Regulated Legalization of Cannabis in Germany Essay

I hope you all can agree that a better idea would go after the source of the drugs or even the treatment of the people using them and hopefully in time the number of people using narcotics drops dramatically. But realistically what happens is people using and distributing narcotics are entered into a never ending life of crime because the government punishes the criminal offenders’ absurd amounts that the government knows they cannot afford. So once released from prison or jail these criminals have debts that they have to repay and no way to pay them. So what is the answer? Crime is the answer. That is where the cynical cycle starts all over again and these released inmates find themselves in a familiar situation; trying to make money for reasons that don’t benefit themselves. But, unfortunately, the only way these people know how to make money is deemed deviant by society.

For example, Benedikt Fischer talks about the benefits of the adoption of harm reduction in Germany, in his article “Drugs, Communities, and Harm Reduction in Germany: The New Relevance of Public Health Principles in Local Responses.” Similar to America, Germany dealt with drug issues by applying the idea of abstinence. However, in the early 1980s, they have “modified their approach to drug controls from a strategy of repression and stigmatization of drug users to a policy of what is currently discussed under the umbrella of harm reduction” (Fischer 1995: 393). After employing the harm reduction approach, registered drug users, deaths related to drugs, and drug-related crime has declined significantly. Although drug abuse and drug-related issues exist, one of the main goals of harm reduction was accomplished; reducing the harm and risk of drugs. Fischer concluded that “one is especially startled by how these relatively dramatic changes and results could be accomplished in a political-ideological environment of a nation and culture characterized by a strong sense of prohibition and repression” (Fischer 1995: 406). Therefore, due to the similar past policies on drugs, America will experience beneficial changes if it

2. Once they discover that the government has been lying about marijuana, they are less inclined to believe official warnings about other drugs. 3. Once they buy marijuana on the black market, they are more likely to have the opportunity to buy other drugs” (Sullum). There is an obvious connection between pot smoking and other drug use because people who like the “high” that they get from pot, will enjoy a different “high” from another drug. However there is no connection between using marijuana and the desire to use other drugs. It is a matter of personality, environment, and personal influence. Even a National Academy of Sciences panel stated “There is no evidence that marijuana serves as a stepping stone on the bases of its particular drug effect” in a recent report (Sullum). Many other pro-prohibitionists have stated that marijuana is responsible for a long list of health problems. Although marijuana is connected to immediate lung problems like occasional coughing and phlegm production, and an increased risk for acute chest infections, there has never been a single tie to cancer. The results of studies linking marijuana smoking to lung cancer have also been hindered by small test sizes and subject bias, and the true results are saturated with unconfirmed studies and secret procedures with public results (Buddy). Marijuana is gaining headway with the most recent Gallup poll reported that 48 percent of the population supports decriminalization of marijuana, while

When concerned with the ethics of development in a global environment, the issue of drug abuse is of particular importance. All of the different aspects of the drug trade impact a nation, and specifically the development of a nation within a global environment. Within the United States, drug abuse has been prevalent among specific populations in society for almost a half of a century now. Historically speaking, drug abuse has erupted in many directions; new drugs have offered new markets, new trends have developed new habits. These patterns have become societal concerns on many levels. The creation of new drugs has added another dimension to prescriptive drug abuse. Though science is making

Through my research I have found our involvement in the drug world follows the same theme that seems to recur with our government and their policies. We talk a good game that formulates a structure and a well-worded policy that appears to be in the best interest of American citizens and foreigners alike. However we also aid these countries. The problem doesn’t lie within our policies or the simple compassion from our government that drugs hurt our society. The problems occur with those that implement and enforce these policies. Cocaine and its market cannot be eradicated. The efforts of many of our political leaders have been futile because of the supply and demand of the product. In 1989, President Bush had a plan that he called, “The cheapest and safest way to eradicate narcotics” (Menzel pg.43). The result was the following,

Mark A.R. Kleiman, Jonathan P. Caulkins, Angela Hawken. Drugs and Drug Policy: What Everyone Needs to Know. Oxford University Press, 2011.

