Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
-Drug Laws of The Netherlands –
Is a Permissive Legal System Better than a Restrictive One in the Case of Drugs?
Introduction
The Netherlands is one of the most highly developed countries in the world. It is an international, well-integrated country with policies that are among the world’s most liberal. In fact, The Netherlands has perhaps the most liberal view on drug use than any other country and has even gone to the extreme of extraordinarily relaxing its laws regarding ‘soft’ drugs.
However, a common misconception about drugs in the Netherlands is that people believe they have been legalized there. Rather, cannabis and its by-products, marijuana and hashish, have merely been decriminalized. This means that the sale and use in moderate amounts of marijuana and hashish is not prosecuted.
This begs the question: Is a permissive legal system more effective than a restrictive system in the case of soft drugs? This paper examines the attitude of law enforcement in The Netherlands regarding soft drug use and assesses whether or not The Netherlands’s permissive system is a successful one.
Soft Drug Decriminalization in The Netherlands
Contrary to popular belief, when the Dutch parliament revised the country's drug laws in 1976, it did not actually legalize any narcotic substances. Rather, it separated illegal drugs into two distinct categories: drugs with unacceptable health risks (such as heroin and cocaine), which were classified as "hard drugs,” and drugs with a lesser medical risk (such as cannabis), which were classified as "soft drugs" (Bransten, para. 3). The Dutch Parliament then decided to decriminalize soft drugs.
Because of this determination, throughout The Netherlands so-called "coffee shops” have opened. In these coffee shops, people are able to purchase limited amounts of cannabis and smoke a marijuana joint without fear of prosecution (Bransten, para. 4). These activities are not legal per se, but the local police do not monitor or prosecute them.
The rationale behind the Dutch parliament’s decision was that the use of marijuana among the Dutch population was increasing, and rather than bog down the legal system, Dutch politicians decided to decriminalize marijuana (Bransten, para. 4). The other benefit of the policy, as the Dutch politicians and general public see it, is that “it isolates the hard drug market from the...
... middle of paper ...
...s not occurred in The Netherlands as a result of decriminalization of drugs. In fact, the majority of research and statistics show that the Dutch have no more drug problems than most neighboring countries which do not have "liberal" drug policies.
Conclusion
While some people continue to claim that the permissive Dutch drug policy has led to an increased amount of drug use in that country, the majority of statistics tend to refute this. Overall, it appears that a permissive soft drug policy is certainly as effective, if not more so, than a restrictive system.
Bibliography
American Civil Liberties Union. ACLU Paper #19 - Against Drug
Prohibition. 1996. Available at: . Retrieved June 6, 2003.
Bransten, Jeremy. Europe: Drugs -- Dutch Practice Liberal Policies
(Part 2). Radio Free Europe. 28 November 2000. Available at: . Retrieved June 5, 2003.
Reinarman, Craig. “The Dutch example shows that liberal drug laws can be beneficial.” In: Scott Barbour (Ed.), Drug Legalization: Current Controversies. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2000, pp. 102-108.
Voth, Eric A., and Ambassador Melvyn Levitsky. Contemporary Drug
Policy. 1/21/2000. Available at: . Retrieved June 5, 2003.
One of the key aspects to consider when evaluating domestic political actors preferences towards policies pertaining to illegal drug use in both the Netherlands and Germany is to evaluate their ideological differences. The Netherlands attitude towards drug policy revolves around limiting the negative impacts illegal drug use has on society by implementing laws catered towards decriminalization. On the other hand, Germany considers drugs a detriment to society and promotes legislation that proactively restricts the flow of supply and demand of illegal drugs within the country. Now that both countries ideological differences have been brought to light, we must also consider the origins of those ideas and how they transcended into public policy. One of the significant driving forces behind the shaping of any policy are those political actors who reside in the country. The objective of any political actor is to influence public preference by sponsoring changes in policy. Just like the United States, both Germany and the Netherlands have organizations within their own country that promote policies to the public in an attempt to sway their opinion on an issue. The investigation of political actors in Germany and the Netherlands will allow one to obtain a greater understand of why their stance on illegal drug use is the way it is.
