Proponents of drug legalization argue that individuals have the right to ingest whatever they choose without State interference. Laws arise when the majority in a community believe that certain individual behaviors threaten the well-being of the community. Drug abuse sufficiently undermines responsible and safe behavior to proscribe it. Legalization proponents also argue that drug sanctions lead to violence, corruption, and crime. The sanctions themselves, however, do not cause such behavior any more than the law against bank robbery produces that crime. Legalization would not undermine drug-related criminal enterprises, as proponents argue, since it is doubtful that regulated government drug distribution would meet all aspects of the drug demand. The argument that supply reduction policies have failed does not appreciate how an unrestrained drug supply would impact our society, and the argument that law enforcement costs would be reduced fails to consider the cost to society of expanded drug use. Although legalization proponents argue that legalization would not result in higher drug use, evidence indicates otherwise. A legal structure for countering supply combined with educational efforts to reduce demand is the best option for addressing the threat of drug abuse.