Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
War on drugs united states
War on drugs united states
War on drugs
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Liberal and Conservative Views on the War on Drugs Drug use has been an ongoing problem in our country for decades. The use of drugs has been the topic of many political controversies throughout many years. There has been arguments that are for legalizing drugs and the benefits associated with legalization. Also, there are some who are opposed to legalizing drugs and fear that it will create more problems than solve them. Conservatives and liberals often have different opinions for controversial topics such as “the war on drugs,” but it is necessary to analyze both sides in order to gain a full understanding of their beliefs and to decide in a change in policy is in order. The purpose of this essay is to interpret the views of conservatives Sasha Abramsky, writing in the liberal magazine, the Nation, uses California as an example in which getting rid of the harsh drug policies would be a huge benefit to the economy. In the article titled “The War Against the ‘War on Drugs,’” Abramsky finds a correlation between the drug policies and incarceration rates. Abramsky writes about how some of the state’s political figures are finding that the war on drugs is “responsible for the spike in prison populations over the past thirty years” and they agree that the California’s drug policies “are not financially viable and no longer command majority support among the voting public” (18). Abramsky then goes on to discuss in the article how liberal politicians, Betty Yee and Tom Ammiano, are pushing for a bill to change the drug laws and legalize marijuana. Yee wants to excise “fees on business owners applying for marijuana licenses, impose an excise tax on sellers and charge buyers a sales tax” and if that is done the right way, she believes that the state could gain “about $1.3 billion a year” Timothy Lynch, writing in the conservative magazine the National Review, writes about how the drug war has not made very much progress and has essentially failed. Lynch writes about how voters in California, Arizona, Oregon, Washington, Nevada, Alaska, and Maine that have rejected ideas to improve the war on drugs and instead they “approved initiatives calling for the legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes” (40). Lynch also writes that “the supply of drugs has not been hampered in any serious way by the war on drugs” (41). This supports the conservative’s claim that the war on drugs is not making any progress to stop the supply of drugs coming into America. Conservative writer for the magazine National Review, William Buckley, shows his outrage towards the Council on Crime in America for their lack of motivation to change the drug policies that are ineffective. Buckley asks, “If 1.35 million drug users were arrested in 1994, how many drug users were not arrested? The Council informs us that there are more than 4 million casual users of cocaine” (70). Buckley goes on to discuss in the article, “Misfire on Drug Policy,” how the laws set up by the Council were meant to decrease the number of drug users, not increase the number of violators. Richard Lowry writes an article for the National Review, quoting a Council on Foreign Relations report on drug eradication policies
Legalizing the use of soft drugs would help bolster the U.S. economy, partially because the government would have the ability to tax these drugs. This includes marijuana used for medicinal purposes, which, according to a 1995 article in The Journal of the American Medical Association, can “counteract the toxicity of chemotherapy, treat migraines, minimize pain, and treat moderate wasting syndrome in AIDS patients.” The economy would also benefit from the legalization of drugs because fewer drug offenders would crowd the prisons, and the government could spend the money they saved from this reduction in prison populations on other public expenses. With drug busts running at 750,000 cases a year nationwide, (mostly for marijuana,) prisons are bulging, and those imprisoned for drug-related crime account for only a fraction of America’s drug users. In Elliot Currie’s essay, “Toward a Policy on Drugs,”...
The series “High Profits” demonstrates the works and restrictions of the United States government regarding the issue of legalizing recreational marijuana. Breckenridge Cannabis Club business owners, Caitlin Mcguire and Brian Rogers, demonstrate both the struggles and profits of this up and coming industry. This series portrays virtually every viewpoint possible by including opinions from an array of political actors who discuss the influence of the government on this topic and the impact this topic has on the general public.
The War on Drugs is believed to help with many problems in today’s society such as realizing the rise of crime rates and the uprooting of violent offenders and drug kingpin. Michelle Alexander explains that the War on Drugs is a new way to control society much like how Jim Crow did after the Civil War. There are many misconceptions about the War on Drugs; commonly people believe that it’s helping society with getting rid of those who are dangerous to the general public. The War on Drugs is similar to Jim Crow by hiding the real intention behind Mass Incarceration of people of color. The War on Drugs is used to take away rights of those who get incarcerated. When they plead guilty, they will lose their right to vote and have to check application
“[The war on drugs] has created a multibillion-dollar black market, enriched organized crime groups and promoted the corruption of government officials throughout the world,” noted Eric Schlosser in his essay, “A People’s Democratic Platform”, which presents a case for decriminalizing controlled substances. Government policies regarding drugs are more focused towards illegalization rather than revitalization. Schlosser identifies a few of the crippling side effects of the current drug policy put in place by the Richard Nixon administration in the 1970s to prohibit drug use and the violence and destruction that ensue from it (Schlosser 3). Ironically, not only is drug use as prevalent as ever, drug-related crime has also become a staple of our society. In fact, the policy of the criminalization of drugs has fostered a steady increase in crime over the past several decades. This research will aim to critically analyze the impact of government statutes regarding drugs on the society as a whole.
