In 1993, Elliott Currie wrote an essay titled "Toward a Policy on Drugs" where he argues that there is a correlation between drugs and the crime rate. Currie explains that the drug problem has worsened since the 1990s because the law is clearer than what it once was in regards to the justice system. Correctional facilities now have limited space to house all people who have committed crimes due to the fact that people who are addicted to drugs commit the most crimes. Drugs continue to be a "law-enforcement problem" because it is unclear what the people want the justice system to do (Currie, 1993, p.571). Currie goes on to say that the justice system can help drug users improve their lifestyles so that they are not caught up in the streets
Marijuana also known as weed, is a green mixture of dry, shredded leaves and flowers of a hemp plant known as Cannabis sativa. Research has shown that marijuana has been around since the 1920s. People use marijuana because of the after affects. Studies have shown marijuana makes you feel delightful, it increases satisfaction while smoking, if you’re stressed, after smoking the marijuana you’ll be on cloud nine and the stress will no longer be present. Society has influenced people to smoke marijuana more each day. After interviewing a series of marijuana users, they’ve told me that marijuana is a safe, harmless drug, that is used for meditation. In order to smoke the marijuana, you’ll use some form of paper to roll it up with.
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.
Douglas N. Husak's A Moral Right to Use 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.
In order to achieve a good essay, one must defend his argument and use data and research to back their argument. In “There’s No Justice in the War on Drugs”, Milton Friedman talks about the injustice of drugs and the harsh reality of being addicted to drugs, and the causes or side effects that come along with them. The author clearly argues about the “war on drugs” and uses analysis and facts to prove his argument. The author agrees that the use of government to keep kids away from drugs should be enforced, but the use of government to keep adults away from drugs, should not be enforced. The author has a clear side of his argument and the audience can clearly see that. He argues against the “war on drugs” claim that President Richard
Drug in the American Society is a book written by Eric Goode. This book, as the title indicates, is about drugs in the American Society. It is especially about the misuse of most drugs, licit or illicit, such us alcohol, marijuana and more. The author wrote this book to give an explanation of the use of different drugs. He wrote a first edition and decided to write this second edition due to critic and also as he mentioned in the preface “there are several reason for these changes. First, the reality of the drug scene has changed substantially in the past dozen or so years. Second much more information has been accumulated about drug use. And third, I’m not the same person I was in 1972.”(vii). The main idea of this book is to inform readers about drugs and their reality. In the book, Goode argued that the effect of a drug is dependent on the societal context in which it is taken. Thus, in one society a particular drug may be a depressant, and in another it may be a stimulant.
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
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.
There are individuals who oppose the use of drug courts. These people argue that by letting drug offenders avoid incarceration the justice system is doing nothing more than giving offenders an easier punishment for their crimes. Some people feel that over the long term treatment will cost more than sending the offender to prison to pay their debt to society. There are those that feel that treatment not wa...
We cannot afford to keep using the same approach in hopes of diminishing our drug problem in the United States. In a study posted on RAND.org, the author Jonathan P. Caulkins compares many methods we can use to help with drug crime. The first graph compares federal mandatory minimum sentences, conventional enforcement at all levels of government, and treatment of heavy users. Conventional enforcement prevented around thirty kilo grams of cocaine from being used, while federal mandatory minimums prevented around forty kilograms from being used. Treatment of heavy users blew both of the other methods out of the water.
Drug arrests occur too often and are taking up a majority of general arrests in America. “Drug arrests were the single largest category of arrests, accounting for more than 10% of all arrests in the country” (A drug, 2015). One out of ten of every arrest in the United States of America is a drug arrest. This over focus on drug arrests needs to stop as it is taking focus off of more damaging violent crimes. Overall drug arrests are up 8.3% from a decade ago” (A drug, 2015). Drug crimes are increasing because of the American government increased focus on drug crimes, despite the fact that it is not helping the problem. Even though drug arrests are going up, drug use in the United States of America is “... plentiful and widely used as ever” (Grenier,
Bruce K. Alexander’s essay “Reframing Canada’s ‘Drug Problem’” is about shifting the focus from intervention to prevention. Alexander explains that in Canada there have been three major waves of drug intervention: “Criminal prosecution and intensive anti-drug” (225), “medicinal and psychological treatment” (225), and the ‘“harm reduction’ techniques” (225) being the most resent. The “’harm reduction’” (225) consisted of: clean injectable heroin, clean needles, methadone, and housing for addicts. Although each of the methods is devoted and knowledgeable, they have done little to decrease the deaths or suppress the unhappiness. While clean heroin did work well few addicts quit using and many found
The drug control policy of the United States has always been a subject of debate. From Prohibition in the early 1930’s to the current debate over the legalization of marijuana, drugs have always been near the top of the government’s agenda. Drug use affects every part of our society. It strains our economy, our healthcare, our criminal justice systems, and it endangers the futures of young people. In order to support a public health approach to drug control, the Obama administration has committed over $10 billion to drug education programs and support for expanding access to drug treatment for addicts (Office). The United States should commit more government resources to protect against illegal use of drugs by youths and provide help for recovering addicts.
In the 1980s, the United States started a campaign to reduce to the use and sale of illegal drugs and this increased the numbers of those arrested, convicted, and incarcerated. William J. Stuntz (2013) argues, “mandatory minimum sentences, longer sentences for nonviolent first-time offenders, and “three strikes” laws mandating increased penalties for repeat offenders have all contributed to this increase” (p.380). Also, the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 abolished parole for federal inmates and modified how much time inmates could earn for good behavior. Inmates incarcerated after November 1, 1987 are not eligible for parole. These practices lead to limited abilities to reduce our prison population numbers. The type of drug offenses range from misdemeanor offenses of being under the influence of illicit drugs to felony offenses such as possession/transportation or sale of illicit drugs. The prisons become overpopulated with more nonviolent offenders with the current laws.
Milton Friedman was a man of many hats, and never really stuck to just being one of them: A professor by profession in Economics, Lead financial advisor for Richard M. Nixon (President at time), Nobel Prize winner for his studies in macroeconomist, and finally a writer in heated political debate. Friedman is a man of accomplishment, and in right he has his opinions on what the American government should be. In his article, “There’s No Justice in the War on Drugs,” Freidman has found the government’s ethics to come into question, and uses factual evidence on specific topics to defend his argument to make us understand that the war on drugs is unnecessary. His theory behind his essay comes down to the government’s actions has impacted American’s
One of the most prevalent misconceptions, Benson and Rasmussen, contend is the notion that a large percentage of drug users commit nondrug crimes, what might be called the “drugs-cause-crime” assumption implicit in the government’s drug-war strategy. If true, then an effective crackdown on drug use would reduce nondrug crime rates.... ... middle of paper ... ...