Here's the article: (The Drug Laws Don’t Work, by Michael Huemer.pdf.)
Find an instance of where the argument comes dangerously close to committing a fallacy and explain why you think this is so. Be sure to (a) name the fallacy, (b) define it, and (c) explain why you think it's committed.
There are parts of this argument that are quite compelling. Explain why any one inductive inference pattern that it uses (such as inductive generalization (enumerative induction), statistical syllogism, analogy, or causal argument) makes it an effective argument. Be sure to (a) identify the type of inductive argument and (b) reconstruct its premise(s) and conclusion.
Do you think that drugs should be legalized, or perhaps that only certain drugs should be legalized? What are your reasons?