Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Drug control policy
United states drug policy paper
Drug control policy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Drug control policy
The beginning of the 1960s, drugs became a symbol of youthful rebellion, social upheaval, and political dissent, while the government researched and tested their medical safety and efficacy. However, June 1971, President Nixon declared a war on drugs, saying that drugs were the number one threat to the American Public; spending more than $51,000,000 annually on the drug war every year (Drug War Statistics) The Drug has still not been solved, but has sadly created many more problems. The drug war has not only been going on for 40 years, but were enforced more than hundred years ago and fueled by discrimination and racism. “The first anti-opium laws in the 1870s were directed at Chinese immigrants. The first anti-cocaine laws, in the South in …show more content…
America's current political stand is to spend billions of dollars a year In order to fight and defeat the enemy, drugs. “We spend $50 billion per year trying to eradicate drugs from this country. According to DEA estimates we capture less than 10 percent of all illicit drugs.” (The United States War on Drugs) Showing us that the money being spent is doing little to no change to the amount of drugs supplied and demanded in the United States Part 2 When trying to solve the drug problem, many ideas and concepts look great on paper but do not work in the real world. We can not arrest and incarcerate addiction out of people, the human brain does not simply work like that. “Despite 44 years of aggressive policing and incarceration at the cost of a trillion dollars, 21 million Americans are still addicted to drugs or alcohol. The drug epidemic in America is at its worst ever, because the war on drugs is all wrong.”(Top Drug Official: The Old War on Drugs Is All Wrong). Botticelli, a former alcoholic sober for 27 years, believes it's not only inhumane, but it's ineffective and it cost us billions upon …show more content…
One organization, The Drug Policy Alliance, has “committed to identifying and promoting health-centered alternatives to harmful, punitive drug laws. We are working to stem the tide of low-level drug arrests, to reverse draconian sentencing practices that cultivate discrimination, and to eliminate lifelong barriers faced by people with even a minor drug conviction.” (Fighting Drug War Injustice) The Drug Policy Alliance however, is not the only organization that sees this problem, but also The United States Government. Certain government agencies are aware of the problem and are looking at other countries for help according to (For Safe and Effective Drug Policy, Look to the Dutch.) Asked the question “Why has the Netherlands—a country sometimes viewed as having a permissive approach to drugs—had better results than so many governments with much more strict policies?” The answer is enforcement, In the Netherlands there are far fewer arrests for minor drug offenses. “Lighter enforcement did not lead to more drug use. About 25.7 percent of Dutch citizens reported having used marijuana at least once, which is on par with the European average. In the comparatively strict United Kingdom, the rate is 30.2 percent and in the United States it is a whopping 41.9 percent.” The entire drug war is wrong, the government is
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
While the War on Drugs may have been portrayed as a colorblind movement, Nixon’s presidency and reasoning for its implementation solidifies that it was not. Nixon coined the term “War on Drugs” in his 1971 anti-drug campaign speech, starting the beginning of an era. He voiced, “If there is one area where the word ‘war’ is appropriate, it is in the fights against crime” (DuVernay, 13th). This terminology solidified to the public that drug abusers were an enemy, and if the greatest publicized abusers were black, then black people were then enemy. This “war” started by Nixon claimed it would rid the nation of dealers, but in fact, 4/5 of arrests were for possession only (Alexander, 60). Nixon employed many tactics in order to advance the progress
The film, American Drug War: The Last White Hope was directed by Kevin Booth. He lost four close people who were addicted to alcohol, nicotine and prescription pain killers. Through this film he portrayed how the war on drugs in the United States is a way for those in power and on wall street to profit meanwhile incarcerating the poor people who sell to get food on the table or are addicted to drugs. President Nixon created the Drug Enforcement Agency and the scheduling of drugs eventually declaring a war on drugs. Since his presidency the American government has been in a state of war on the fight against illegal drug use. There has been no advancements in this war, if anything the drugs are winning. It was stated in the film that there are
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.
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.
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.
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 war on drugs began with the presidential term of President Nixon in the 1970s. According to drugpolicy.org, “He dramatically increased the size and presence of federal drug control agencies, and pushed through measures such as mandatory sentencing and no-knock warrants. Nixon temporarily placed marijuana in Schedule One, the most restrictive category of drugs.”
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.
Ethan Nadelman first states that the “Global War on Drugs can be Won.” Needless to say, the “Drug-Free World” and “Alcohol-Free World” are viewed as completely different realistic goals in which one could achieve. Drug-Free World would be a lot harder task for one to accomplish due to the number of addicts who are incapable of stopping, even if it continues to kill their bodies. Drug use has been a bigger problem than alcohol use, mainly because it is harming the human bodies of all races with dangerous diseases. Alcohol, on the other hand, may cause a bit of damage to the body (in severe cases, alcohol poisoning), but not merely as the damage brought upon by the drug usage. Therefore, a Drug-Free World may be a harder goal to achieve than an Alcohol-Free World. Also, politician are on the verge of eliminating drugs from the Earth, despite the fact that majority of the people are spending their money on drugs rather than quitting. When the manufacturing of illegal drugs terminate, the percentage of people sent to jail may decrease substantially. In add...
In 1971, President Nixon declared a “war on drugs.” He substantially increased the presence and size of federal drug agencies, and passed legislation like mandatory sentencing laws and unconstitutional warrants. Nixon even listed marijuana as a Schedule One drug, the most constrictive drug category. Over forty years later, the U.S is still waging a war on drugs, spending billions of dollars per year and creating major social issues.
“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.”
The War on Drugs is the campaign against illicit drug trade with the ultimate goal of lowering the consumption of drugs in America. After 40 years of the war on drugs, it’s proven to be an ineffective and inefficient way to reduce drug use. The conventional war on drugs campaign is hurting communities that use drugs by marginalizing and bankrupting them, causing social tension. By pointing out the failures of this campaign, this paper will explain how alternatives can lead to a more successful outcome.
...y minimums, prisoners who are considered to be “victims” of the War on Drugs take up about 30 percent of our prison population today. Due to the fact that we have high incarceration rates, less funding goes towards rehabilitation for prisoners. Without rehabilitation, prisoners will return to a life of drugs, which means more crimes, more victims, and more pressure on the criminal justice system. This takes away the positive aspects from the neighborhood that would otherwise have a positive influence on the community surrounding. Due to the crimes brought to that area, community deterioration takes place. This causes more drug crimes to develop in and attract to that area. Progress is inevitably slow but there is unique movement behind drug policy reform right now. Our nation should look find drug policies that are shaped by scientific research rather than politics.
Since the reign of Nixon in the presidential office the drug war practices have led to the conviction of millions of Americans – excessively poor people and people of color – while this drug war is continually failing in the reduction of drug use and drug related disease and overdose. The major problem with the war on drugs is the way authorities – like government officials – are handling the situations brought upon through the drug war. A solution to the war on drugs would be to create safer way to help drug users across America.