A “drug-free society” has never existed, and probably will never exist, regardless of the many drug laws in place. Over the past 100 years, the government has made numerous efforts to control access to certain drugs that are too dangerous or too likely to produce dependence. Many refer to the development of drug laws as a “war on drugs,” because of the vast growth of expenditures and wide range of drugs now controlled. The concept of a “war on drugs” reflects the perspective that some drugs are evil and war must be conducted against the substances
Lately it seems that drug policy and the war on drugs has been in the headlines quite a lot. It is becoming increasingly apparent that the policies that the United States government takes against illegal drugs are coming into question. The mainstream media is catching on to the message of organizations and individuals who have long been considered liberal "Counter Culture" supporters. The marijuana question seems to be the most prevalent and pressed of the drugs and issues that are currently being addressed. The messages of these organizations and individuals include everything from legalization of marijuana for medical purposes, to full-unrestricted legalization of the drug. Of course, the status quo of vote seeking politicians and conservative policy makers has put up a strong resistance to this "new" reform lobby. The reasons for the resistance to the changes in drug policies are multiple and complex. The issues of marijuana’s possible negative effects, its use as a medical remedy, the criminality of distribution and usage, and the disparity in the enforcement of current drug laws have all been brought to a head and must be addressed in the near future. It is apparent that it would be irresponsible and wrong for the government to not evaluate it’s current general drug policies and perhaps most important, their marijuana policy. With the facts of racial disparity in punishment, detrimental effects, fiscal strain and most importantly, the history of the drug, the government most certainly must come to the conclusion that they must, at the very least, decriminalize marijuana use and quite probably fully legalize it.
When it comes to the topic of war on drugs,most of us will readily agree that the war on drugs is not about the drugs But about the people. Many Politicians and law enforcement will argue that the war on drugs is about our nation's wealth and safety.however they don't see the destruction the war on drugs has caused; The war on drugs has recreated this new system of discrimination among the minority community, individuals and communities are being profiled,their rights as citizen are being seized ,individuals being stripped away from their families. They’re being locked up with no hope to live the American dream in their our country.
The controversy of legalizing marijuana has been raging for quite a while in America. From some people pushing it for medical purposes to potheads just wanting to get high legally. Marijuana has been used for years as a popular drug for people who want to get a high. All this time it has been illegal and now it looks as if the drug may become legal. There has been heated debate by many sides giving there opinion in the issue. These people are not only left wing liberals either. Richard Brookhiser, a National Review Senior editor is openly supportive of medical marijuana yet extremely conservative in his writing for National Review (Brookhiser 27). He is for medical marijuana since he used it in his battle with testicular cancer. He says "I turned to [marijuana] when I got cancer because marijuana gives healthy people an appetite, and prevents people who are nauseated from throwing up. "(Brookhiser 27) Cancer patients are not the only benefactors from the appetite enhancer in marijuana, but so are any other nauseous people. Arizona and California have already passed a law allowing marijuana to be used as a medicinal drug. Fifty Six percent of the California voters voted for this law. "We've sent a message to Washington," says Dennis Peron. "They've had 25 years of this drug was, and they've only made things worse." (Simmons 111) The Arizona proposition garnished an even wider margin of separation between the fore's an against in a sixty five percent support tally. Ethan Nadelmann insists that " these propositions are not about legalization or decriminalization. They're about initiating some non radical, commonsense approaches to drug policy." General Barry McCaffery disagrees saying, "I...
The war on drugs in our culture is a continuous action that is swiftly lessening our society. This has been going on for roughly 10-15 years and has yet to slow down in any way. Drugs continue to be a problem for the obvious reason that certain people abuse them in a way that can lead to ultimate harm on such a person. These drugs do not just consist of street drugs (marijuana, cocaine, ecstasy), but prescription medications as well. Although there are some instances where drugs are being used by subjects excessively, there has been medical research to prove that some of these drugs have made a successful impact on certain disorders and diseases.
New York: New York, 2010. Print. The. Should the U.S. Continue Its War on Drugs? Opposing Views: Issues, Experts, Answers.
America's War on Drugs: Policy and Problems. In this paper I will evaluate America's War on Drugs. More specifically, I will outline our nation's general drug history and look critically at how Congress has influenced our current ineffective drug policy. Through this analysis, I hope to show that drug prohibition policies in the United States, for the most part, have failed.
Ever since the federal criminalization of marijuana in the United States in 1937, there has been a large underground drug market (Paul). Much like how the prohibition of alcohol simply forced imbibers underground, those who chose to partake in marijuana are forced to stay away from the prying eye of the law because of present marijuana laws. This means the drug world is concealed from the average citizen, hiding the dangers of drug deals gone wrong, police shootings, and other dangerous occurrences. In a way this allows the government to mask the fact that their well-funded ‘War on Drugs’ is ineffective, a ‘War’ with a budget of roughly twenty billion dollars; which is not profoundly effective in the curbing the use of drugs (Jillette). If the average citizen does not know what is happening, in the eyes of the American zeitgeist, it is not happening. Criminalizing a harmless drug to cut down on its use simply turns its users into criminals, making the crime rate go up and clogging prisons with non-violent criminals. Marijuana is less harmful than alcohol and tobacco and the laws pertaining to it should reflect that.
Just say no? This is not exactly the philosophy that the vast majority of the United States population tends to follow. Drugs have become a routine aspect of everyday life in the United States. Neither a gigantic metropolis nor a minute town have gone without feeling the everlasting effects of drugs. Drug use has always posed a major dilemma for America to overcome. The banning of illegal drugs takes many back to the days of the Prohibition problems involving the banishment of alcohol. Prohibition obviously did not work in the 1920’s, and some modern day people feel that making drugs legal would solve the constantly rising drug problem. In his article Facing up to Drugs: Is Legalization the Solution?, Pete Hamill presents both sides of the argument very thoroughly. Using tremendous techniques in both writing and in major points, the author persuades the reader to give a great deal of consideration to the author’s belief that legalization is the answer to America’s drug problem.
Wolf, M. (2011, June 4). We should declare an end to our disastrous war on drugs. Financial Times. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.proxy.consortiumlibrary.org/docview/870200965?accountid=14473
“Getting tough on drugs inevitably translates into getting soft on nondrug crime,” they write. “When a decision is made to wage a ‘war on drugs,’ other things that criminal justice resources might do have to be sacrificed.”