Forbidden fruit is sweet indeed. Even if the delicacy carries slow and painful death for anyone attracted by its flavor, there‘ll always be plenty of those who’d want a little more. Advices, explanations, warnings, restrictions, prohibitions, punishments — nothing can stop this insane thirst for breaking the rules.
According to the study of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) in 2003, “The total number of drug abusers is estimated at some 200 million people, equivalent to 4,7% of the global population age 15 or above… compared to 4,3% last year (2002)”;. In 1998 “the international illicit drug business has generated as much as $400 billion in trade according to the United Nations International Drug Control Program. That amounts to 8% of all international trade and is comparable to the annual turnover in textiles”, reports www.drugwarfacts.org. At the meantime “individual drug use or possession of illegal drugs for personal consumption are not amongst the top priorities of European law-enforcement authorities”.
All this statistics shows a very simple and obvious fact: you can’t stop drug abuse by forbidding it. Every law that you think, makes getting drugs harder, in reality just lowers its quality and raises its price, which leads to more people being infected by HIV or Hepatitis, more bribed police, more killed in drug wars and more funds spent on drug-related law enforcement. Recent charges of 27 cops in Cancun, Mexico, with “running a drug ring or aiding in the murder of their fellow officers”; illustrate “how traffickers continued to infiltrate the area around the Caribbean resort, despite a crackdown following the 2001 arrest of the state’s former governor on drug charges.”, has reported CNN.com on 03/01/2005.
However there is another way: decriminalization of illicit drugs can at least help to make using drugs as safe as possible and even solve some social and racial problems. To tell the truth, not all the laws against drugs have gained approval because of government’s concern about the lives of common people. Desmond Manderson, author of the book “From Mr. Sin to Mr. Big” describes the development of drug laws in Australia. E.g. anti-opium laws in the XIX century were passed to discriminate Chinese from the white Australians:”Opium was seen as a pollutant, moral as well as physical; it was tainted by the environment of its consumption and by its connections with the Chinese themselves”.
Nowadays racial drug-related prejudices are supported by law enforcement.
Approximately given 80 to 90 million Americans have tried an illicit drug at least which once in their lives; marijuana alone is tried for the first time by about 6,400 Americans everyday. Furthermore, illicit drugs seem to be relatively easy to attain- in for 1999, 90 percent said which this about marijuana, also 44 percent about cocaine and finally 32 percent about heroin. Yearly, for which 35 million dollars is given just to control illicit drug trafficking. Moreover, over 400,000 of drug offenders caught are in jail, of which, some 130,000 are which for possession. Not for only are these statistics a international obvious embarrassment but because for these quantities which have been growing throughout history, we can only assume that they will get worse. We can already begin to for imagine the costs of these numbers which is it not already clear that we need for to find an alternative approach to this
In Australia the Government uses three methods to tackle drugs; Demand reduction, supply reduction and harm minimization. Needle and syringe programs are under harm minimization category. Supply reduction is focused on drug dealers and drug makers and is brought about by law enforcement. In the Demand reduction method it is tried to decrease the number of people taking drugs through anti-drug advertisements and campaigns, legislation, rehabilitation centers. On the other hand harm minimization recognizes the fact that drugs can never be eradicated fro...
Making drugs illegal has wasted a vast amount of money, prison space, police time, and caused epidemics of violent crime.
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. At the time, recreational use of narcotics was not a major social issue. The first regulatory legislation was for the purpose of standardizing the manufacturing and purity of pharmaceutical products. Shortly after, the first criminal laws were enacted which addressed opium products and cocaine. Although some states had prohibited the recreational use of marijuana, there was no federal criminal legislation until 1937. By contrast, the use of alcohol and its legality was a major social issue in United States in the early 20th century. This temperance movement culminated in the prohibition of alcohol from 1920 to 1933. Recreational drug use, particularly heroin, became more prevalent among the urban poor during the early ?60s. Because of the high cost of heroin and its uncertain purity, its use was associated with crime and frequent overdoses.
We cannot afford to keep using the same approach in hopes of diminishing our drug problem in the United States. In a study posted on RAND.org, the author Jonathan P. Caulkins compares many methods we can use to help with drug crime. The first graph compares federal mandatory minimum sentences, conventional enforcement at all levels of government, and treatment of heavy users. Conventional enforcement prevented around thirty kilo grams of cocaine from being used, while federal mandatory minimums prevented around forty kilograms from being used. Treatment of heavy users blew both of the other methods out of the water.
