The Silk Road is what a 21st century approach to drug policy looks like.Remember, even if everything you want happens in America, it's still the case that the rest of the world's population is stuck with the same bullshit. As the cypherpunk doctrine states, the best route to change is to circumvent the state, not to challenge it directly or try and persuade it. kmfkewm's interpretation is cynical but completely accurate. Drug consumption is being pathologized either way you look at it. People should be free to consume drugs, but they should also accept the consequences of their actions. People fuck up all the time, everybody does it, and they pay for their actions with a wide variety of consequences in regards to their health, finances, social relations. I don't see fat people doing community service for eating too much.Having said all that, I believe there should be more opt-in systems for people with poor impulse control, whatever the particular issue is: gambling, drugs including alcohol, watching x-factor. Call it a soft authoritarianism hybrid with libertarianism. People intuitively know most of the time when they've gone too far, and it'd be good if there was some kind of boot camp where people could go to deal with their neurosis. It would be coercion, but opt-in, paid for by themselves, if they don't have any money or capital they could always perform indentured labor. It might sound desperate, but some people are desperate to change. It's better than the last stop being prison or dead. A kind of adult 'military school' if you will.Rehabilitation centers already exist, but frankly the public ones often have no incentive other than the milk of human kindness to help people get on their feet, we've already heard a few horror stories on SR about them. A twenty year tax bump on future earnings should incentive corporations to genuinely put people through the paces as best they can. I would fear a huge liberal program of government funded centers would do the same for rehabilitation as their programs for housing for the poor. It sounds like a good idea, but it's generally a disaster and it puts private sector competition out of business or prevents other more extreme (but opt-in) future options being explored.This way, those who are responsible drug consumers live free without anxiety or fear, and those who need help actually get it. The key thing is getting the opt-in bit to work. If it becomes coercive instead of choice, it could just become yet another nightmare.