Overspending Hypothesis

The federal government has incentivized the drug related activities of local law enforcement through the disbursement of federal grants. The

This journal article discusses how the government has increased “mandatory sentencing” using “aggressive initiatives” for drug related crimes. Additionally, these government implemented sentencing guidelines have made the prison population grow

The 1980s and early 90s were home to an extreme wave of criminal activity that swept across much of the country. The dramatic uptick in crime can largely be attributed to the spread of the crack-cocaine epidemic and subsequent “War on Drugs.” New York City, for example, suffered from 2,605 murders and 208,813 burglaries in 1990, at the height of the violence . Much of this criminal activity centered around and affected the poorest individuals in those communities – which often included minorities.

The Public Policy of Crime and Criminal Justice, by Nancy E. Marion and Willard M. Oliver. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2006 by Pearso

The book’s fourth chapter, “Where have All the Criminals Gone?” in particular, includes several subjects the authors acknowledge will “provoke a variety of reactions, ranging from disbelief to revulsion, and a variety of objections” (140). By this point, readers already know the authors’ view that the legalization of abortion in Roe v. Wade caused the drop in crime during the 1990s because this idea first appears on page four. Rather than simply explaining why abortion lowered crime rates, Levitt and Dubner use a chart to introduce seven explanations commonly cited by experts for the sudden drop in crime during the 1990s, then examine the authenticity of each one. The first possible cause is “a fairly uncontroversial one: the strong economy”

Reduction of drug dealing arrests and criminality (Mattick, Breen, Kimber and Davoli, 2003; Powers and Anglin, 1993).

This report starts off with an overview of drug courts are, then moves into the overall problem with drug control in the United States. They talk about the history and the rise in drug offenses during the 1980’s causing the prison populations to rise. When comparing the rise of drug offenses, they found it was both state and federal level. The growth of drug offenses became approximately one in every 198 persons was incarcerated. About nine years later, the first drug court was established. Courts, jails, and prisons were seeing a pattern with the number of low level repeat drug offenders and street dealers starting to cause problems with overcrowding . The drug court movement was a shift from law enforcement’s emphasis on reducing drug use.

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

Furthermore, the data from Figures 1 and 2 on drug arrests and government expenditure on prosecution shows that there seems to be significant heightened drug enforcement over the years. According to this data, from 1981 to 2007 there is a significant increase in both the number of drug arrests and the amount of money that the government decided to spend on drug enforcement. However, in order to deduce the effects of 9/11 on drug enforcement, it is necessary to examine and compare data in the years before and after 2001. The arrest rate in 2000 was 559.71, while the arrest rate in 2005 was 622.68. This indicates that over the course of five years, the number of arrests for possession of narcotics increased by almost six million. Likewise, the

Part 1: Nature, Extent, Impact of Crime Policy on Crime & the Administration of Justice in the U.S.

This paper explores the relationship between low income and violent crime rate in Unite State over some period of time. This question is research is interested in how income inequality increases crime rate. Between 1975 to 2004 research shows that income earned by the top 5% of America families increased from 15.3% to 20.1%. Families that are at the bottom sees their earning dropped from 5.1% to 4.2%. Data used for this research is been collected from bureau of justice statistics (BJS) from national Crime and victimization survey (NCVS), which provide summary statistics based on a nationality representative sample for a wide range of crimes. Data is been collected from household that are below and above poverty level in the country and non-fall violent victimization, but

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

The War on Drugs in the United States has a profound influence on both the incarceration rates and activities of the criminal justice system. Many politicians and advocates of the policy claim that the War on Drugs is a necessary element to deter criminal behavior and reduce the crime rate. However, studies show that drug deterrent policies on possession and use have been inadequate and unsuccessful (Cole & Gertz, 2013). Studies also show that the War on Drugs has not attained its objectives because the policy exhibits racial discrepancy as it has led to the disproportionate incarceration of Blacks and minorities. Specifically, evidence indicates that the upper class, generally White individuals, is more likely to use powered cocaine while

Alex Kreit states in the article “The Drug Decriminalization Option” that drug prohibition expenditures stand at around $30 billion overall, with marijuana law enforcement being $10 billion alone annually, federal expenditures stand at about $15 billion annually (Kreit, 2010). In an argument defending the criminalization of drugs, whatever data you use to backup your statements, it is impossible to deny the fact that drug enforcement spending consumes a significant percentage of the countries corrections and law enforcements resources. According to the article, there are studies which have found that increases in spending for drug enforcement lead to reductions in the budget for enforcement in non drug related crimes such as robberies. The money and taxes spent does not all have to go to law enforcement related expenses, the money could have been invested in education. Despite all the government spending on drug prohibition, there is not much evidence that these efforts have had an effect on the availability or drug use rates. According to the article, nearly half of high school seniors have used an illegal drug by the time they graduate, some say it is easier to obtain than legal substances such as alcohol. There is no reason for the

In a study that was done back in 1970 by Sutherland and Cressey, they pointed out that in the U.S. alone, “felons are overrepresented in the addict population, [and] crime rates are increased considerably by drug addiction” (1970, p. 164). Despite having proposed several hypotheses attempting to explain the correlation between drug abuse and crime, they could not reach a conclusion. A decade later, the knowledge about the drug/crime relationship had steadily increased due to numerous studies of the incarcerated or addicted population. However, the information didn’t reveal any viewpoints that made sense aside from heroin. This view was