Back off

So...

Lindsay Lohan is off to jail for cocaine use. She broke the law, she has to go to jail. Fine.

But who did she harm in this? Who did she threaten to harm? Who did she potentially put at risk of harm?

Was it only herself?

If she was driving under the influence of drugs, then sure, lock her up. However, she was not charged nor convicted of this. She was jailed for taking drugs.

Ultimately, the state has told the individual what she can do with her own body. And when she was unwilling or unable to comply with the edict,  the state used its power to remove her from society.

Where does this power come from? Is there a right to command the adult individual to live her or his life in such a way that meets state approval? If so, where is the line drawn between acceptable state inference and unacceptable state interference?  The state can lock you up for taking coke, so why can't the state lock you up for having bad tats? Hey, a bad tat only harms the individual who chooses to get it, it does nothing of consequence to anyone else. Same with taking drugs.

Now there are peripheral crimes that can happen because of taking drugs such as those associated with acquiring the drugs, acquiring the money for the drugs and actions undertaken while under the influence of the drugs. You steal to fund your habit, you drink or drug up and you behave like an ass, then tough. You freely took the substances that made you behave that way. As citizens, we must be responsible for our own actions.

It's a common defense for the outlawing of drugs to say that drug taking leads to these other crimes. Well sure, it can do. It doesn't always but often it does. That doesn't matter because we already have laws covering those other crimes. We don't need the extra law that says you can or cannot take this substance just in case other things might happen.

We are all adults here. We have to have the right and the duty as citizens to make these responsible decisions for ourselves. The state currently has the power to do this for us, but it clearly does not have the moral right.