To a significant extent, drug prohibition has failed comprehensively in Australian as its has overlooked principles of criminal law that are form the foundation of legislation and are imbedded in common law. These undermining of legal principles raises questions about the legitimacy of the criminalisation of drugs and the reasons for the overstretching of the criminal law specifically in relation to drugs. Drug prohibition has created an over criminalization of drugs as it has not protected the health and wellbeing of communities. As a result of the poor process of drug prohibition there is a lack of medical supervision, spread of preventable disease, preventable overdose deaths, violence due to drug trade, discretion of police resources and …show more content…
These harms include an unregulated black market, drug overdoses, resort by drug users to crime to pay for drugs, the growth of criminal networks, corruption of public servants and reduced respect for the law. As a result of prohibition, the high prices of illicit drugs and the nature of the black market generates an environment in which criminal networks flourish, and provide an inducement for drug-dependent users to commit crimes to obtain the money to pay for drugs. Randy E. Barnett in The Harmful Side Effects of Drug Prohibition outlines that as a result of prohibition and its over criminalisation of drugs, the prices of drugs has risen. By increasing the risk to those who manufacture and sell, drug laws raise the cost of production and distribution, demanding higher prices. Due to this, the prohibition of drugs has failed comprehensibly as these laws have created a strong incentive for drug users to illegal crimes that if not for the over criminalization of drugs they would not otherwise engage in. This is outlined The Demand for Intoxicating Commodities which considered that the ban on heroin and hyperinflation of prices has generated a black market, soaring prices, corruption and accelerated property crime to fund use. This is further backed up by Stephen Odgers who outlined that a study by bureau of crime statistics released …show more content…
The Harmful Side Effects of Drug Prohibition journal outlines that prohibition automatically makes drug users into criminals and restricts their ability to obtain employment. Due to this, there is an increased likelihood that the artificially high prices of drugs will lead drug users to engage in criminal conduct to obtain income. As a result of punishing drug users through over criminalization, drug users and suppliers are reluctant to call authorities for help due to the stigma caused by criminal law and penalties for drug supply. Mr Ritcher outlined ‘We've been simply repeating the same idiocy on a one-shoe-fits-all basis . . on a law enforcement basis, a prohibition basis . . which has failed.’ This encompasses the notion by Count The Costs Journal which outlined that the war on drugs punishes those most in need. This over criminalization of drug users leads to increased stigmatization and marginalization. This marginalization due to over criminalization of drugs is further accentuated by the diseases such as HIV spread amongst drug users due to needle sharing and a lack of clean facilities. This journal further outlines that by fueling the spread of disease often with fatal outcomes, drug-war policies have had a overwhelmingly negative impact on the health of drug users. Therefore, it is evident that prohibition of drugs in terms of the health dangers it would create in
We live in a “recreational drug culture”, with the current criminalization of illicit drugs being driven by the common but not entirely universally accepted assumption that negative externalities will instead be placed in on society. Addressing the seemingly ever-infinite "war on drugs", in "Why We Should Decriminalize Drug Use", Douglas Husak argues in favour of the decriminalization of drugs in terms of not criminalizing the use of such recreational drugs. In this paper, I will dispute that Kusak 's argument succeeds because of the lack of justification for prohibition, and the counterproductiveness and how numerically evident the ineffectiveness of these contemporary punitive policies are.
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.
“[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
In Australia the Government uses three methods to tackle drugs; Demand reduction, supply reduction and harm minimization. Needle and syringe programs are under harm minimization category. Supply reduction is focused on drug dealers and drug makers and is brought about by law enforcement. In the Demand reduction method it is tried to decrease the number of people taking drugs through anti-drug advertisements and campaigns, legislation, rehabilitation centers. On the other hand harm minimization recognizes the fact that drugs can never be eradicated fro...
Making drugs illegal has wasted a vast amount of money, prison space, police time, and caused epidemics of violent crime.
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.
Implications of implementing this approach may be “to reduce the dangers of drug use for the community and the individual, and to shift the focus of illegal drugs as primarily a criminal justice of medical issue to a social and/or public health iss...
When societies finally become comfortable with reality, they begin to abandon the murderous laws that impede their growth. Currently, the social stigma and legislated morality regarding the use of illicit drugs yield perhaps the most destructive effects on American society. Drug laws have led to the removal of non-violent citizens from society- either directly by incarceration or indirectly by death - which is genocidal in quantity and essence. 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.
The drugs issue is a major problem in Australia. A simple solution cannot be found to solve this great problem because there are so many decisions, thoughts and sacrifices that need to be made. All sides of the issue must be considered when making such a large decision. To find a solution, several tests, meetings, interviews and research need to be made, to name a few. Extreme care is needed when challenging such major issues, all aspects of the problem need to be considered.
Our economic statue tells us that a supply rapidly grows up to meet a demand. But if the demand is widespread then suppression is useless. It is harmful to society because since by raising the price of the drug in question, it raises the profits of middlemen, which gives them an even more powerful drug to stimulate demand further. The vast profits to be made from cocaine and heroin, which would be cheap and easily affordable, even by the poorest in affluent societies if they were legal. Besides, it is well known the illegality in itself has attraction for youth already inclined to disaffection.
This topic is very controversial topic because it deals with a growing body of citizens whose lives have greatly been affected by the United States government drug policies. In order to tackle the problem effectively, we need to look how it relates to economic problems, health issues, the criminal justice system and etc in our communities I look at bureau of justice statistics for statistics on National Drug Budget control, National household survey on drug abuse, prison statistics and book written by scholars on the issue.
Many feel today we are loosing the war on drugs. People consider legalization unnecessary. They feel that it will increase the amount of drug use throughout the world. They state that in many cases, drug users who have quit quit because of trouble with the law. Legalization would eliminate the legal forces that discourage the users from using or selling drugs. They also say that by making drugs legal, the people who have never tried drugs for fear of getting caught by the law will have no reason to be afraid anymore and will become users (Potter 1998).
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.
Addiction levels rose, especially among teenagers, and more people became addicts. This sets an example to how it will hurt the nation as one, not only will the nation look bad, but go bad as well. Crime, violence, and drug use go hand-in-hand. Many believe that legalizing drugs w... ... middle of paper ... ...