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.
the only way to make money. Minimum wage salaries can not compare to the huge
Drug arrests occur too often and are taking up a majority of general arrests in America. “Drug arrests were the single largest category of arrests, accounting for more than 10% of all arrests in the country” (A drug, 2015). One out of ten of every arrest in the United States of America is a drug arrest. This over focus on drug arrests needs to stop as it is taking focus off of more damaging violent crimes. Overall drug arrests are up 8.3% from a decade ago” (A drug, 2015). Drug crimes are increasing because of the American government increased focus on drug crimes, despite the fact that it is not helping the problem. Even though drug arrests are going up, drug use in the United States of America is “... plentiful and widely used as ever” (Grenier,
Concerned authorities have focused essentially on criminalization and punishment, to find remedies to the ever-increasing prevalent drug problem. In the name of drug reducing policies, authorities endorse more corrective and expensive drug control methods and officials approve stricter new drug war policies, violating numerous human rights. Regardless of or perhaps because of these efforts, UN agencies estimate the annual revenue generated by the illegal drug industry at $US400 billion, or the equivalent of roughly eight per cent of total international trade (Riley 1998). This trade has increased organized/unorganized crime, corrupted authorities and police officials, raised violence, disrupted economic markets, increased risk of diseases an...
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.
A “drug-free society” has never existed, and probably will never exist, regardless of the many drug laws in place. Over the past 100 years, the government has made numerous efforts to control access to certain drugs that are too dangerous or too likely to produce dependence. Many refer to the development of drug laws as a “war on drugs,” because of the vast growth of expenditures and wide range of drugs now controlled. The concept of a “war on drugs” reflects the perspective that some drugs are evil and war must be conducted against the substances
One of the most obvious reasons why drugs are still around is because it is such a profitable business. In our society, marijuana, cocaine, xanax, and ecstasy are convenient and readily available to purchase almost anywhere you go. Those who sell drugs can make anywhere from five hundred to three thousand dollars a day. This income is tax-free and requires little to no labor efforts whatsoever. Those involved in this lucrative trade are taking somewhat of a risk, but because dealing drugs is so common in our society the chances of getting caught aren’t as high as expected. Drug trafficking alone serves for about 40 percent of all organized crime activity with this number increasing everyday as drugs become more and more popular. With the economy being so bad most find it easy to turn to selling drugs as an acceptable mean of income.
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.
As the common person may know, drugs are very expensive. Prescription drugs, although still expensive, are one of the cheaper routes to go. However it can also be dangerous, because it’s easier for doctors to notice the abuse. It is said that Americans pay more for prescription drugs than any other country in the world (Brym and Lie). Other routes a drug addicted person can go is through the illegal drug trade, otherwise known as the black market. For example, cocaine can go for around $1500 per kilo in Colombia, which is around two pounds. Often times the price of cocaine in America can go for a retail price of around $66,000. These prices even for just cocaine are what keep the drug cartel’s ...
Do drugs really cause crime, or is it our governments way of controlling the communities? Many people blame drugs for every problem in our society, but is it the true evil in our society? No one person can answer that question. There are only opinions and supposed theories on this issue. We have been taught over the years that drugs were bad and that they only affected the poor and less fortunate, and turned them into crazy criminals, but this isn’t true to any extent. The laws controlling and prohibiting drugs are the true reasons. Would our crime levels decline if drugs were legalized to some extent, or would we just increase the destruction of our country? Over the past fifty years, prohibition has been proven to actually increase crime and drug use instead of its intended purpose, which was to extinguish the use of illicit drugs in the United States. We constantly here of prison over crowding, and why is that? Most of our prisons are filled with drug offenders, ranging from use to distribution of supposed illicit drugs. What is our country coming to? The purpose of this research paper is to view the advantages and disadvantages of the legalization of illicit drugs in the United States. I will examine each side of this major problem plaguing our fine country from past to present. People wake everyday to their normal and monotonous life without even thinking about what they are doing. They do not realize that they have been conditioned by the government and its laws to obey and follow the supposed norm of society. What is the norms of society, and who set the guidelines for them? No one can explain how these norms came about, they only know that they must follow them, or they could get in trouble with the law. We are going into the twenty first century, and we still follow laws that were passed hundreds of years ago. Why is this? We are a highly advanced country, but we spend time, lives and money on abiding by laws that were around before the automobile was even invented. I will begin with the history of our drug control policies, which have failed miserably, and examine the drug-crime connection. Policy History Drugs have been in this country since the beginning of time in some shape or form, which was used for personal and medicinal use. Usage of marijuana has been reported to date back to the founding of Jamestown (1). Ge...