Legalize Drugs Essay, Research Paper

Such an issue stirs up moral and spiritual beliefs ; beliefs that are contrary to what America should “ believe ” . However, such a argument has been evident in the American market place of thoughts before with the prohibition of intoxicant in the 1920 & # 8217 ; s. With the illegality of intoxicant the Mafia could bring forth spirits and therefore had considerable control over those who wanted their substance and service. The function that the Mafia played in the 1920 & # 8217 ; s has transformed into the corner drug traders and drug trust of the 1990 & # 8217 ; s. The justification that legalized intoxicant under Amendment 21 in 1933 should besides legalise drugs in 1996. With the legalisation of drugs a lessening in deceases related to drug trades would happen and besides the monetary value would decrease because bigger concerns could bring forth drugs at a cheaper monetary value. Thus, cut downing offenses that are committed to back up a drug wont. Another drug that has played a major function in American society is nicotine. For 100s of old ages, coffin nails have been a popular legal drug within the United States. Merely through legalisation and instruction has the popularity and the usage of coffin nails declined within the past 10 old ages. Physically, the existent effects of utilizing illicit drugs is much less than of utilizing drugs like intoxicant or coffin nails and the effects will be diminished. Illicit drugs can and will be made safer than they are in the present system. In doing comparings, the best is to look at how states are working that have less enforcement on drugs and what the statistics were after drugs were decriminalized. Within the last 30 old ages many groups have their efforts. The usage of drugs is a victimless offense much like homosexualism. Homosexuals have fought for a great trade of freedom that is based on their basic human rights ; the right to do determinations and act freely based on what is protected under the Constitution, so long as anyone else is non affected. Economically, the production of drugs in the United States would profit the fiscal well being of the American authorities and people. Taxes should instantly be placed on drugs therefore ensuing in a important addition in authorities income. The more money that authorities receives is more money that they can set towards the instruction of how drugs consequence the human head and organic structure. Prohibition breeds discourtesy for jurisprudence & # 169 ; enforcement ; the bureau that “ should ” keep the highest regard of the American society. Money spent on prohibition is an overpowering figure that is non needed and is evidently accomplishing small. Those who want to be controlled by a substance should hold every right to make so, because this right has equal legal power as any other human right that has emerged from the sea of subjugation and persecuted freedoms. & # 193 ; ? the deceases ensuing in the geting of intoxicant have all but disappeared. When all non & # 169 ; medical traffics in intoxicant were prohibited in the United States in 1919, the consequences were really similar to today & # 8217 ; s drug trade. Alcohol o & # 212 ; quality was brewed illegitimately ; importers were considered felons and behaved as such ; protection rackets, payoffs and pack warfare organized offense in the United States. ( Boaz, p.118 ) The enforcement budget rose from $ 7 million in 1921 to $ 15 million in 1930 & # 169 ; & # 169 ; $ 108 million in 1988 dollars. In 1926, the Senate Judiciary Committee produced a 1,650 & # 169 ; page study measuring enforcement attempts and suggesting reforms. In 1927, the Bureau of Prohibition was created to streamline enforcement attempts, and agents were brought under civil service protection to extinguish corruptness and better professionalism. In that same twelvemonth, President Hoover appointed a blue & # 169 ; thread committee to measure enforcement attempts and urge reforms. Three old ages subsequently Prohibition was over and intoxicant was legalized. ( Boaz, pps.49 & # 169 ; 50 ) Immediately, the moonshiner stopped running about the streets providing illicit contraband. Peoples stopped worrying about rummies mugging them in the streets or interrupting into their flats to acquire financess to purchase a pint of vino. We now deal with intoxicant maltreatment as a medical job. Let us cover with the drug job in the same manner. Let us seek non to reiterate the errors of the past by go oning to intensify a war that is wholly unneeded. ( Boaz, p.120 ) The