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,”...
In Douglas N. Husak’s A Moral Right to Use Drugs he attempts to look at drug use from an impartial standpoint in order to determine what is the best legal status for currently illegal drugs. Husak first describes the current legal situation concerning drugs in America, citing figures that show how drug crimes now make up a large percentage of crimes in our country. Husak explains the disruption which this causes within the judicial system and it is made clear that he is not content with the current way drugs are treated. The figures that Husak offers up, such as the fact that up to one third of all felony charges involve drugs, are startling, but more evidence is needed than the fact that a law is frequently broken to justify it’s repeal.
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.
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
Drug dependence or addiction reliance is an expanding scourge around the world. Drug legalization or at least decriminalization has been discussed for quite a long time as an answer for the drug issue. Indeed, at times authorization appears to be legitimate however in a few circumstances it is most certainly not. The relationship between of crime and drugs, the distinctions and similarities between alcohol and drugs and the advantages of an organized commerce approach in drug legalization. (Bonevac, 2015)
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.
I base my support of the decriminalization of all drugs on a principle of human rights, but the horror and frustration with which I voice this support is based on practicality. The most tangible effect of the unfortunately labeled "Drug War" in the United States is a prison population larger than Russia's and China's, and an inestimable death toll that rivals the number of American casualties from any given war, disease or catastrophe.
Ever since marijuana’s introduction to the United States of America in 1611, controversy of the use and legalization of the claimed-to-be Schedule I drug spread around the nation. While few selective states currently allow marijuana’s production and distribution, the remaining states still skepticize the harmlessness and usefulness of this particular drug; therefore, it remains illegal in the majority of the nation. The government officials and citizens of the opposing states believe the drug creates a threat to citizens due to its “overly-harmful” effects mentally and physically and offers no alternate purposes but creating troublesome addicts hazardous to society; however, they are rather misinformed about marijuana’s abilities. While marijuana has a small amount of negligible effects to its users, the herbal drug more importantly has remarkable health benefits, and legalizing one of the oldest and most commonly known drugs would redirect America’s future with the advantages outweighing the disadvantages.
Nadelmann, Ethan. "DRUGS: THINK AGAIN." European Coalition for Just and Effective Drug Policies. Sept.-Oct. 2007. Web. 02 Mar. 2011. .
The war on drugs and the violence that comes with it has always brought around a hot debate about drug legalization. The amount of violence that is associated with drugs is a result from harsher drug laws and prohibition.
Recreational drug use has been controversial for years. Government has deemed the use of certain drugs to be dangerous, addictive, costly, and fatal. Governmental agencies have passed laws to make drugs illegal and then have focused a great deal of attention and money trying to prohibit the use of these drugs, and many people support these sanctions because they view the illegality of drugs to be the main protection against the destruction of our society (Trebach, n.d.). Restricting behavior doesn’t generally stop people from engaging in that behavior; prohibition tends to result in people finding more creative ways to obtain and use drugs. However, just knowing that trying to control people’s behavior by criminalizing drug use does not work still leaves us looking for a solution, so what other options exist? This paper will discuss the pros and cons about one option: decriminalizing drugs.
The legalization of marijuana is considered a controversial issue, something that can benefit people for medical purposes, but what about recreationally? Marijuana has been illegal since 1937, but there’s never been a bigger push for legalization. There are several reasons why it is illegal, because of government propaganda and big industry not wanting to lose money, but this will be discussed later. The purpose of this paper is to educate, theorize, and discuss various aspects of marijuana, such as its history, development, and the advantages and disadvantages of marijuana legalization. Finally, my personal reflection on legalization and marijuana in general will be discussed.
Millions of people are suffering needlessly because of the prohibition against using medical marijuana, Rosenthal and Kubby assert. They conclude that marijuana should be decriminalized. ”(Rosenthal, Kubby) Today, I am going to help you understand the real benefits of marijuana. By the time that we are through, you will be agreeing with me and will want to be a part of the effort needed by citizens to legalize such a beneficial drug.
“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.”