Prohibition on Guns, Alcohol, Drugs, and Prostitution

I will be blunt: remember Prohibition in America? All it did was create an organized criminal black market. Same with drug criminalization; the only reason drug dealers have guns is that drugs are illegal. That's why you don't see Holland exploding with violence over marijuana. If drugs were legal, then no one would use violence to secure them, the same as you don't see sellers of chocolates and doughnuts using guns. Banning guns means that only those who are willing to violate the gun laws will have guns - the same people who are willing to murder and steal in the first place - and law-abiding citizens will have nothing with which to defend themselves. That's why shootings occur in gun-free zones like schools and malls, because in those places, the criminals know that they will have a monopoly on force. Think of Prohibition, and apply all the same lessons to bans on drugs, guns, and prostitution.

There is more to be said about prostitution; a friend of mine said it should be banned to protect women. Besides the fact that this is false, simply because a prohibition would be unsuccessful and create a black market - see above - there is a further consideration: how do such prohibitions protect women even if they did work?? On the one hand (hypothetically), if a woman wants - and I meant truly wants - to be a prostitute - then any law banning prostitution is oppression, denying her her own free will.

On the other hand, if she does not want to be a prostitute, then the only reason she will become one, is that she literally has no other choice. And if she has no other choice, and she chooses prostitution as being superior to whatever other choice she has (if any), then banning her prostitution actually does her harm. Perhaps she had the choice between prostitution and starvation from destitution. Banning prostitution condemns her to starvation. How is that protecting her? She did not want to be a prostitute in the first place, and she became one out of necessity. So banning prostitution denies her what is necessary for her welfare. If people really cared about her welfare, then they wouldn't ban prostitution, but they would instead help her gain some other, superior livelihood. And banning prostitution would not be necessary, because as soon as superior livelihood was available, she would freely cease to prostitute herself, as she never wanted to be a prostitute in the first place.

Therefore, banning prostitution either denies a prostitute's free will and liberty, or else it denies her her livelihood. Either way, it does not protect her.

Furthermore, banning prostitution means that if she does have some trouble requiring legal assistance, she cannot seek it. If her pimp beats her, for example, she cannot go to the police, because they will arrest her. So instead of getting redress for violence done her, she must instead passively accept all the injustices done to her. That is what banning prostitution does, turning it into a black market, the same as with drug and alcohol criminalization. All these do is drive the activity underground, and make its customers afraid to turn to the police when they need help. That is why drug dealers must use violence: to defend themselves both from the police, as well as from each other. If drugs were decriminalized, then there would be no reason for sales to occur in dark alleys filled with gun-toting thugs.