abrogation of intoxicant prohibition provides the perfect analogy. Revoke did non stop alcohol addiction & # 169 ; & # 169 ; as so Prohibition did non & # 169 ; & # 169 ; but it did work out many of the jobs created by Prohibition, such as corruptness, slaying, and poisoned intoxicant. ( Boaz, p.50 ) We can anticipate no more and no less from drug legalisation today. & # 193 ; ? United States has non tried to censor the usage of baccy on a & # 212 ; coffin nail smoke is one of America & # 8217 ; s most unsafe drug wonts. Nicotine, the active ingredient in baccy, is extremely toxicant. When stray and taken orally, it can convey decease in a affair of proceedingss. Cigarette baccy contains about 1.5 per centum nicotine ; an mean coffin nail outputs six to eight mgs of the drug. Cigar baccy is potentially more deadly ; a criterion & # 169 ; size cigar contains about 120 mgs of nicotine, twice the sum of a deadly dosage. What seemingly & # 212 ; ? & # 212 ; ? sarcasm is that baccy which can be seen as merely of a danger if non more so than many illicit drugs of today is considered a “ good ” and absolutely legal drug among the American society. & # 193 ; ? awful, commanding substance that alters the head and putting to deaths. This is a true statement ; nevertheless & # 212 ; lead to more deceases in the United States than do illicit drugs. The National Institute on Drug Abuse reports that the official 1988 toll of drug & # 169 ; caused deceases in 27 U.S. metropoliss, the best available step of the state & # 8217 ; s “ drug job, ” was, for cocaine merchandises, 3,308 ; for diacetylmorphine and morphia, 2,480 ; & # 212 ; class, for marihuana, nothing. “ Emergency & # 169 ; room references ” for cocaine in the same metropoliss totaled merely 62,141. For comparing, smoking killed 390,000 last twelvemonth and intoxicant killed at least 100,000. Alcohol is responsible for more foetal harm than cleft and remains the major threat on our main roads. ( Boaz, p.123 ) & # 212 ; provinces that about 57 million people in this state are addicted to coffin nails, 18 million are addicted to alcohol and 10 million are mistreating psychotherapeutic drugs. By comparing, cleft, diacetylmorphine and hallucinogens each histories for one million nuts. Further, the study states that every twenty-four hours in this state 1,000 people dice of smoking & # 169 ; related unwellnesss, 550 dice of intoxicant & # 169 ; related accidents and diseases, while 20 dices of drug overdoses and drug & # 169 ; related homicides. ( Lynch, p.8 ) The war on drugs might every bit good be non & # 169 ; existent ; protagonists argue that the & # 212 ; authorities & # 8217 ; s & # 212 ; demands to be focused on more abused drugs that do more injury to the American people, such as intoxicant. & # 193 ; ? therefore drug decriminalisation, gives his positions on governmental engagement in drug related issues. Nadelmann believes that the authorities should utilize the revenue enhancement system to deter ingestion among childs, and even among grownups to some extent. Nadelmann provinces, “ I think it & # 8217 ; s legitimate for authorities to play a function in seeking to deter people from utilizing coffin nails. If they want to set the information out at that place, that sounds all right. But I find improbably unsavory is the manner that they & # 8217 ; re demonising coffin nail users now. What & # 8217 ; s go oning now, with [ FDA Commissioner David ] Kessler, is they & # 8217 ; re header in a prohibitionist way, which is something I would see as really bad on both policy evidences and ethical evidences. ” Nadelmann continues to indicate out that, “ Advancement in the rights of & # 212 ; engineering sophisticated environment, may redound to the benefit of the drug issue. I think besides that the war on coffin nail users & # 170 ; & # 169 ; if you want to name it that & # 169 ; & # 169 ; is raising the issue of single liberty vis & # 169 ; a & # 169 ; vis drug usage in a context to which 10s of 1000000s of Americans still associate. And the more that cigarettes get tarred as a drug, the more the connexion is traveling to be outstanding. You & # 8217 ; re traveling to hold 10s of 1000000s of Americans get downing to place more and more with the diacetylmorphine, cocaine and marihuana users. At the same clip, you & # 8217 ; re traveling to hold these statements about single rights and the freedom to utilize drugs in your ain place. ( Reason, July 1994 p.43 ) The personal rights and freedoms issue is a pressing point that protagonists of prohibition must look towards and make up one’s mind on what their beliefs are on how deeply authorities should interact and restrict the actions of people. & # 193 ; ? call for a campaign or an exterminatory witchhunt. In the Netherlands, the focal point is pragmatically centered on minimising the injury that addict population does to itself and the remainder of society. The record speaks for itself: American striplings use marihuana at about twice the rate of their opposite numbers in Holland, where marihuana and hashi

