The Negative Effects Of Drug Prohibition

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.

“Drug policy regarding the control of the traditional illicit substances (opiates, cocaine, cannabis) is currently moving through upbeat times in almost all Western countries. Prohibition on the basis of repressive law enforcement not only seems to fail on a large scale, but also to create vast additional costs, problems, and harm for drug consumers, who often find themselves in extreme social, economic, and health conditions” (Fischer 1995: 389).

Throughout history, campaigns against certain parts of life are frequently argued upon. Wars are in a state of flux, but a constant in America's policies is the Drug War. The government attempts to prevent the consumption of illicit and harmful substances, even shown in modern domestic policies. Yet with much effort, positive results was not usually yielded. Apart from the outcomes, prohibition has made a large impact on daily life. In the United States, prohibition of alcohol and opium was a visible and controversial debate. The prohibition of alcohol and criminalization of opium were very different but still had some similarities such as the events that happened, its immediate reaction, and the lasting significance.

“The law of unintended consequences is what happens when a simple system tries to regulate a complex system. The political system is simple; it operates with limited information (rational ignorance), short time horizons, low feedback, and poor and misaligned incentives. Society in contrast is a complex, evolving, high-feedback, incentive-driven system. When a simple system tries to regulate a complex system you often get unintended consequences.” (1)

The existing drug laws are very inefficient. This paper will focus on the people and the specific elements that are affected by the inefficiency of the drug laws. When looking at the drug laws at a glance a person might be lead to think that they would be very effective and they seem reasonable. While drug laws in themselves are necessarily wrong, some of the discrepancies in the laws make them unfair and take from the category of handing down justice and puts them into the category of cruel and unusual. First there will be an analysis of prohibition throughout American history, then an analysis of what the actual crimes and punishments are for a few of the drugs in the United States. Next there will be a look into who is affected by

He also describes how the United States views as a voice and forceful supports of prohibitionist drug controls in international policymaking. In addition, in the United States the discussion on surrounding drug control policy is one of the most extremely disputed matters of our current eras. The author mentions in the article how the strictly enforced US prohibitionist drug was unable to control the Narcotic drugs which happened to create many negative and harmful consequences for the people in the world. The negative consequences that were created when they failed to control the narcotic drugs happened to increase the violence, government dishonesty, and public seizure; therefore, these consequences to the economy growing are very harmful and dangerous. Narcotic drugs have long preserved, which has impacted many people lives in the world. A main purpose of this article is about the unaffordable drug control normally employed by the United States. The United States has spent way too much money abroad and local just thinking that they will be able to decrease the level of illegal drugs; however, they happened to fail at

ALCOHOL IS BAD FOR YOU AND MAKES LIFE DIFFICULT SO THE GOVERNMENT WAS LIKE NAH THANKS TO MUCH WORK NOT WHAT WE THOUGHT IT WAS GUNNA DO

Drug Policy in the United States began under the Presidency of Richard M. Nixon, who launched the “War on Drugs” and oversaw the creation of the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA). The sole purpose of both initiatives was to combat the copious amounts of drugs flowing out of our borders. Then First Lady Nancy Reagan, who will go down in history as the greatest First Lady of All Time, launched “Just Say No”. A campaign aimed towards the youth to refuse the vices of drug and alcohol abuse. These policies were perpetuated in the 1990s under the Clinton Administration who passed their own tough on crime initiatives as well. The upside, the implementation of these policies has caused the drug use rates to equal where they were 25 years ago. On the downside, the United States imprisons more people than any other industrialized nation in the world because of the drug offenses.

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.

The United States defiantly needs to do more to prevent imported drugs into the country. More emphasis results in less drug use by consumers. Although it may not completely stop drug use. It will reduce the number of people gaining access nonetheless. An argument for this issue is that the more the force the United States places on drug

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

First drug prohibition has cause harm to the entire country because of the escalating crime rate. Drug addicts will rob, kill and even prostitute themselves to obtain the illegal drugs they are addicted to. “Prohibition drives markets underground, thereby generation violence and corruption. Participants in black markets cannot resolve their disputes with courts and lawyers, so they resort to violence instead.”(Miron). If drug legalization takes places it this country will be a safer place.

Drug abuse and predatory criminality go hand in hand in a few, select social groups, while in others, drug abuse most often occurs without criminal behavior (other than the fact they’re doing drugs.) Despite what most might think, drug abuse typically follows predatory criminality. As drug abusers keep trying harder drugs due to necessity, the intensity of their criminal behavior escalates dramatically. When using more than one type of drug at one time, studies show that the frequency of criminal activity increases. But, when these drug offenders decrease the amount of drugs they put in their system, their rate of criminal activity also decreases, which shows that drugs can cause a person to commit crime. This shows that drug usage can cause crime and stopping drug usage can slow or even halt criminal activity.

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.

Drug abuse and crime is not a new concept and the statistics around the problem have continued to rise. According to (Office of Justice Programs, 2011), there were an estimated 1,846,400 state and local arrests for drug abuse in the United States. Additionally, 17 percent of state prisoners and 18 percent of federal inmates said they committed their current offense to obtain money for drugs (Office of Justice Programs, 2011). Based on this information, we can conclude that our criminal justice systems are saturated with drug abusers. The United States has the highest imprisonment rate and about 83 percent of arrests are for possession of illegal drugs (Prisons & Drug Offenders, 2011). Based on these figures, I can conclude that we should be more concerned about solving the drug abusers problems and showing them an alternative lifestyle rather than strict penalty of long term incarceration which will inevitably challenge their ability to be fully functioning citizens after release.