Legalising Drugs Analysis

One example of similarities and differences of the two societies is the Government. In both of our societies the Government controls us and instills laws to help protect our lives. Like in our modern day society we have laws about seat belts the help keep us safe. And in the book ‘Fahrenheit 451’ the Fireman Captain talks about the Government taking away books to help keep people believing in only one government to keep them safe from war. “If you don’t want a man unhappy politically, don’t give him two sides to a question to worry him; give him one.

The argument against this is that in passive euthanasia the doctors do not do anything to cause the patient’s death

After most people hear what Perry has gone through you immediately give him a get out of jail free card right? You think that since he had a difficult upbringing he should be exempt from receiving the death penalty? Although you may think this, this is certainly not an excuse for such a violent act. Throughout In Cold Blood, Capote attempts to portray to the reader that Smith in a way should be exempt from the crime he commited and how one should not blame it on Smith himself, but his psychological background. Specifically when Al Dewey, the head of the Clutter murder investigation, states how the crime was not in fact Smiths fault.

It indicates that if the court didn’t have any evidence against a criminal and the court let him go and later, police find evidence against criminals so they can’t arrest that person again. It shows to us that the seventh amendment is very important and helpful. The 8th Amendment is important to all people that live in the United States. First, the 8th Amendment helps the courts to take a decision.

This epidemic has to stop “23.5 million Americans are addicted to alcohol and or drugs” The government 's role should not condone that the is a disease because that will encourage this number to stay the same instead of

Once Walt starts producing methamphetamine, its criminality starts to wear down to viewers because Walt is still that loving family man who is trying to support his family. The way crime is viewed in Breaking Bad is like a paradigm shift of ideology. All of Walter's actions are justified because of the emotional attachment and sympathy from viewers. Walt knows he is going to die from cancer and wants to ensure his family financial stability even if that means going to the extremes of engaging in illegal actives. Breaking Bad has been labeled as one of the best shows of its time (Forbes 2016, Rolling Stone 2016).

Is it ethical for the government to give up one’s well being just for the sake of money? There are many ways for a government to earn money other than legalizing marijuana. Legalizing marijuana is an unnecessary action. Keeping it illegal is the best thing to do for the world, for the country, and for

Rehabilitation is paramount in order to form a brighter, healthier future. After all, what good to society is a brilliant mind, if a highly disorientating substance continually afflicts it? Most of the time these same people that abuse drugs are the ones being directly affected by some type of outside oppression. Our jails and prisons serve as a type of rehab as well. Once in jail or prison, abusers have no access to illegal drugs and are forced to quit cold turkey from all illegal substances, including nicotine.

One of the main arguments is that euthanasia could be an ethical issue and can be seen as assisted murder. Physicians are not forced to provide the euthanasia doses; the physicians who do, have agreed to do so. As well as the patient is asking to die, they are not being killed against their will. Another argument is that medical resources and money will be spent for a patient to kill themselves, when they can just commit suicide on their own free will. More medical resources would be spent on keeping that patient alive, than it would euthanize them.

Playing god isn’t frowned upon because of religious or moral objections. Instead, it is a feared because of the unintended social consequences that might occur. Victor’s failure to even consider the possibilities, both bad and good, of what his scientific discovery might create clearly violates the code of ethics pertaining to social responsibility. In this case, reviving the dead didn’t promote social welfare or prevent harm. It did quite the opposite actually, as Victor’s creature ended up bringing fear into the hearts of many, and death to the special

This shouldn’t happen, because for one PEDS can ruin your body, and if somebody openly knows about the drug use they are only adding to the harm. Another reason is that there is always someone on the team who works just as hard without PEDS who deserves a chance to shine. Professional athlete’s use of PEDS sets a bad example for young athletes, by showing that you don’t have to necessarily work hard, but you could just take the easy way out and pop a few pills, but hopefully as an athlete becomes older the government can try to regulate their use of these substances as they do alcohol, tobacco, and prescription

Studies done after the sandy hook shooting have found that, “ Contrary to pro-gun lobby claims, research into prevention of gun violence has shown that reasonable reforms could reduce the excessively high rates of firearm deaths in the US while preserving access firearms, possession is not illegal for people proposed do not infringe on law abiding citizens ',” (Vittes 6). This has two main point to it, the first and most clearly is that it is irrelevant on what one 's believes might be, reasonable gun control will save Americans lives. The more subtle meaning behind this study was that gun lobby 's push the agenda that their companies are protected by right. The gun manufacturing business is no small group of occupations. They receive money by having customers purchases firearms, which they donate to political parties to pass different legislation.

This ideology is simple, and is used in day to day terms as keeping ‘honest people honest’. With a hardened border, the effort and money that would need to be put in in order to surpass the infrastructure in place, would bring along a different breed of criminal, and one who has the wits and whereabouts to avoid detection and prosecution. Just as with the wars on drugs, creating a stricter border patrol, simply removed the amateur drug smugglers, leaving the large funded cartels with the upper hand. While some authors believe that creating a closed border will only lead to attacks on weaker targets, the regarded weaker targets will have fewer civilian casualties, and therefore will result in less financial cost in order to rebuild the affected area. When it comes to opening our borders more, the implications are reversed.

Will making drugs like marijuana legal stop things like addiction and crime? Gore Vidal writes that addiction can stop in a short amount of time by simply making all drugs available and selling them at cost. He says that we as Americans have the right to do what we want with our life as long as it is not hurting our neighbor. Isn’t legalizing drugs hurting our neighbor? If we legalize marijuana or even worse more harsh drugs we will have people driving around high.

While searching for an opinion based article and after reading several vague and unexciting hooks off every article’s introduction I found Don Winslow’s “America’s war on drugs is empowering Mexico’s drug cartels” a must read. With Winslow’s dispute toward America and its leaders, his opinion of how mediocre their effort is toward the war on drugs is spot on. Although not anti-government Winslow stresses how the government’s insufficient interest in thoroughly dealing with the ongoing war on drugs compared to other conflicts in the Western hemisphere is helping the cartel thrive. However, although considered a war by many, including myself, Winslow sees it more than just a war but an act of terrorism with money being the ultimate goal. Needless