Drug War

Let People Choose Their Own Drug Policies

What if we just allowed people to take drugs in a supportive social milieu that clearly signals appropriate behavior?



In 2014, for the first time in American history, a drug formerly declared illegal was made legal and commercially sold. I am talking about marijuana in Colorado, soon to be followed by several other states. 

Of course, this statement immediately calls for several caveats.  Marijuana has been previously legalized for medical purposes around the country, with a prescription.  And, so, obviously I am referring to recreational drug use being legalized.

Previously, of course, in 1933—with the passage of the 21st Amendment—the United States re-legalized alcohol, after having made its sale, production, and transportation (although not its personal use) illegal in 1920. But alcohol was a very familiar substance, one used traditionally by a great number of Americans (for example, by both Catholics and Jews in religious observances) as well as having been a universal social lubricant in Colonial times.

Alcohol prohibition had been roiling in America for a century when the 18th Amendment banning it for commercial purposes was ratified by three-quarters of the states. Strange to note, while alcohol prohibition was a hot topic during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries (think Temperance), in the same period opiates were used indiscriminately. Think of the tinctured opiate, laudanum, sold on street corners and over shop counters.

Yet opiates were not considered a particular social or health problem in nineteenth-century America. It was only when addiction was defined as a distinct medical syndrome around the turn of the century that drugs were singled out for special attention. This lead to the Harrison Narcotics Tax Act in 1914, which essentially banned heroin and cocaine use. Marijuana was effectively outlawed at the national level by the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937.

We have added any number of drugs to that list of banned street substances: barbiturates, amphetamines, psychedelic drugs (e.g., LSD), designer drugs (e.g., Special K, or ketamine; Ecstasy). As many people have noted, humans seem to have an inordinate appetite for drugs' mind-altering effects, making the violation of these bans a never-ending social problem. 

This struggle results since the urge for intoxication is universal, starting with alcohol. In Uncorking the Past, University of Pennsylvania bio-archeologist Patrick McGovern proved that alcohol has been fermented in every early center of civilization—human society has developed alongside the ethanol molecule.

So we can't be surprised at how commonplace and socially accepted use of different intoxicants has been throughout history. Still, we can only marvel today at the stupendous quantities of alcohol our founding fathers drank, for example at George Washington's farewell party on the eve of the passage of our Constitution—amounts that would stagger even alcoholics in contemporary America.  

The media—viewing everything as it does through our current cultural lens—struggles to deal with this reality when it takes a ground-level view of our founding fathers. The History Channel series, Sons of Liberty, turns Sam Adams and Benjamin Franklin into closet alcoholics, which could just as easily be done with George Washington and Thomas Jefferson.

What Sons cannot comprehend is the social cohesion that underlay the controlled drinking of Colonial Americans. According to historian Mark Lender in Drinking in America, the colonial tavern was the main community meeting place, the tavern keeper as prestigious as the town minister. Taverns were filled with wives and children. This setting ruled out drunken misbehavior. The taverns in Sons instead resemble the nineteenth century Western saloon or workingman's bar, where the few women present are prostitutes.

We see that people managed prodigious drinking and regular drug use in the past. But our modern view of addiction as causing uncontrollable substance abuse makes this seem biologically impossible: "there is science that shows addiction, whether it's of (sic) drugs or alcohol, significantly changes a person s brain. These changes result in compulsive behaviors that weaken a person's self-control, qualifying all of it as a complex, chronic brain disease."

And, so, the modern marijuana legalization experiment is of tremendous social and scientific interest. For, while marijuana is no longer seen through the prism of the laugh-along movie Reefer Madness, it is considered potentially addictive. From this perspective, the head of the National Institute on Drug Abuse and the primary spokesperson for the chronic brain disease meme, Nora Volkow, "watches anxiously as the country embarks on what she sees as a risky social experiment in legalizing marijuana….The legalization process generates a much greater exposure of people and hence of negative consequences that will emerge."

