Legalisation of Purchase, Possession and Consumption of all Class A, B and C Drugs
‘It is every parent’s nightmare. A youngster slithers inexorably from
a few puffs on a joint, to a snort of cocaine, to the needle and
addiction.’ In modern society, in the developed world, it has been
drilled into the minds of middleclass youngsters that drugs are bad
for you. A taboo has formed around the issue, raising curiousity. This
curiousity, combined with an idea of rebelling against rules has led
many people to illegal drugs (not to mention various individual
reasons for resorting to illegal drug taking). For many, drugs have
become the forbidden fruit. For many others, the supply of forbidden
fruit can be extrememly profitable. For the majority, this ‘business’
can cause serious harm to society.
Many say that prohibition of drugs isn’t working. Even with it being
illegal, it is still very accessible, and hence drug trade continues.
On the other hand, it is still less accessible than what it would have
been if they were to be legalised and, say for example, placed on
supermarket shelves. Legalisation has come to be seen by some as a
symbol of a frightening laissez-faire society where drugs are cheap
and easily available to anyone, with the result that drug use and the
harms that are attendant on it are rampant. However, legalisation is
not a risk-free policy: it is not a way to make drugs safe. But
because it causes different types of harms from those that result from
a policy of prohibition, it is possible that it will cause less harm.
Most users enjoy taking drugs i.e. this is consumer surplus. They are
prepared to pay more than the actual price to ‘get high’. This also
suggests that the illegal drug market is fairly price inelastic for
demand. After legalisation, drugs may become relatively more readily
available, and the prices that they would have to pay may well fall
(as there is no criminal organisation trying to make a healthy profit
to fund terrorist activity in Afghanistan… etc.
“The first time cocaine is used it may make the heart beat faster leading to a feeling of excitement and fear” (qtd. in Carroll, 1994, p.24). Followed by euphoria, these feelings can peak within five seconds. The user then begins to feel more energetic and becomes more sociable (Carroll, 1994). One inhalation will produce a high usually lasting 10-15 minutes. After this zenith of intense sensation, “…the drug wears off, these temporary sensations of mastery are replaced by an intense depression, and the drug abuser will then "crash", becoming lethargic and typically sleeping for several days” (qtd. in Narconon, 2001). There are several different ways to use crack. It can be snorted, smoked, or taken intravenously. It can also be taken orally (chewed), but this method is not preferred because of the low intensity of the high. The two most popular ways of using crack are smoking and IV usage. These two methods are most favored because they give the most intense sensations.
the only way to make money. Minimum wage salaries can not compare to the huge
Anti-drug legislation has had an extensive and fascinating record in the United States. The initial drug that showed prevalent use in the nation was Opium, which came primarily from China. Opium was utilized as a recommendation drug by doctors, but the growing cases of addiction led to laws alongside this drug. The greater part of the opium addicts were girls due to the doctors tend to recommend the drug for many women’s particular problems. In 1875, a law was approved in California barring individuals from smoking opium. While the law pertained generally to Chinese immigrants it was the first place in anti-drug provision is the Unites States. At the Federal stage, the prohibition of importation of opium by Chinese nationals happened in 1887 and in 1905 opium smoking was constrained in the Philippines (Harrison). While these regulations were the initial steps, they did not have any absolute provisions to decrease drug supply and use in the country. The laws beleaguered the lessening of delivery of drugs in the country and do not deal with the problem of treatment of a true illness.
Marijuana, or Cannabis, is a plant that has been in use since ancient times. Cannabis has had significant affects on history and societies throughout the years. It is a plant that can grow in any environment, with the exception of the Arctic Circle. Up until recent years the Cannabis plant has never been looked upon negatively. The debate on Cannabis has started again; with some people thinking that it should be legal and others thinking that it should stay illegal. It is time for people to see Cannabis as what it really is and not as what manipulative advertisements have shown it to be.
