Thomas Szaz Analysis

Thomas Szaz argues in favor that people should be allowed to take any drug they want without any restrictions. He thinks the fear that the government has that; people will neglect their responsibility and engage in smoking opium or heroine all day is just a fallacy.

He argues that, yes it is easier for a person to kill himself with heroin than with aspirin but it does not validate ban of the use of dangerous drugs. He says it equally easier for a person to kill himself jumping off a tall building as oppose to a low one.

Szasz stated that the hullabaloo that drugs are dangerous so therefore should not be legalized. Szazs believes that there are indeed some drugs that are more dangerous than others, also drugs like marijuana, heroin, methadone or morphine is banned because it is said to dangerous but it is false because there are no facts supporting these claims and therefore not enough reason to justify the prohibition of those drugs.

Also here in the US people can easily walk in to a store and purchase a shotgun because the government believes strongly in the right and worth of civil liberty.

If this is the case then the government should have no say in what a person decides to put into his body since the government has no business in what a person puts in his mind. Szasz added that, the only justification for government intervention is when one individual is doing something that may harm someone else or his environment.

He believes that the majority of drug related deaths are as result of overdose and added that if drugs were taxed and sold, the strength or potency of drugs would be regulated for safety concerns.

He believes that just as we respect freedom of speech and religion as important rights, so we should also regard freedom of self-medication as central right. Like most rights, the right of self-medication should only apply to adults; and it should not be an unqualified

right.

Szazs stated that addiction could be anything such as eating, shopping, exercising etc. and is not limited to only narcotics. Furthermore, opium is less toxic than alcohol so alcoholics can be just as productive as an opium addict can. He states that in the Declaration of Independence, people have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Therefore aren’t the individuals who choose to do drugs entitled to this right to pursue their happiness? He states they do.

I partially agree with Thomas Szazs point. I agree with the fact that people should be given the chance to pursue their happiness but when the “pursuit “ of this “happiness” will be allowing them to use drugs it what I don’t agree with. I personally believe that the effect drugs have may present an instance pleasure but in the long run can be very detrimental to a person’s health. I don’t believe in gratifying an instant craving and suffering perpetual consequences. The risk outweighs the benefits and therefore it is not worth getting involved in the first place.