Decriminalize Drugs Essay

Drug decriminalization is opposed by the majority of Americans. Leaders in drug prevention, education, treatment, and law enforcement are against it, as are many political leaders. However, pro-drug advocacy groups, who support the use of drugs, are making headlines. They are influencing legislation and having a significant impact on the national policy debate in the United States. Although, pro-advocacy groups claim decriminalization of drugs will lower incarceration rates and boost the economy, drugs must stay illegal in America, if not, more people will use, causing negative effects on health, families and communities.

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.

In the past forty years, the United States has spent over $2.5 trillion dollars funding enforcement and prevention in the fight against drug use in America (Suddath). Despite the efforts made towards cracking down on drug smugglers, growers, and suppliers, statistics show that addiction rates have remained unchanged and the number of people using illegal drugs is increasing daily (Sledge). Regardless of attempts to stem the supply of drugs, the measure and quality of drugs goes up while the price goes down (Koebler). Now with the world’s highest incarceration rates and greatest illegal drug consumption (Sledge), the United States proves that the “war on drugs” is a war that is not being won.

Within the last 50 years, drug legalization has been a very hotly debated topic in the United States society. It almost seems that every "street drug" was once legal, but banned soon after its introduction in society. Illegal substances that one sees today were once synthesized and created by chemist such as LSD, ecstasy, methamphetamine, cocaine, and etc., and at some point used for medical reasons, however during many circumstances were deemed illegal by the government due to detrimental effects after prolonged usage. William Bennett's "Drugs: Should Their Sale and Use Be Legalized" targets the general American public into understanding the societal importance of upholding the nations

The systematic scheduling of drugs in the United States is arbitrary which leads to a discriminative social injustice. Some psychedelic substances such as Psilocybin are schedule 1 drugs, while alcohol and nicotine are legal. According to the National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA) both alcohol and nicotine are proven to be harmful and addictive (2017). Conversely, Psychedelic substances have not been proven to be addictive. This equates to a social injustice that discriminates over someone who may prefer the effects of psilocybin to nicotine, even under the science that has shown nicotine and alcohol have a higher potential for abuse. Unfortunately, many political factors come into play regarding the legal status of drugs and industries such as the pharmaceutical, tobacco and alcohol industries, who harbor the most money and have an influence in the legality of drugs whether they are safe or not. While legalizing psychedelic substances would most likely cut into profits for these large industries they would bring about economic benefits as well.

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

Legalizing these drugs and having them on the streets, allows anyone, including young individuals, to easily be able to obtain these items. As stated by William Bennett, “Legalization on the other hand, removes the incentive to stay away from a life of drugs.” (548). Parents and guardians need to make a huge evaluation to whether or not they want to see some of these drugs on the streets permanently. During prohibition this nation made a huge decision to ban the sale and consumption of alcohol.

We should decriminalize drugs in the U.S. instead of legalizing them. Decriminalization refers to the lessening of criminal penalties of certain acts. According to De Marneffe, “… the legalization of drugs … [is] the removal of criminal penalties for the manufacture, sale, and possession of large quantities of recretational drugs, such as marijuana, cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamine” (346).

      In the article “Drug Policy and the Intellectuals,” William J. Bennentt, chides intellectuals who believe drugs should be legalize. Bennett challenges his audience , by attacking intellectuals. However Bennett tries to win over his audience of intellectuals in two ways: by calling upon their talents and by attacking on the arguments of intellectuals who favor legalizing drugs. .He shows an understanding of others’ viewpoints by addressing points of opposition several times during the article. Bennett demonstrates knowledge of the subject by supporting

Just Say No.” This phrase was uttered in 1982 by Nancy Reagan, the first lady of the United States, in response to a schoolgirl’s question of what she should do if offered drugs (Weinraub A5). These words became the slogan for a nationwide substance abuse prevention program that followed the then recently enacted drug policies intended to discourage the manufacture, sale, and use of illicit drugs in the United States. These zero tolerance policies carried harsh penalties and strict enforcement for all drug related offenses. Almost four decades later, these policies are still in effect, as is their focus on criminalization as a means to reduce the availability and usage of drugs. Their ineffectiveness is evidenced by the facts that drug use rates have remained steady over the past four decades and incarceration rates have exponentially rose during that same period. I believe that a new course of action should be taken, and a bold new drug policy should be enacted. Decriminalization would result in a substantial decrease of the prison population, relieve the unnecessary burden that has been placed on our criminal justice system, shift the paradigm from drug enforcement to drug treatment, reduce the health risk of HIV, AIDS, and heroin related deaths; and provide unprecedented benefits from the regulation of the manufacturing and sales of substances that are currently illegal.

Throughout U.S governmental history, policies have been known to affect the way of life and every aspect. The topic it choose to research is about “The War on Drugs”, the impact policies have on society and if it does help the public or tend to extent social inequality. This topic is very important to me in the sense that, I look at the community I live and see how drugs have affected people lifes, broken up families and also destroyed the community itself. I wanted to know if the “war on drugs” stop our neighborhood from being flooded with drugs or it just over shadow the real problems that needs to be tackled.

Man, as a creature, is inherently bored. Since the dawn of time, it has been the

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;

The rise of illegal drug use that began in the 1960s was accompanied by the growing opinion that drug use should be legalized. This feeling remained strong though the middle of the 1970s when the existing research on drugs such as marijuana and cocaine did not clearly point to health hazards. Those who favored legalization thought that certain drugs could be used responsibly by most people who would otherwise be law-abiding or even model citizens. In other words, they believed most drug use to be a victimless crime.

Drugs are a very strong controversy and people have such strong opinions about whether or not they should be legal or not. I don’t have a strong opinion on this topic, I am easily swayed to either side. For the most part though, I think that they should be legalized because people already do them anyways and will continue to do them. If they were legal then the government could regulate their usage and sale then the government was receiving the profits rather that the drug dealers.