I have to take issue with a point you made about the libertarian ideal as it relates to drugs: “Many drug abusers take drugs, then drive, rob, or murder.”

This implies that the violence surrounding drugs in our country is mostly a result of the drugs’ effects and not of the laws surrounding them.

When is the last time you heard about a 14-year-old kid getting killed while two rival cigarette pushers had a dispute? Or the “Jim Beam” cartel bribing judges or police officers?

Simple. These substances are legal and therefore competition keeps prices at a reasonable level where users don’t have to rob anyone to obtain them and sellers have access to courts to settle disputes.

The example of prohibition in the 1920s and 1930s seems to be lost on most people.

The reality is that when alcohol was banned, organized crime was out of control. Now that it is legal we don’t see the same violence.

When pitting these theories against each other, just look at what resulted when these theories were tried.

Nazi totalitarianism, where government controlled people’s lives, failed. Soviet communism folded.

But a group opposing British taxes and writing a constitution limiting government turned into the most powerful and free nation in the history of the world.

That’s reality.

Ryan Reed