Drug Decriminalization In Canada

Most of the reasons behind the decision to prohibit drugs will still occur even with drug decriminalization. Decriminalization does not guarantee the purity of the substance, and with drug use being less legally risky, users may find themselves sick or dead from laced drugs. There are currently 950 organized criminal groups in Canada, 80% whom which derive their revenue through illegal drug sales. These groups would still exist after decriminalization along with any gang-related violence. Currently, only 3% of impaired driving is done while under the influence of illicit drugs but after decriminalization, this number would most likely rise. 5% of all incidents reported by police involve drugs, and any drug related violence or crimes that are occurring now while drugs are less accessible would rise, not only affecting the safety of addicts but the people of their

The cost of substance abuse in Canada is astronomical. According to the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse (CCSA), in 2002 alcohol accounted for about $14.6 billion and illegal drugs for about $8.2 billion in social cost (Single, Robertson, Rehm, & Xie, 2002). This cost was measured in terms of the burden on health care and law enforcement, and productivity in the workplace or home. Arguably, the greatest cost may be immeasurable: human suffering and tragic loss of lives. This suffering is not limited to only of those wrestling with these problems, but extends those around them: family, friends, co-workers and society as a whole.

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.

The ethical implications of the Canadian government funding and supporting these projects, considering current drug laws and policies, are questioned by some. People believe that the government should not participate in enabling drug use (Globe & Mail, (2011) and that zero tolerance approaches should be taken. In opposition to zero tollerance attitudes some

Drugs and alcohol is a major social issue (J. David Hawkins, Richard F. Catalano, and Janet Y. Miller, 1992). It is not something that can be solved by the law (Lee P. Brown, 2008). Throughout history, many attempts have been made to try and legalize and control alcohol and drug addiction but has failed.

Marijuana is currently a hot topic of debate throughout Canada, and has been for the past few years. Marijuana was first banned in 1923 under the Opium and Drug Act, but since 1997 the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act have controlled it. In 2000, over 30,000 Canadians were charged with possession of marijuana. Currently, the marijuana laws are not enforced equally across the country, which has prompted the interest in changing the laws or possibly decriminalizing marijuana. Also, those convicted of marijuana related crimes usually don’t go to jail, but they do receive a criminal record.

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

People today are blinded by the clouds of drugs. Just within the 2015 year over, 47 thousand Canadians deaths were linked to substance abuse. Canadians are aware of the dangers connected to taking part in this practice, however, we do not want to accept it.

The criminalization of drugs has filled the jails across Canada with people who have addiction problems, or substance abuse disorder, rather than criminality. The drug problem in our society has not been deterred, but in fact it has grown. This criminality has made it so that addicts are forced to break the law to obtain their drugs, as well as have to break the law to finance their addiction, rather than being offered the help and support that a person with substance abuse disorder requires to get better. The only true way to advance the war on drugs is to completely alter the current approach, as prohibition does not work any better now than it did in the early 1900’s with alcohol. The trend in drugs being cut with more dangerous drugs

According to Barbor et al(2010), it explains that there are 5 different types of interentions and strategies relevant to drug policy. And one of the main strategies that our society strongly focused on are laws and regulations and punitive(Barbor et al., 2010, pg. 101). Currently, Canada’s regulation places marijuana strictly illegal. Canada introduced the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act in 1995 to strictly criminalize possession and trafficking marijuana(Best Advice, 1997, pg. 2). Our current legislation of the Controlled Drgus and Substances Act possess some flexibility in terms of punishing drug users. First-time possession of marijuana under 30 grams is punishable with summary conviction of 1000 dollars fine or six months of imprisonment. For non-first time possession or possession over 30 grams is dealt more seriously. Possession for the purpose of trafficking, production and import or export of marijuana can be punishable by a maximum penalty of life imprsionment(Best

In my research I was surprise to learn that an increase in the international drug trade and drug user estimated 14.8 million Americans were illegal drug users as of 1999. I also read that the international drug trade generates $200 to $300 billion dollars a year. And due to a great amount of budget that is spent, this gives the drug trafficker an advantage over the government that has a small budget. Illegal drugs are considered to be a major source of funding for organized crime. The Canadian government has attempted to address these problems by implementing a national drug strategy, which is meant to reduce the demand for and the supply of illicit drugs. Eleven federal government departments and agencies have spent approximately $500 million annually in addressing the illegal use of drugs. In order to optimize the effectiveness of such governmental initiatives and expenditures, it is useful to achieve greater understanding of major trends relating to drug offences. This information will assist policy makers and criminal justice professionals in deterring

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.

The argument for drug decriminalization has two sides. The first side is the opinions of prohibitionists. They believe that recreational drugs should be prohibited by law because they are seen as extremely harmful to not only the users, but society has well (Rader, n.d.). To prohibitionists, these drugs can be seen as harmful because they alter a person's state of consciousness. In addition, by taking these drugs people can become addicted to them, they can lead to crime, and more (Henderson, n.d.). Prohibitionists believe that by the mind being altered it can lead to more serious issues causing harm to them or others. The second side is the legalizers. They believe that recreational drugs should not be prohibited by law for one of three reasons:

Drug abuse is a major public health issue that impacts society both directly and indirectly; every person, every community is somehow affected by drug abuse and addiction and this economic burden is not exclusive to those who use substance, it inevitably impacts those who don 't. Drugs impact our society in various ways including but not limited to lost earnings, health care expenditures, costs associated with crime, accidents, and deaths. The use of licit or illicit drugs long term, causes millions of deaths and costs billions for medical care and substance abuse rehabilitation and the effects of drug abuse extend beyond users, spilling over into the society at large, imposing increasing

Drugs have been a problem in society for a very long time and it is still an ongoing subject of debate. Different organisations work hard to keep people from using drugs, though a new issue has arisen. During the last few years there have been discussions in some countries to decriminalize soft drugs, including cannabis and ecstasy.