The Effect Of 9/11 On Drug Enforcement

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 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.

(1989), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that drug courier profiles at airports could be used as a legitimate law enforcement tool, the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution notwithstanding. In a seven to two decision, the Court ruled that the drug courier profile could provide a “reasonable basis” for officials to suspect that a person is transporting drugs.

The War on Drugs is one cause for the mass incarceration that has become apparent within the United States. This refers to a drastic amount of people being imprisoned for mainly non-violent crime (“Mass Incarceration” 2016). In addition to people who are not an immediate threat to society being locked up for a substantial duration of time, the economic consequences are costing states and taxpayers millions of dollars. Specifically, every one in five people incarcerated is in prison due to some

The horrific events of September 11, 2001, profoundly altered the way law enforcement agencies conducted business. The creation of new agencies arose, strategies, procedures, and training for law enforcement was necessary to prepare and combat terrorism. In this paper, I will analyze the before and after effects, the events of 9/11 caused in law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and what improvements I feel are needed to keep our nation safe from terrorism.

In 1971, President Richard Nixon initiated the national War on Drugs, which focused on the passage of policies geared toward fighting illegal substances (Amundson, Zajicek, and Hunt, 2014). During this time, Nixon allocated two-thirds of federal dollars for treatment of drug addiction and prevention of new users and one-third of federal dollars for interdiction and enforcement (Amundson et al., 2014). After Nixon’s initial War on Drugs program, policies and programs began to shift. Under the Regan Administration, the War on Drugs became more punitive and there was a reversal of federal dollars. Under the new and subsequent regimes, two-thirds of money was spent on interdiction and enforcement and one-third was spent on treatment and prevention (Amundson et al., 2014). Under this new Administration came tougher sentencing, an increase in prison spending, and mandatory minimum sentencing for drug offenses (Amundson et al.,

Since 1941 there has been a major surge in drug dealing through proof of arrest rates. This is pretty clear since the amount of arrests has increased by a monumental 50% since then. Statistics show the escalation of arrests from1941-1990. From 1941-1950 there were 0.3 arrests; 1951-1960 0.7%; 1961-1970 7.9%; 1971-1980 36.9% and from 1981-1990 54.2%. Today, nineteen years later, these arrest rates

Drugs have played a part of the United States of America criminal justice fabric for generations. The scare tactics of the 1960s gave way to the contradictory messages of the late ’70s and early ’80s. In the 1970’s drugs became glamorous and recreational to many citizens. Prior to the 1970’s, citizens that abuse drugs was seen by policymakers as suffering from a social disease that could only be helped by treatment. Policymakers posture change drastically in the mid 70’s. In 1973, only twelve percent of the population reported to the Gallup poll that they had tried drugs. By 1977, that number was doubled. Notably, in 1978, 66 percent of Americans said Marijuana was becoming a serious issue in their respective communities (Riley, K.

The number of people incarcerated in America has steeply risen since the beginning of the War on Drugs. In 1980, about 300,000 individuals were in jail. (Alexander, 2010) In 2000, the number rose to over one million, and at the start of 2008, there were 2.3 million adults in prison in America (Pew Center on the States, 2008). These increases in the rate of incarceration are traceable to the War on Drugs (Nunn, 2001). “Convictions for drug offenses are the single most important cause of the explosion in incarceration in the United States (Alexander, 2010).” Drug offenses account for two thirds of the rise in the federal prison population between 1985 and 2000 (Nunn, 2001).

With President Nixon’s war on drugs still the go to method on dealing with illegal narcotics, the amount of drug offenders being sent to prison is still sky high. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), in 2004 out of all the

The 9/11 attacks has changed how law enforcement response to terrorist attacks. Prior to 9/11 law enforcement were a bunch of entities that acted independently of each other. One of the major things that were affected during 9/11 was the communication and this hit to our communication infrastructure crippling how law enforcement, EMS and FDNY passed information. This attack changed how law enforcement responded to any terrorist attacks. After the terrorist attack law enforcement created a domestic counterterrorism unit to handle moments of disaster and terrorist attacks. These units worked in conjunction with other law enforcement agencies; the sharing of information is all funneled into one system called the Nationwide Suspicious Activity

Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, recently affirmed that the plan demand from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) included extra counter-terrorism subsidizing for "frameworks to improve data offering around elected, state, neighborhood, and tribal law enforcement." Elsewhere Napolitano portrayed associations with state, nearby, and tribal powers as one of the necessities of the DHS and noted that "partnerships with state, nearby, tribal, and regional offices influence DHS's capacity to recognize dangers and reinforce readiness before an occurrence," and that "information offering between DHS and state and neighborhood governments is especially discriminating to our security."

The current policy in use by the United States concerning illegal drugs is both outdated and unfair. This so-called war on drugs is a deeply rooted campaign of prohibition and unfair sentencing that is very controversial and has been debated for many years. The war on drugs is designed so that it will never end. This current drug was has very little impact on the overall supply of prohibited drugs and its impact on demand seems non-existent. United States’ taxpayers are spending billions of dollars on this failure of policy. They are spending billions to incarcerate drug users instead offering drug treatment which could help lower demand. Legalizing illicit would lower abuse and deaths from use and could have a positive economic impact on the United States. Certain industries are making massive sums of money by capitalizing on the drug war.

The War on Drugs is a term that is commonly applied to the campaign of prohibition of drugs. The goal of this campaign is to reduce the illegal drug trade across America. This term “ War on Drugs” was used during Nixon’s campaign in which he declared War on Drugs during a press conference in 1971. Following this declaration many organizations were created to stop the spread of drugs, like the DEA and Office of Drug Abuse Law Enforcement. Note that Nixon’s approach to this problem was to fund treatment rather than law enforcement. After Nixon’s retirement from office, most of the funding went from going into treatment to the law enforcement. Which militarized the police force giving the officer’s military weapons and gear. With this, the sentencing for possessing drugs was changed as well, resulting incarcerations rates to increase overtime. The increase of incarceration rates started to create many patterns that were soon noticeable. The funding’s that go into the law enforcement has shown to greatly have an affect on the incarceration rates.

According to Michelle Alexander, why and how has the “war on drugs” developed over the last 40 years? What are the main political and economic factors that led to the war on drugs, and what are the main political and economic factors that shaped it as it developed over the last four decades? Draw on material from the Foner textbook chapters 25 through 28 to supplement Alexander’s discussion of the political and economic context.