Social conflicts and struggles are an inevitable part of any society in any country. These struggles can include an increased rate in crime, unemployment, domestic/general violence, and overall civilian depression. When governments cannot seem to find a means to an end, they often turn and look for something to blame for their struggles, and that thing is more often than not, drugs. For many years, several opiates and drugs were primarily used for medicinal purposes, were seen to have an abundance of health benefits and was widely accepted among communities. Although, with the increasing social conflicts and economic conditions, authorities turned to and targeted many different forms of once accepted drugs, and made them the scapegoat for the problems they were facing.

No Drugs, No Problems! That has been the philosophy of the war on drugs, which is a nice idea except when not carried out properly backfires. The idea was to get rid of the supply, but they did not first lower the demand. In economics the supply and demand counterbalance each other; while supply decreases, then demands and price increase and vice versa. When they took away the drugs without reducing the demand and the price skyrocketed, but it didn’t do anything to lower sales of drugs. This won’t work because no matter the price, drugs will be sold. It has no effect, even if you destroy the production

One profound way of combatting drug usage is to continue educating the youth and public on the fatal risks of utilizing drugs. Another aspect that the film did not touch upon is the drug policies and issues in other countries. Most of the world’s narcotic painkiller market is based in the United States, so there could be stronger laws introduced to limit who is able to access these strong pills. Moreover, countries such as Spain, have legalized most drugs, and have since seen a decrease in the usage of these drugs. These measures could be applied in the United States, and the black market where profit is made on these drugs would dissipate. Furthermore, these substances could be highly taxed like cigarettes, and made limited so that they become less accessible to the public. While recovery is a lifelong process for those already addicted, America can save the lives of tomorrow by getting the drugs out of the hands of first time

Historically speaking, according to Narconon (2015), the issue of prescription drug abuse began in the 1800’s when consumers could self-prescribe medications such as cocaine and morphine. In the 1900’s, the Pure Food and Drug and Harrison Narcotic Tax acts were put into place as measures to control the sale and distribution of these substances (Narconon International, 2015). Today, the prescription drug problem continues to be a growing issue that has many consequences in our society.

In order to find an alternative to the United States current drug policy, it is helpful to look at the current options. Governments typically take three broad approaches toward drugs. The first is legalization, in which possession and sale are lawful but still subject to regulation and taxation. The second is criminalization, which consists of the banning of possession and sale with criminal punishment (i.e incarceration). Lastly, there is the combination of the two—where sale and possession are prohibited, yet possession is punishable only by sanctions, such as fines or abuse treatment but not jail time.

system in which marijuana is regulated and taxed similarly to alcohol, makes the personal use,

In recent years, the United States has seen an enormous spike in drug abuse causing many to start calling it an epidemic, making many question to the way in which the government handles this issue. As many Americans already know the current policy in which the government deals with this situation is known as the war on drugs, which calls for the eradication or prohibition of illegal drug use. This policy enforces stricter punishments, including mandatory sentencing that has maxed out the prison population, and has caused an influx of money to go to drug related agencies to combat the issue. Thus, in theory creating a nation free of all drugs deemed harmful and keeping them away from society along with teaching those who break these laws a lesson in order to deter more drug crime. However, according to many this policy has dramatically failed, this so called “war” has cost tax payers billions, is unfairly implemented, and has put thousands of nonviolent people in prison for years. This issue is in desperate need of reform, instead we need to look at it as a public health issue. In order to deal with all these underlining issues and better support those dealing with addiction the United States government must reform this policy and consider a public health approach instead that could potentially save thousands. We should be helping those suffering from drug addiction not punishing then further by locking them up and throwing away the key.

As such, strong regulation would be needed in order to safely distribute a substance that has high potential for addiction – but of course, the capitalist would move their business to where it may be most lucrative. Where there is less state intervention, it is more likely that the capitalist would find a larger market and an even larger black market. Consider once again the movement of tobacco sales from North America to Latin America and Asia. Following years of regulatory legislation, state campaigning, and education surrounding the dangers of cigarettes, these businesses moved their focus as they would rather attempt tapping and expanding into new markets without such barriers. However, there is an opportunity to make it a universal and apparent reality that painkillers are dangerous, and therefore there should be a rigorous and conscientious preventative system to deter profit motives from exploiting addictive and potentially destructive commodities such as OxyContin. As with any social transformation, the consciousness of the public must be raised to realize these

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