Education is the Best Weapon in the War on Drugs
It seems that in the ongoing debate over whether to legalize drugs in the United States, quite a few people feel that legalization would diminish the crime rate. Their argument points out that the permissible use of marijuana would eliminate the necessity for people to go into hard drug territories to purchase such a drug and maybe even deter them from trying narcotics like crack-cocaine and heroin. Even though these people assert that legalization could diminish crime rate, they forget to realize that alcohol and nicotine are legal psychoactive drugs and have detrimental hazards on our society. Since these drugs are easily obtainable, they are more often used by people of all ages. Although education about nicotine effects decreased smoking in our country, the crimes related to alcohol abuse are still staggering in our community due to the easy accessibility and acceptance from the population in general. The way alcohol impairs a person's brain it is amazing that more efforts have not been made to in some way deter people from drinking like they have been deterred from smoking. Prohibition is out since it has been acceptable and we know what happened when we did try to prohibit alcohol. If we were to legal other drugs, it would be hard to rescind the decision much like with alcohol and nicotine. Legalization is a scary issue when it is looked upon in this respect.
Contrary to the feelings of those who rationalize legalization, this answer does not seem to hold a feasible solution to the drug problems of today. In essence, legalizing them is just like saying that the use of mind altering substances is not only...
... middle of paper ...
...bligation to push for education and treatment for the disease of addiction and not for feeding this cancer that has taken the American society into a world of chemical dependency. The laws themselves are not what influences our behavior, but the acceptance of our behavior by our fellow man.
Bibliography:
Finley, Rick. "Legalization is Giving Up." Internet htp.www.drugs.com
Frolik, Joe. "Nations Drug War Dwindles." Times Picayune
[New Orleans, LA.] 6 Mar. 1994: A-4.
Simons, Marlise. "Lenient Laws Make Dutch Town a Mecca for
Drug - Hungry Foreigners." Times Picayune
[New Orleans, LA.] 1 May 1994: A-32.
U.S. Department of Justice. "The Ten Claims." DEA Speaking out against
Drug Legalization.
Weisheit, Ralph. "Drugs, Crime and the Criminal Justice System." Introduction
Pg 60. Acis/Anderson.
While most people can control their liquor, unfortunately others can’t. Legalizing alcohol was a big mistake, the many different tragedies that occurs because of alcohol is insane. The fact that imbeciles are allowed to drink is even worse. In the article “The Legalization of Drugs” by Douglas Husak and Peter de Marneffe, both philosophers have a debate as to whether to criminalize drug users or not. Husak argues for legalization of drugs. While Marneffe argues against the legalization of drugs. The article states “Since alcohol is currently legal, and this condition is not likely to change soon. It is necessary to defend the prohibition of any drug against the background of legalized alcohol. Observe, then, that an increase in the use of some drugs as a result of legalization might actually result in a net decrease in the independent harms of drug and alcohol abuse taken together” (Husak 112). Being that alcohol is currently legal, there’s a 99.9% chance that it won’t change soon. Some drugs are banned, but, alcohol is still being sold in stores. Marijuana is a nonviolent drug, whereas alcohol promotes anger and pure violence. By legalizing marijuana and making drinking alcohol illegal, there’s a chance that violence will decrease. The video “Why We Need to End the War on Drugs” spoken by Ethan Nadelmann, he discussed both valid points about drugs and whether it should be legalized or stay
During the duration of this paper, I will discuss an issue that has been controversial for over a century; prohibition and how it has effected, currently effects, and will, most likey, continue to effect American society. The aspects that I choose to address from this issue are political, historical, they make you wonder, and they should effect anyone who reads this paper. For decades, the American government has had a restriction or ban on drugs and alcohol. Also for decades, these restrictions have been met with resistance from our society. In the early twentieth century, from 1920 through 1933, it was the prohibition of alcohol. A corrupt time, in which, so called, "criminals" and law makers both manufactured and sold bootlegged alcohol. There was high demand then and everyone was in it for the money, everyone. A time which proved to be a failed attempt by the government to take away what is now one of the United States' top commodities. During the 1970's President Richard Nixon started an ongoing "war on drugs" and every president since Nixon has continued this fight to, somehow, rid the entire country of illicit drugs. Today, a few states have taken a new approach to one of these drugs and eyebrows are being raised to the war on drugs all together. States, such as, California, Washington, and Calorado have loosened their tight grip on prohibiting marijuana and even have medical marijuana dispenseries. This idea has been proven to have boosted those economies, and it has allowed people with cancer to use a medication that actually gives them comfort. However, marijuana is still illegal. Why would we restrict the nation from something that beneficial...
Additionally, I will highlight and evaluate the influences acting on individual legislators' decisions to continue support for these ineffective policies as a more general demonstration of Congress' role in the formation of our nation's drug policy strategy. Finally, I will conclude this analysis by outlining the changes I feel are necessary for future progress to be made. Primary among these changes are a general promotion of drug education and the elimination of our current system's many de-legitimating hypocrisies. However, before the specific outcomes of Congressional influence and policy impact can be evaluated, it becomes important to first review the general history and current situation of drugs today. Our present drug laws were first enacted at the beginning of the century.
I base my support of the decriminalization of all drugs on a principle of human rights, but the horror and frustration with which I voice this support is based on practicality. The most tangible effect of the unfortunately labeled "Drug War" in the United States is a prison population larger than Russia's and China's, and an inestimable death toll that rivals the number of American casualties from any given war, disease or catastrophe.
