Milton Friedman on Drugs and prohibition
But I have to admit that the one negative feature of legalizing drugs is that there might be some additional drug addicts. However, I want to qualify that in still another way. The child who’s shot in a slum in a pass-by shooting, in a random shooting, is an innocent victim in every respect of the term. The person who decides to take drugs for himself is not an innocent victim. He has chosen himself to be a victim. And I must say I have very much less sympathy for him. I do not think it is moral to impose heavy costs on other people to protect people from their own choices.
Context. From a television interview about the war on drugs. Just before, Friedman says the evidence on whether legalization raises drug use is very mixed: when Alaska legalized marijuana, its use among high school students went down, and in Holland, which does not prosecute soft drugs, use by young people has gone down too.
Where this comes from
Checked against the sourceThe wording was checked against the work itself.
Cite this passage
Milton Friedman, “America’s Drug Forum interview” (1991), With Randy Paige, taped at the International Conference on Drug Policy Reform, Washington, November 1991; reprinted as Ch. 8 “On Liberty and Drugs” in Friedman & Szasz on Liberty and Drugs, ed. Arnold S. Trebach and Kevin B. Zeese (Drug Policy Foundation Press, 1992), pp. 69–70. https://miltonfriedman.org/quotes/one-negative-feature-legalizing-drugs-not-innocent-victim-1991
Quoted for commentary and research. Rights in the underlying work remain with its rights holder, so cite the work itself, not only this page.
Topics
He also said
It does harm a great many other people, but primarily because it’s prohibited. There are an enormous number of innocent victims now. You’ve got the people whose purses are stolen, who are bashed over the head by people trying to get enough money for their next fix. You’ve got the people killed in the random drug wars. You’ve got the corruption of the legal establishment. You’ve got the innocent victims who are taxpayers who have to pay for more and more prisons, and more and more prisoners, and more and more police. You’ve got the rest of us who don’t get decent law enforcement because all the law enforcement officials are busy trying to do the impossible.
Context. From a television interview about the war on drugs. The interviewer has just suggested that critics such as the former drug czar William Bennett would say the sale and distribution of illegal drugs harms other people, so government has to step in; “it” is that trade. He goes on to name the people of Colombia and Peru, killed because the United States cannot enforce its own drug laws.
America’s Drug Forum interviewInterview, 1991, With Randy Paige, taped at the International Conference on Drug Policy Reform, Washington, November 1991; reprinted as Ch. 8 “On Liberty and Drugs” in Friedman & Szasz on Liberty and Drugs, ed. Arnold S. Trebach and Kevin B. Zeese (Drug Policy Foundation Press, 1992), p. 70Checked against the sourceFind the bookNow suppose you legalized. Under current circumstances, a mother who is a crack addict and is carrying a baby is afraid to go get prenatal treatment because she turned herself into a criminal, she’s subject to being thrown into jail. Under legalized drugs, that inhibition would be off. And, you know, even crack addicts, mothers, have a feeling of responsibility to their children. And I have no doubt that under those circumstances, it would be possible to have a much more effective system of prenatal care, a much more effective system of trying to persuade people who are on drugs not to have children or to go off drugs while they have children.
Context. From a television interview about the war on drugs. Friedman has just said that what bothers him most about crack is the “crack babies”, innocent victims who tend to be born underweight or mentally impaired, adding that alcohol harms more babies this way.
America’s Drug Forum interviewInterview, 1991, With Randy Paige, taped at the International Conference on Drug Policy Reform, Washington, November 1991; reprinted as Ch. 8 “On Liberty and Drugs” in Friedman & Szasz on Liberty and Drugs, ed. Arnold S. Trebach and Kevin B. Zeese (Drug Policy Foundation Press, 1992), p. 67Checked against the sourceFind the bookThe one adverse effect that legalization might have is that there very likely would be more people taking drugs. That’s not by any means clear. But, if you legalized, you destroy the black market, the price of drugs would go down drastically. And as an economist, lower prices tend to generate more demand. However, there are some very strong qualifications to be made to that. The effect of criminalization, of making drugs criminal, is to drive people from mild drugs to strong drugs.
Context. From a television interview about the war on drugs. The interviewer has asked how legalization would adversely affect America. Asked next “In what way?”, Friedman explains that interdiction has made bulky marijuana scarcer and dearer, pushing people toward stronger drugs.
America’s Drug Forum interviewInterview, 1991, With Randy Paige, taped at the International Conference on Drug Policy Reform, Washington, November 1991; reprinted as Ch. 8 “On Liberty and Drugs” in Friedman & Szasz on Liberty and Drugs, ed. Arnold S. Trebach and Kevin B. Zeese (Drug Policy Foundation Press, 1992), p. 65Checked against the sourceFind the book
Think this quote is wrong, misattributed, or missing context? Report it and it gets fixed, not argued with.