DEA agents: Regulating your behavior through force

Libertarians believe, first and foremost, that you didn't commit a crime unless you harm a person or their property. Basically, your rights end at your neighbor's rights. Meaning, do what you want, live your life how you choose; but when you infringe on another citizen's rights of property and safety, you have committed a crime. 

Obviously, smoking a joint doesn't meet those requirements of criminal activity. 

It's not that libertarians necessarily approve of the behavior; we simply realize that Prohibition doesn't work. Moreover, we understand that it does more to make Americans unsafe than any other single factor. 

First let's take a look at history. From 1919 to 1933 the Federal government outlawed the manufacture, transport, sale, and consumption of alcoholic beverages by way of the 18th Amendment. Widely supported by a popular majority of well-meaning religious groups in 36 of 48 states, citing the societal decay and "deviant" behavior under the influence of alcohol, they decided to establish a law banning its use for everyone. 

Soon thereafter, major unintended consequences came to the surface. Firstly, gangs immediately filled the void. Mafia groups soon moved out of small-time thievery and gambling and into bootlegging and racketeering. In turn, corrupting law enforcement and creating an arms race between the rival gangs. Secondly, otherwise law abiding Americans became criminals overnight, leading to widespread disrespect for the "rule of law". On top of that, not having that $500 million of tax revenue annually had a devastating effect on government budgets. Lastly, the cost of enforcement, with no way of measuring its impact, was enormous and wholly ineffective, with nearly 100,000 "speakeasy clubs" operating in New York alone. 

Sound familiar? Libertarians would liken those consequences to what we are seeing now in the midst of the "War on Drugs". Only instead of Al Capone and the Mafia, we have Bloods, Crips, and the advent of the drive-by. Not to mention an ever expanding library of dangerous drugs made of household poisons. Talk about unintended consequences. 

Fortunately, they saw their folly and repealed the 18th Amendment in 1933. Unfortunately, in 1969 Nixon replaced it with a Federal "War on Drugs" policy that remains in place now. 

Currently, the government at all levels, confiscates $40 billion with a 'B' per year of taxpayer money to fund the "War on Drugs". And it has only risen. At the same time, as usual, there are no statistics on the effectiveness of such programs. But do you feel like your kid would truly have a difficult time obtaining an "illegal" drug? Gives you an idea of the real-world effectiveness doesn’t it. This is 30 odd years later mind you. 

Instead, over 1 million Americans are incarcerated every year due to "War on Drugs" initiatives.

Not to mention the millions more who commit property crimes to support their increasingly expensive drug habit. Drug prohibition inflates the cost of drugs, which leads users to steal to support their behavior. An estimated 25% of auto thefts, 40% of robberies and assaults, and 50% of burglaries are committed by drug addicts. Prohibition puts your family and property at risk.

Also, during Prohibition, the murder rate rose 70%. Since the "War on Drugs" began, our murder rate has nearly doubled; a clear cause and effect that Libertarians see as dangerous to innocent Americans.

Stop the madness.

Let law enforcement focus on crimes that actually hurt people and their property. Just about half of police resources are dedicated to stopping drug trafficking. Putting those cops on the street could dramatically reduce the number of violent crimes. 

Libertarian philosopher Paul Hager makes a case that drug prohibition violates the principles of the limited government outlined in the Constitution. He asserts that alcohol prohibition required a Constitutional Amendment because it was not a power granted to the Federal government. Likewise, drug prohibition would require the same formidable Constitutional amendment process.

Simply, if a power isn't explicitly handed to the central government in the Constitution and not prohibited by the State, it is not a power they can legally impose. It, in turn, is a right of the people. Obviously, that hasn't stopped them enforcing it anyway.

Instead, we get the DEA, ATF, and FBI coordinating drug investigations not only in America, but around the world. 

So, if you like "no-knock" warrants, draconian taxes, and the central government legislating your private behavior, then keep voting for the current buffoons. Otherwise, you might want to think about the Libertarian answer.