Analysis Of The Article ' Legal Drugs Unlikely Foster Nation Of Zombies ' By Stephan Chapman

For many years, drugs have been the center of crime and the criminal justice system in the United States. Due to this widespread epidemic, President Richard Nixon declared the “War on Drugs” in 1971 with a campaign that promoted the prohibition of illicit substances and implemented policies to discourage the overall production, distribution, and consumption. The War on Drugs and the U.S. drug policy has experienced the most significant and complex challenges between criminal law and the values of today’s society. With implemented drug polices becoming much harsher over the years in order to reduce the overall misuse and abuse of drugs and a expanded federal budget, it has sparked a nation wide debate whether or not they have created more harm than good. When looking at the negative consequences of these policies not only has billions of dollars gone to waste, but the United States has also seen public health issues, mass incarceration, and violent drug related crime within the black market in which feeds our global demands and economy. With this failed approach for drug prohibition, there continues to be an increase in the overall production of illicit substances, high rate of violence, and an unfavorable impact to our nation.

In the essay “America’s Unjust Drug War” by Michael Huemer, Huemer discusses the facts and opinions around the subject on whether or not the recreational use of drugs should be banned by law. Huemer believes that the American government should not prohibit the use of drugs. He brings up the point on drugs and how they harm the users and the people in the user’s life; he proves that the prohibition on drugs in unjust. Huemer believes that drug prohibition is an injustice to Americans’ natural rights and questions why people can persucute those who do drugs.

Chapman mentioned how some US states and the Netherlands legalized marijuana only to have its popularity decrease. He extrapolates these findings to all drugs which commits the fallacy of equivocation. The statistics for marijuana legalization would be different if it were Cocaine that was legalized. Chapman also glosses over other factors such as the poll size, the country’s economy, drug preferences, and poll bias. Furthermore, the legalization of drugs in other countries is an ongoing process where research and monitoring of the legalization must be done. It could happen that Chapman’s statistics for legalization in the Netherlands only show favorably for the first five years and then a rapid societal decline

According to the Durkheimian perspective, the public sees drug use as an unacceptable behavior and recognizes it as a threat to morality and values. As such, drug users must be punished in order to restore societal harmony and deter future offenses. The increasingly punitive reaction to drug use in the 1980’s can be seen as a reaction to the public’s increasing perception that drugs are a threat to the moral fabric of society. By inflicting severe punishment on drug offenders, the community is satisfied with the knowledge that drug addicts are paying for

Proponents on the legalization of drugs believe if drugs were to become legal; the black market worth billions of dollars would become extinct, drug gangsters would disappear, addicts would stop committing crimes to support their habit and the prison system would not be overwhelmed with a problem they cannot defeat. The decriminalization of drugs will only make illegal drugs cheaper, easier to get and more acceptable to use. “The U.S. has 20 million alcoholics and alcohol misusers, but only around 6 million illegal drug addicts. If illegal drugs were easier to obtain, this figure would rise”(Should Drugs be decriminalized? No.November 09, 2007 Califano Joseph A, Jr).”

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.

When my audience hears “War on Drugs” they may assume it is a worthy endeavor because drug abuse is such a pervasive problem that affects many families. I must dispel the assumption that the “War on Drugs” dealt with the drug abuse problem or reduced drug sales. I can do this by demonstrating that there is plenty of evidence showing that the “War on Drugs” did not do what it set out to do and is therefore not an effective approach to the problem of drug trade and abuse. Additionally the imprisoning of citizens, even if it is done unjustly, does not reduce crime at comparable rates. Research from Harvard found that during the “War on Drugs” in state prisons there was a 66% increase in prison population but crime was only reduced by 2-5% and it cost the taxpayers 53 billion dollars (Coates, 2015). The fact the violent crime went up all through Nixon’s administration while he rallied for “Law & Order” and policing became more severe furthers this argument (Alexander, 2012). Four out five drug arrests are low-level possession charges as well, demonstrating that police policies aren’t dismantling the drug system just punishing addicts (Alexander, 2012). What’s more, drug abuse in America have remained stagnate and even increased in some instances even when billions of dollars have been pumped into the program (National