sh have been freely available for more than 17 years. The only drug that causes traffic fatalities and violence in Holland is the same one that causes these problems here©©alcohol. Over a 17©year period in Holland, during which possession and use of hard drugs have been treatedOunder 22 years of age who use heroin or cocaine has dropped from 15 percent to less than three percent. (Perrine, p.12) In Holland, a Dutch reformed parish operate a methadone dispensary and a needle exchange. There are designated areas where drugs can be used, and permitting such areas is controversial, even in tolerant Holland. Drug legalization in England and Holland has had mixed results. While there has been a slight increase in drug use in those countries, the number of crimes associated with drugs has decreased. However disagreeable, the visible presence of junkies in countries like England and Holland plays its part. Dutch adolescents have no problem seeing that this is hardly a glamorous and exciting life©style and that it does not even provide much pleasure. Reality, even disagreeable reality, is remarkably educational; and the attempt to legislate reality out of existence is remarkably counterproductive. (Perrine, p.12) In the U.S. there were eleven states that decriminalized the personal use of marijuana. According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse(1992), there was no increase in its use in those states.(Riga, p.7) Anti©drug supporters argue that corollations cannot be made between the United States and other countries;O however, the way in which people conduct themselves and how society responds to this is very similar around the world. O ?heightened awareness of the destructiveness of drugs, and in self©pride programs for society’s “have nots.” The United States has cut back drastically on its alcohol and tobacco consumptionOare dangerous. The same thing must be done for other drugs. Pragmatically, the legal and controlled sale of drugs would not only reduce crime but channel valuable resources into treatment.(Riga, p.7) With the treatment of drugs as a medical problem, we can then and only then focus on the real problem:O people that O A ?and adulteration of supplies of drugs. Without some system of control, it is argued, that there is no way to guarantee the purity or strength of any given cannabis preparation. Wide variations in THC(delta©9©Tetrahydrocannabinol) concentration could have deleterious effects on users. Inexperienced smokers, accustomed to low©grade domestic pot, could be adversely affected by the unexpected introduction of high©potency Colombian or Jamaican supplies.(Schroeder, p.54) Today’s drug consumer literally does not know what he is buying. The drugs are so valuable that the sellers have an incentive to “cut” or dilute the product with foreign substances that look like the real thing. Most street heroin is only three to six percent pure; street cocaine ten to fifteen percent. Since purity varies greatly, consumers caO produce the desired effects. If a personO percent heroin and take a five percent dose, suddenly he hasO nearly doubled hisO open market would face different incentives than pushers. They rely on name brand recognition to build market share, and onOincentive to provide a product of uniform quality; killing customers or losing them to competitors is not a proven way to success. (Pragmatist, p.3) With majorO how drugs should be made and what they should be cut withO dangerous approach may be taken. A ?well be the schism that has been created in the American society. Prohibition has set generation against generation, law?enforcement officials against users, and the system of criminal justice against millions of otherwise law©abiding citizens. The effect of prohibition has not been a decreased marijuana consumption©©statistics show that the opposite is true. Rather, prohibition has bred disrespect for the law and the institutions of government, and many have argued that that is too high a price to pay for even a successful program.