Analysis Of Harm Principle By John Stuart Mill

Pope John Paul II said “freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought”. Meaning someone may not agree with everything they are legally authorized to do, but they still have that right to do it if they please. Most believe that the United States’ restraints on freedom are slim, nevertheless there is still one major controversy people like to argue. The freedom to use drugs. What one does in their personal life and home, including the use of drugs, should be accepted as morally permissible as long as no direct harm is done to others. Whether it be because of privacy, Utilitarianism, Mill’s Harm Principle, or just freedom in general, people have the liberty to fulfill their life to the standard they …show more content…
Unfortunately, there are young people in our society who do partake in drug activity. So this raises the question of how non adults should be constrained from directly harming someone else. It would not make sense to constrain adults to not directly harm others, but not constrain young people. If the Harm Principle were to go into use in our society, it would need to be a fair law that deals with people of all ages. Along with this disagreement comes the topic of too much freedom. Some may say if a country tolerates drugs to be legal then the people will continue to want more freedom. Legalization of drugs may lead to other heinous crimes becoming legal as well. Would all this legalization go against the harm principle and somehow lead to direct harm down the road? Possibly. The more freedom a person is given the greater the chance they have to screw it up. Hence, direct harm to …show more content…
The Unites States’ Amendment were made to bring the people freedom and that is what they deserved. Especially if no one else is being harmed in the making of this action. Utilitarianism would also side with drugs being legal since it will most likely maximize happiness and minimize unhappiness for the people involved. Considering there are people in this country that would die without their intake of drugs every day, making it legal would do no more indirect harm than already and would definitely not increase the direct harm. John Stuart Mill’s Harm Principle would suggest since using drugs does not lead to direct harm of other people in any other way then it is acceptable to do. Especially since drug laws are known as victimless crimes which have no victim, therefore no harm- direct or indirect for that matter. And if people are predisposed to the freedom they should be given, the economy would grow profoundly if drugs were to be taxed. Legalizing drugs have really had no downfalls to it, people just are not used to the concept of being able to use an illegal substance to their ability. But people should have that opportunity and right given how important the quality of freedom is in today’s society. So although, it may be a scary thing to attempt something new, the United States could certainly benefit from the legalization of illegal drugs,