Critics argue that legalization of certain drugs will not end the drug war and that instead, it will cause more violence and issues for the county’s well being. In the mid-1980’s the cocaine epidemic hit and a large amount of crime, deaths from overdoses and violence came with it. The result of this was laws being placed with minimum punishment for drug trafficking to attempt to control the issue. Throughout the early 1990s crime started to slowly decrease and in 2013 the amount of crime was reduced in half. One viewpoint is that once the title of being non-violent labeled drug traffickers crime started to rise anew. Some crimes included murders of innocent bystanders and more drug flow into the U.S (Cook1). William J. Bennett and John P. Walters, Boston Globe writers, complicate matters further when they write “For 25 years before President Obama, U.S policy confronted drug

There are many differing viewpoints in the United States when dealing with drug policy. Within the political arena, drug policy is a platform that many politicians base their entire campaigns upon, thus showing its importance to our society in general. Some of these modes within which drug policy is studied are in terms of harm reduction, and supply reduction. When studying the harmful effects of drugs, we must first to attempt to determine if drug abuse harms on an individual level of if it is a major cause of many societal problems that we face today. In drawing a preliminary conclusion to this question we are then able to outline the avenues of approach in dealing

The existing drug laws are very inefficient. This paper will focus on the people and the specific elements that are affected by the inefficiency of the drug laws. When looking at the drug laws at a glance a person might be lead to think that they would be very effective and they seem reasonable. While drug laws in themselves are necessarily wrong, some of the discrepancies in the laws make them unfair and take from the category of handing down justice and puts them into the category of cruel and unusual. First there will be an analysis of prohibition throughout American history, then an analysis of what the actual crimes and punishments are for a few of the drugs in the United States. Next there will be a look into who is affected by

One of the greatest problems we face in America today is the use and abuse of drugs in our country. It is important to find a solution that works within our country to combat the growing populations of our nation’s prisons, keep the supply of drugs under control, and have adequate prevention programs in place to help people who need treatment. Throughout reading the material for this course and the research conducted on the topics described in this paper, it is clear that the methods used in earlier years were not able to achieve the results we would like to see. Advocating for reform and the support of the American people can help with the desperate need for change.

For many people, the thought of making drugs easily accessible for consumption by the masses may be frightening. After all, we have drug laws in place because they have the potential to be harmful. It also may not be difficult to imagine that it could very well be subject to failure due to a numerous amount negative externalities that may occur. Our nation has been engaged in a war on drugs for several decades now. The effectiveness of this war, however, is a topic that has continuously been debated. Some argue that universal legalization of drugs, an alternative that has never been tried, may have a greater benefits when compared to the present state of the war on drugs. On the other hand, the opposition believes that legalization would only pave the way for a vast amount of crime and many wasted resources.

Today’s world is changing at a rapid pace. Things never thought to be possible are becoming very real. One of the popular subjects of wanting change is the legalization of drugs. There has already been a small amount of change in the drug legalization process with marijuana now being legal in a few of the states. Vanessa Baird in her work “Legalize Drugs- all of them!” argues for the legalization and decriminalization of drugs. John P. Walters counters Baird’s argument for legalization in his piece “Don’t Legalize Drugs.” Both authors take an extended look into the harsh reality of the drug war and the small progress it has made since it began.

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;

A multibillion dollar industry, with a consumer population of about 125 to 203 million people; the drug industry affects lives of all racial, ethnic, economic , social background, including participants in the drug industry, addicts, teenagers, parents, families, and officers of the law. Many people have encountered an experience with drugs and or drug education; the shared experience regarding the discussion of this topic or illegal experience brings importance to this current issue and validates the proposal for change. How much change, what change and how long will the change take place. Although this issue has many perspectives and opinions on how the war on drugs could be “won”, I will focus on two perspectives: drug criminalization and drug legalization. In a Human Rights lens, I will discuss the limitations and strengths of both methods. In the opinion of some and with hindsight the status quo regarding drugs requires reform in order to reverse the unintended consequences of drug prohibition. In the opinion of others criminalizing participants in the drug trade should be penalized under the law.