Ever since marijuana’s introduction to the United States of America in 1611, controversy of the use and legalization of the claimed-to-be Schedule I drug spread around the nation. While few selective states currently allow marijuana’s production and distribution, the remaining states still skepticize the harmlessness and usefulness of this particular drug; therefore, it remains illegal in the majority of the nation. The government officials and citizens of the opposing states believe the drug creates a threat to citizens due to its “overly-harmful” effects mentally and physically and offers no alternate purposes but creating troublesome addicts hazardous to society; however, they are rather misinformed about marijuana’s abilities. While marijuana has a small amount of negligible effects to its users, the herbal drug more importantly has remarkable health benefits, and legalizing one of the oldest and most commonly known drugs would redirect America’s future with the advantages outweighing the disadvantages.
Drug legalization is an enduring question that presently faces our scholars. This issue embraces two positions: drugs should not be legalized and drugs should be legalized. These two positions contain an array of angles that supports each issue. This brief of the issues enables one to consider the strengths and weakness of each argument, become aware of the grounds of disagreement and agreement and ultimately form an opinion based upon the positions stated within the articles. In the article “Against the Legalization of Drugs”, by James Q. Wilson, the current status of drugs is supported. Wilson believes if a drug such as heroin were legalized there would be no financial or medical reason to avoid heroin usage; therefore, anybody could afford it (367). Wilson stated that during 1960’s, British physicians were allowed to prescribe heroin to addicts until the number of addicts increased fivefold. He argued that cocaine is not a “victimless crime.” Addicts victimize children by neglect and spouses by not providing (370). Wilson upholds that illegality of drugs increases crime because users need to pay for their habit (372). He believes the benefit of illegal drugs is it forces patients who enter under legal compulsion to complete their treatment due to the pressure and drug-education programs in the schools (374). Wilson is convinced the difference between nicotine and cocaine is that while tobacco shortens one’s life, cocaine debase it and destroys the addicts humanity (375). Wilson’s argument is strong because he demonstrates his knowledge of the subject and supports it with many clear, scientific facts and historical examples of drug usage. He interprets facts differently by seeing “logical fallacy and factual error” (371) in what other perceive as being a true. He also acknowledges his opposition by addressing how the advocates of legalization respond to his position. Wilson recognizes that that he may be wrong about his conclusions of drug legalization. Yet he states if he is wrong, money will be saved, while if he is right, and the legalizers prevail, then millions of people, thousands of infants and hundreds of neighborhoods will live a life of disease (377-8). In the article “Drug Policy and the Intellectuals,” by William J. Bennentt, drug legalization was not supported. Bennett wants to address the “root causes” of drugs by means of...
For many years, a real push has been looming on the idea of legalizing now illegal drugs. This has become a hot debate throughout nations all over the world, from all walks of life. The dispute over the idea of decriminalizing illegal drugs is and will continue on as an ongoing conflict. In 2001, Drug decriminalization in all drugs, including cocaine and heroin, became a nationwide law in Portugal (Greenwald). Ethan Nadelman, essayist of “Think again: Drugs,” states his side of the story on the continuing criminalization of hard drugs, in which he stand to oppose. Whether it is for the good of human rights or not, decriminalizing drugs may be a good head start for a new beginning.
It is said that marijuana is a “gateway” drug, and it will lead to harder drugs such as cocaine or heroin, though this is not a proven theory. “Over time, there has been...