(Schroeder, p.55) A loss of respect for governmental agencies can be seen as one terrible event that has occurred within America. Plans that would breed and boost respect for these agencies should be desired and sought after. A ?the prohibition of drugs yearly is an unnecessary and overwhelming figure. The total annual cost of the drug war, are about $100 billion dollars annually.(Duke, p.3) For instance, the Air Force spent $3.3 million on drug interdiction, using sophisticated AWACS surveillance planes, over a 15 month period ending in 1987. The grand total of drug seizures from thatOof the Coast Guard and Navy, sailing for 2,500 ship days at a cost of $40 million, resulted in the seizure of a mere 20 drug?carrying vessels.(Wink, p.1) O were not enough, domestic production of marijuana continues to increase. It is the largest cash crop in ten states and second largest in the nation, second only to corn. Revenues from drug trafficking in Miami, Florida, are greater than those from tourism, exports, health care, and all other legitimate businesses combined.(Wink, p.2)O have a lower cost than throwing people in prison. It costs $52,000 a year to detain someone at Riker’s Island. However, a years stay at Phoenix House in New York, for example, costs $15,000.(Yoffe, p.1) If it is not already obvious, the way in which the government goes about it’s drug war is inoperative. Money that is spent is a waste; O education and treatment. If politicians cannot see this, than we are losing the drug war in our policies and in the minds of our “greatest” law©makers, not on the streets. A ?A ` ` ?concluded that the prohibition of drugs criminalised users, forced them into contact with professional criminals, tempted entrepreneurial young people from impoverished backgrounds into a lucrative criminal life, encouraged gang warfare, resulted in people taking impure mixtures in often dangerous methods, and created heavy policing costs. It is, in short, not drug abuse itself which creates the most havoc, but the crime resulting fromOother Western governments, to contemplate some form of licensed sale of drugs which would deprive the pushers of their market while obliging registered addicts to take treatment. The key to beating the traffic is to remove its prodigious profitability and to deglamorise drug abuse by a heavy programme of public education.(Boaz, 122) The government can continue harassing, humiliating and jailing drug users in the name of helping them stay away from evil. It can continue fostering violence and corruption in the name of protecting our society. Or, America can begin fighting drugs through peaceful means, taking the problem away from police and jailersO doctors and educators. Legalizing drug use©©with certain restrictions©©would eliminate the terrible collateral damage wreaked by the war on drugs. It would respect the right of individuals to make personal choices about what they consume, while still holding them responsible for the harm they cause others. It would free up real money for prevention and treatment programs that currently enjoy more lip service than funding. And it would encourage people with problems to seek help rather than take them underground. Any new approach to drugs must begin by replacing hype and demagoguery with information and analysis. It must discriminate between the uses and misuses of drugs. It mustO alsoO for paternalistic moralizing for hypocritical double standards.(Boaz, p. 135) Legalizing drugs would not be a panacea. Many people would continue to use them recklessly andOjoin their ranks. But scare scenarios of a prostrate, addicted nation have no basis. Clearly, there will be some increase in drug use if drugs are made legal and accessible at a reasonable price. Yet the benefits of legalization will outweigh the negatives: less crime, less O available for greater rehabilitation efforts, fewer jail cells and prisoners, better utilization of law enforcement personnel, greater respect for the law, fewer corrupted policeman, and fewer deaths from impure substances. Furthermore, taxes from these legalized substances will fund treatment centers and educational outreach. If we can distribute condoms and clean needles to control the spread of diseases, why can’t we bring ourselves to distribute drugs cheaply and legally? The same arguments made about cause and effect ought to be made here as well. Granted, America has a vast and terrible problem with the issue on drugs in the 1990s, but as Robert Kennedy opined, “If the alternatives [are] disorder or injustice, the rational choice is injustice. For when there is disorder, we cannot obtain or maintain justice.”(Boaz, p. 120)