Thus we may marvel at the first-year results of the Colorado legalization experiment—massive purchases for consumption of the drug, and yet reduced traffic fatalities statewide in CO and violent crime in Denver, and broad compliance with Colorado's legal restrictions (for example, no public consumption is allowed). Somehow, as noted at the Colorado Pot Guide website: "Most stoners in Colorado are pretty considerate."

California fell short of legalizing marijuana in 2010, instead merely decriminalizing it—reducing penalties to citations with small fines. California's decriminalization, however, unlike legalization laws such as the one in Colorado, applied to youths as well as adults. As a result, the beneficiaries in California included young people, which is reflected in a reduction in overall criminal behavior by youths and not just drug arrests, as well as lower school drop-out rates. 

Public Domain

In 2014, California took the radical step of decriminalizing possession of heroin, cocaine, and meth, with results we will look forward to.

What do these developments tell us about the human potential for managing drug behavior? It seems that people develop personal codes of conduct with drugs that are reinforced by how they see others behave and the expectations laid down for their behavior.  This process, scientifically, is called the social learning model. It represents the operation of informal social control as opposed to legal regulation.

In a previous column for Reason, I noted how people seemed to manage drug use as well as they do other human appetites before the Harrison Act made drugs illegal.  Some people, including Sigmund Freud and William Halsted (the pioneering surgeon), encountered problems with cocaine and narcotics. But their responses when they did were usually to quit or cut back their drug use—the way people deal with other life problems.

As to addiction, as I said in that article, "People may become engaged in intense involvements with love, sex, drugs, alcohol, caffeine, nicotine, gambling, spending, video games, et al. that can impair them and cause them distress, and then just as often reverse their behavior when they feel up to it, and the harm to their lives from their habit becomes clear to them. "

Of course people may seek whatever help they feel can benefit them in this process.  Nonetheless, to quote Jiminy Cricket, inhabitants of the 21st Century will need to let their consciences—and values and resilience—be their guides. Our best drug policy is to encourage these beacons, not to undercut them through myths about our inadequacy in the face of drugs. The last century—or two or three—of drug use, drug misuse, and drug policy in America all point us inescapably toward this conclusion.

Dr. Peele is presenting these ideas at the International Cannabis Business Conference in San Francisco, February 15-16.

NEXT: Warrants for Emails and Cell Phone Locations: Online Communications and Geolocation Protection Act

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I’m a Scientist with a strong interest in Cancer research. The evidence of the value of Marijuana as a life saving medicine is now so strong that the need to remove Marijuana from Schedule 1 has become a moral imperative.

    This weekend over 3,000 Americans died, in pain, of Cancer. Today, tomorrow and every day after that, 1,500 more Americans will die, after suffering horribly, from it. Every single minute another American dies of Cancer. Every American Cancer patient deserves the right to have safe, legal, and economical access to Medical Marijuana. Every single one.

    Americans who need Medical Marijuana shouldn’t be used as “Political Footballs” Please call the Whitehouse comment line at (202) 456-1111 and ask that the President take immediate action to remove Marijuana from Schedule 1 so American Physicians in all 50 states can prescribe it. Go to petitions.whitehouse.gov — there are two petitions you can sign electronically there, one to take Marijuana off of Schedule 1, the other to legalize it completely.

    Oncologists have know it for more than a quarter of a Century that Marijuana is a “wonder drug” for helping Cancer patients.

    The American Society of Clinical Oncologists wants Marijuana removed from Schedule 1. So does the American Medical Association, the professional society of all Physicians. A strong majority of Americans want Physicians in all 50 states to be able to prescribe Medical Marijuana. So do their Physicians., Cancer patients can’t wait.

    1. The need to remove marijuana from Schedule I, and to do away with drug scheduling, has always been a moral imperative.