Marijuana is a shredded mix of dry flowers, stems and the seeds of a plant called cannabis and people usually smoke it in the form of cigarettes for relaxation. Ever since marijuana hit mainstream America over 30 years ago, government prohibition of it has been the subject of an ongoing debate. Should marijuana be legalized? Proponents of marijuana argue that there are numerous medical benefits and that the drug is not more harmful than tobacco or alcohol. Therefore, prohibiting it intrudes on personal freedom. On the other hand, opponents argue that marijuana is too dangerous; its legalization would increase the chances of the drug falling into the hands of kids and that marijuana use often progresses to the use of more dangerous drugs like heroin and cocaine. In the past decade, a number of movements to legalize the use of marijuana has been gaining momentum. According to the 2011 Gallup survey, a record high 50% of Americans say that marijuana should be legalized and this figure marks a 4% increase compared to the previous year. Support for legalizing marijuana was 30% in 2000, 40% in 2009 before reaching 50% last year. This shows that despite government efforts to eliminate its use, marijuana is becoming more popular. More and more people realize that legalizing marijuana brings a host of benefits. It not only offers medical benefits to the terminally ill but it could also be a source of tax revenues and could save the tax payers billions of dollars that is spent on enforcement costs.
The arguments that I have just laid out are not perfect and they have some apparent flaws that some philosophers would strongly disagree with, while there are other arguments that some of the great philosophers would agree with. I will critique the arguments that I have just laid out using the perspective of three different philosophers who all have their own ideas of how the state should function and the role of the citizen. The three philosophers that I will use in this critique will be Karl Marx, John Stewart Mill, and John Locke. The reason why I picked these three philosophers is because they all agree with some aspects of my writing, while disagreeing with others. One will disagree with the role of the state and the citizens, but agree with legalizing recreational drug use, while the other two will agree with the role of the state and citizens, but disagree with legalizing drug use.
Just say no? This is not exactly the philosophy that the vast majority of the United States population tends to follow. Drugs have become a routine aspect of everyday life in the United States. Neither a gigantic metropolis nor a minute town have gone without feeling the everlasting effects of drugs. Drug use has always posed a major dilemma for America to overcome. The banning of illegal drugs takes many back to the days of the Prohibition problems involving the banishment of alcohol. Prohibition obviously did not work in the 1920’s, and some modern day people feel that making drugs legal would solve the constantly rising drug problem. In his article Facing up to Drugs: Is Legalization the Solution?, Pete Hamill presents both sides of the argument very thoroughly. Using tremendous techniques in both writing and in major points, the author persuades the reader to give a great deal of consideration to the author’s belief that legalization is the answer to America’s drug problem.
What is marijuana? Cannabis, also known as marijuana, and is a preparation of the cannabis plant intended for use as a psychoactive drug and as medicine. According to Greenhaven “They point to California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who said in early May [2009] that it's now time to debate legalizing marijuana—though he's personally against it. Indeed, a legislative push is on in his state (and several others, such as Massachusetts and Nevada) to treat this "soft" drug like alcohol—to tax and regulate its sale, and set an age restriction on buyers”. (Greenhaven, 2009)
Legalization of marijuana has become an increasingly popular topic for debate in society with “sentiment in favor of legalization [increasing] by 20 [percentage] points in just over a decade,” bringing support for legalization to 52% (Dionne and Galston). The most common arguments for reforming current legislation are the following: enforcement wastes public resources, taxation can provide a new source of revenue, and enforcement of current laws is discriminatory (Dionne and Galston). It is necessary to look at the impact on the primary stakeholders by analyzing the various harms and benefits through application of the ethical theories of utilitarianism and deontology, in order to determine the solution that will result in the best possible outcome.
While growing up, everyone is told that drugs are bad. That’s why US government declared a war against drugs a long time ago, but still people are using recreational drugs like marijuana and ecstasy. The prohibition against drugs is not working for us. Though we are investing a lot of taxpayers’ money on the DEA, we failed to stop people from taking drugs. Instead more people are dying from overdose or too much use of these drugs. Many people like Russell Brand thinks that legalizing drugs might be able to solve the problem. Though legalizing drugs is working perfectly in Switzerland and Portugal, we should do a lot of research before making any decisions. If the government do decide to legalize drugs, it will have certain impacts on our economy, public health and crime rate.
The discussion whether marijuana should be legalized and taxed is very present within the last month. That’s why I’m going to discuss the pro and cons about the legalisation of weed, as it is often called, in the following research paper.