugs should be banned and manufacturers, suppliers and users should be treated as criminals. Adjustment to drug laws has been advocated by a number of individuals and reform groups, however opponents announce that such reduction of laws, involving decriminalization and legalization, will eliminate the preventive effect and increase drug use and release much larger drug-related concerns into the community. A reasoning for legalization is that it would significantly reduce or even abolish drug trade inside the black market and criminal networks. Other arguments involve focusing responses within health instead of the police and the criminal justice system. Governments could accumulate taxation income from illicit drugs as they now do from gambling, alcohol and tobacco. A regulated authority could assure direct income; research indicates this may be approximately $600 million annually for a regulated cannabis market in New South