  2. I’m a straffin run with a strong interest in Liberty research. The evidence of the value of Marijuana as a life saving medicence is irrelevent to me because I OWN my OWN fucking body. No other human who exists has the moral right to allow or deny me the free exercise of my own will as long as I hurt no one else. Defending MJ use on the grounds that it is actually “good for you” opens the door for assholes who would deny your freedom based on data that says something is bad for you.

    1. I am a reptile… Fuck your mammal laws

      1. Dude, that is cold blooded…

        1. Good one, sir!

    2. That door is always open, and will remain open as long as there are 2 people alive within punching distance of each other. How do you persuade people who are not radical libertarians to leave you alone?

      1. If they use force against you, apply sufficient force to get them to stop; repeat as necessary.

        Eventually those who insist on using force against you will either get tired of the effort and punishment received in response, or (if they are sufficiently stupid and/or violent) unable to continue.

  3. My body my choice!

  4. Self-ownership?



    1. Look that social contract you signed when you popped out of the womb clearly states that we collectively own each other. I mean the government is us and it is important for you to reframe from any activities that might harm your ability to pay taxes for the betterment of all of us.

  5. Another factor ignored in old time alcohol consumption is that there was little else safe to drink. Water was disease-ridden in cities or probably communities of any size. Probably only mountain water was fit to drink.

    AIUI, most beer was weak stuff because they spent all day drinking it as a water substitute.

  6. Stanton Peele: Let People Choose Their Own Drug Policies

    And dis-empower unelected career bureaucrats?

  7. My policy: hugs not drugs.

    1. You don’t have to tell me three times!

  8. My policy: hugs not drugs.

  9. My policy: hugs not drugs.

  10. My Policy?

    Think of the children.

    Honestly thought, there’s two types of people who shouldn’t have the right to vote.

    Parents and mothers.

    1. *Though

  11. It’d be fun if some comments were transposed between this thread & those on vaccines. Don’t forget, vaccines are drugs!

  12. What the government gives with one hand they take away with the other. When or if many drugs are legal and widely available is when the government will decide that tobacco and fast food are war crimes subject to execution and/or long long prison terms.

  13. ” Some people, including Sigmund Freud and William Halsted (the pioneering surgeon), encountered problems with cocaine and narcotics. But their responses when they did were usually to quit or cut back their drug use?the way people deal with other life problems.” Fun Fact: Siggy smoked up to 20 cigars a day and died of throat cancer. Talk about addiction! I wonder if Mary Jane would have eased the pain. Morphine sure did.

  14. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ?????? http://www.jobs700.com

  15. Hey you guys I have found the perfect job as a full time student, it has changed my life around! If you are self motivated and social media savvy then this is ideal for you. The sky is the limit, you get exactly how much work you put into to it.
    click on this link to get started and see for yourself????.
    ????? http://www.netcash50.com

  16. Prescription laws are part of the problem in controlling health care costs. These laws give doctors a legal government enforced monopoly over access to medical drugs, most of which are not subject to abuse. However, these laws also mean that instead of starting out with the least costly drug and only moving up to more expensive drugs if the cheaper ones fail, with prescription laws you are at the mercy of the doctor and his or her choices. One thing not generally known is that the drug companies “reward” doctors for writing prescriptions that favor their product. Regardless of the fact that the doctor is forcing the patient to pay more even if the product is no better than a lower cost one. Without prescription laws doctors would no longer be able to do this sort of thing as the patient would simply refuse to pay the additional cost, but could select on his or her own to go with the cheaper medication.

    Why Libertarians haven’t addressed this issue has been a puzzle to me.

  17. BuckyBall neodymium magnet cube is with strong magnetic which makes it possible to compose hundreds of millions of geometric patterns. It’s also with high entertainment and creativity.

  18. We are top suppliers Marijuana, pain pills, sex pills and anxiety meds available (we have meds like xanax, tramadol, percs, oxy, roxy, valium, actavis syrup, etc… +1 (724) 470-0553. Call: +1 (419) 299-6124
    Email Us Via : discreetsales2015(@)gmail.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.