Drug Legalization Essay

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.

Use of illegal drugs is harmful to the user and all those with whom the user comes in contact. There are over 40 million illegal drug users in the world today and America is the biggest market for drugs. (Castro 45) There are more drug dealers in this country, than there are dentists. (Wakefield 112) Illegal drug abuse must be stopped; it

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).”

Alexander claims that the sole reason that the war on drugs was started was to maintain the racist nature that faces America. Alexander realizes that even though the Jim Crow Laws were eradicated, we have just reshaped the ways in which we decide to ruin lives. As the old adage says, “The more things change, the more they remain the same”. I think to a certain point Americans need to have reassurance that things really are changing and here’s where Jim Crow ends, but in the background the powerful people in this country had to come up with a new plan to feed their racist nature. One politician after another want to show how tough they can be on drugs. Each wanting to be stronger than the other. They didn’t care who they were hurting on the bottom, as long as they looked extra tough.

The War on Drugs not only has many acts that have been in place due to it, but there has been a domino effect with other topics. The War on Drugs has become a complicated, yet important aspect of the U.S. as well as other countries. It was to be believed that the War on Drugs has influenced incarceration. This effect was the ability to imprison those who are using drugs, and the amount of crime will begin to decrease (Lloyd, 2015). Margaret Lloyd (2015), also discussed how a community that has less crime could be a better living area for children, in hopes they will not act in deviant behaviors.

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

Robert J. MacCoun, is an associate professor in the Graduate School of Public policy at the University of California and author of Toward a Psychology of Harm Reduction. Professor MacCoun also supports the movement towards a harm reduction approach to drugs. He explains how the harm reduction movement emerged in Amsterdam in the 1980's in response to mounting heath issues directly related to the use of drugs. Professor MacCoun illustrates that harm reduction is not a program that has been proven effective in the war on drugs, being constantly rejected as a viable option to present drug enforcement policy by the United States government. Professor MacCoun illustrates however that the policies that the U.S. presently has in place has failed in its ability to eliminate drug use thus causing the major harms of drug use in place. Professor MacCoun believes that many of the drug related problems we have today are a result of poor legislation as well as the

At first Chapman does not limit his perspective to one side of criticizing the use of illegal drugs in society. Instead, he deals with this subject in a broad way. He argues over the fact that the use of these prohibited drugs costs the government a lot of money, police time and prison space and how in spite of taking several administrative steps, the government has suffered from a colossal failure in stopping the drug abuse. He provides the data in support of his argument which is direct and precise. Through the example of Bennett, he tries to convey the message that people are not willing to have the spread of drug abuse in citizenry. A survey was conducted asking people to respond to the following question: if illegal

As a major policy issue in the United States, the War on Drugs has been one of the most monumental failures on modern record. At a cost of billions of taxpayer dollars, thousands of lives lost and many thousands of others ruined by untreated addiction or incarceration, America's policy orientation concerning drug laws is due for reconsideration. Indeed, the very philosophical orientation of the War on Drugs and of the current drug policy in the United States has been one of prosecution and imprisonment rather than one of decriminalization, treatment and rehabilitation. As our medical and scientific communities characterize addiction as a disease, the United States government continues to characterize this disease as a crime. And in doing so, it has created an unnecessary criminal class in the United States. The research, supplemental political cartoons and proposed research will set out to prove that stiffer drug laws will only have the impact of criminalizing countless drug addicts who might otherwise benefit substantially from rehabilitation and other treatment-based strategies. With a specific focus on the prohibition of marijuana even for medical use, and using the Toulmin model for putting forth and completing the argument, the research will set out to demonstrate the irrational

     One of Bennett's strongest arguments challenges those who claim that legalization is a simple way to eliminate the drug problem. He rightly criticizes them for failing to describe the kind of world they are proposing, for failing to answer questions like these:      Would crack be legal? How about PCP? Or smokable

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.

Although some people argue for the legalization of drugs, addiction to these substances has caused a huge increase in violent crimes in the home, at school, and on the street. Many people do not understand why individuals become addicted to drugs or how drugs change the brain to create compulsive drug abuse. They mistakenly view drug abuse and addiction as strictly a social problem and may characterize those who take drugs as morally weak. One very common belief is that drug abusers should be able to just stop taking drugs if they are only willing to change their behavior. This is a false and uneducated belief. Drug abuse may start as a social problem or social escape but one the addiction has taken ahold of a person

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;

One the many controversies in our country today, regards the prohibition of illegal narcotics. Deemed unhealthy, hazardous, and even fatal by the authorities that be; the U.S. government has declared to wage a “war on drugs.” It has been roughly fifteen years since this initiative has begun, and each year the government shuffles more money into the unjust cause of drug prohibition. Even after all of this, the problem of drugs that the government sees still exists. The prohibition of drugs is a constitutional anomaly. There are many aspects and sides to look at the issue from, but the glaring inefficiency current laws exude is that any human should have the right to ingest anything he or she desires. The antagonist on the other end