As described in novel The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference the course of any trend, movement, social behavior, and even the spread of a virus has a general trend line that in essence resemble a parabola with 3 main critical points. Any trend line first starts from zero, grows until it crosses the first tipping point, and then spreads like wildfire. Afterwards, the trend skyrockets to its carrying capacity (Galdwell, 2000). Then the trend gradually declines before it reaches the next tipping and suddenly falls out of favor and out of memory. Gladwell defines tipping points as the “magic moment when an idea, trend, or social behavior crosses a threshold, tips, and spreads like wildfire” (Gladwell, 2000).
Many feel today we are loosing the war on drugs. People consider legalization unnecessary. They feel that it will increase the amount of drug use throughout the world. They state that in many cases, drug users who have quit quit because of trouble with the law. Legalization would eliminate the legal forces that discourage the users from using or selling drugs. They also say that by making drugs legal, the people who have never tried drugs for fear of getting caught by the law will have no reason to be afraid anymore and will become users (Potter 1998).
The debate between prohibitionists and citizens who believe in the legalization of illegal drugs provide many arguments. Since there are many drugs that are illegal there are many different arguments on what should be legal and what shouldn’t. The biggest debate, and the argument that I will mostly focus on, is the reform of marijuana. Prohibitionists argue that marijuana has adverse health, safety, social, academic, economic, and behavioral consequences (Goldberg 183). Not only do they claim that it causes all of those consequences but it also can cause harm to others including family and friends (Rachels 228). The obvious argument in harming others is driving under the influence of the drug but proh...
drugs may be illegal yet we still have one heck of a problem with them; thus,
The current situation of drug control in the United States is imperfect and inadequate. Millions of men and women, both young and old, are affected by illicit drug use. It costs the United States about $6,123 every second because of drug use and its consequences (Office). Moreover, 90 percent of all adults with a substance use disorder started using under the age of 18 and half under the age of 15. Children who first smoke marijuana under the age of 14 are five times more likely to abuse drugs as adults than those who first use marijuana at age 18. Finally, the children of alcoholics are four times more likely to develop problems with alcohol (Prevent). Current legislation that has to do with the United States’ drug control policy is the Controlled Substances Act, which regulates the manufacture, importation, possession, use, and distribution of certain substances (Shannon). In 1966, Congress passed the Narcotic Addict Rehabilitation Act also known as the NARA. This legislati...
The prohibitionist national policy towards drugs in U.S has been extremely contentious in the present times. After decades of the stance that costs billions how many each year, the paltry achievements and the countless negative externalities have led to a clamor for alternative policies instead of a “War on Drugs”.
Recreational drug use has been controversial for years. Government has deemed the use of certain drugs to be dangerous, addictive, costly, and fatal. Governmental agencies have passed laws to make drugs illegal and then have focused a great deal of attention and money trying to prohibit the use of these drugs, and many people support these sanctions because they view the illegality of drugs to be the main protection against the destruction of our society (Trebach, n.d.). Restricting behavior doesn’t generally stop people from engaging in that behavior; prohibition tends to result in people finding more creative ways to obtain and use drugs. However, just knowing that trying to control people’s behavior by criminalizing drug use does not work still leaves us looking for a solution, so what other options exist? This paper will discuss the pros and cons about one option: decriminalizing drugs.
In the early 1980s, policymakers and law enforcement officials stepped up efforts to combat the trafficking and use of illicit drugs. This was the popular “war on drugs,” hailed by conservatives and liberals alike as a means to restore order and hope to communities and families plagued by anti-social or self-destructive pathologies. By reducing illicit drug use, many claimed, the drug war would significantly reduce the rate of serious nondrug crimes - robbery, assault, rape, homicide and the like. Has the drug war succeeded in doing so?
In order to demonstrate this cause, the difference between illegal and legal substances (specifically alcohol and marijuana) must be abolished. Alcohol, as we all know, was once illegal. The reason that it was illegal was because the ill effects of alcohol led many people to fight for the prohibition cause. Some of these ill effects are direct and some alter the behavior and motor skills of the drinker, helping them do things they would not usually do. More often than not, the direct effects result from heavy drinking, like "depression is frequently diagnosed in alcoholics" (Rittenhouse 140). But just getting drunk can do serious harm. "Accidental trauma forms the major cause of brain damage from alcohol" (140) would indicate alcohol as a threat to human health.
Drugs Should Not Be Legalized. " Greenhaven Press. 65-92 Riga, Peter J. " " Legalization Would Help Solve The Nation's Drug Problems.
Leading to an increase in drug experimentation by the youth and an increase in crack houses, where most laced drugs are produced. There is a reason why these drugs are illegal and it 's because of their harmful effects and the damage they cause the human body. Drug users, are often recognized as people who commit crimes, murder, rape, and other violence including burglary. With drug laws, it creates a fear in people of getting in trouble with the law and is a major reason to not use drugs. The legalization of drugs would not lower crimes rates as there would be more and more addicts as well as large black markets for drugs. Although these drug users commit crimes to obtain these drugs, it is obvious to see they would still be committing these crimes to obtain the drug even if it is legalized. Either way, a crime is still being committed they just have an easier way to steal the drug from someone. Which means the crime rates would start to rise, leading to the population of prisoners increasing, which also leads to the government spending more money on organizing jail facilities to hold these prisoners. One state in particular where marijuana is now legal, has started to come to the realization that maybe it wasn’t a good idea to leaglize this drug. Kevin A. Sabet, Ph.D., an assistant professor at the University of Florida and President of SAM points out that,