The prohibition of drugs has been practiced in the United States since President Nixon’s administration; however, does it really maximize utility of the United States’ citizens? If so, it should continue to be practiced with force, but if not, it is time to end the war on drugs once and for all. Even though some consider it not to be a victimless crime, prohibition of drugs does not maximize utility because the war on drugs has flooded United States’ prisons with inmates who have not committed violent crimes, we have no right to keep someone from their lifestyle choice of doing drugs, and it is giving rise to the cartel monopoly. Utilitarianism is a moral theory established by John Stuart Mill that says we should seek not the individual’s …show more content…
According to Friedman’s ethics of coercion, it’s wrong for the government to keep citizens from doing what they wish. We don’t have the right to use direct or indirect force to keep an individual from committing suicide; therefore, we don’t that the right to keep them from drinking alcohol or doing drugs of any kind. The court is essentially unfairly punishing users and dealer for their choice lifestyle. Criminal penalties should be lifted for small amounts in possession, but they should continue for those producing and trafficking. Written in the Seattle Times, former Seattle police chief Norm Stamper advocated for drug legalization by stating that responsible drug use should be considered a civil liberty and that drug abuse should be seen as a medical matter, rather than a criminal one …show more content…
Wilson developed a strong utilitarian argument that supports prohibition. Wilson might challenge Friedman’s contention on the grounds that drug use is not a victimless crime (Wilson). The harmful effects of drug use for far beyond the user. They not only hurt themselves, but they also hurt their family, friends, community, and the larger population. Some would argue that legalizing drug use would give off the impression that it is a nonthreatening risk-free activity that is perfectly acceptable to participate in. Mexican police officer Elisio Montes commented to the London Guardian, “I sometimes wish drugs would be made legal so that the gringos can get high and we can live in peace. Then I say to myself: no—these drugs are addictive after one single hit. They’re terrifying—they destroy lives; they destroy our young people. If they are legal, they will buy more” (Drug
As director of the National Drug Control Policy, William J. Bennett shares his stance on the drug war in “Drug Policy and the Intellectuals”. He addresses the arguments that American’s have proposed in regard to the legalization of drugs. Bennett goes on to say that the justification behind legalizing drugs lacks the seriousness that a topic like this should have. In addition, the results would likely be disastrous. Rather than “taking the profit out of the drug business”, Bennett’ alternative is to make the usage of drugs a less appealing option.
In “How About Low-Cost Drugs for Addicts?” (1995), Louis Nizer argues that drug addiction is a serious problem and we are losing the ability to gain control over drug addiction. Nizer suggests the government should create clinics that provide drugs free or at nominal cost and be staffed by psychiatrists. The benefits of the new approach will push the mob to lose the main source of its income, the drug dealers will run out of business, and the police or other law enforcement authorities would be freed to take care of other crimes. Nizer also believes that free drugs will win the war against domestic terrorism caused by addicts. On the other hand, Nizer provides some of the opposing arguments that providing free drugs would consign a person to
Chapter two introduces the policy problems related to the War on Drugs, as well as other policies that banned or limited other use of alcohol and drugs. Authors start with the history of the regulations of mood altering substances that began in colonial times, and then it escalated with “The Father of Modern Drug Enforcement”, Dr. Hamilton Wright. President Roosevelt assigned him to be the first Opium Drug Commissioner of the United States. Dr. Wright saw drugs as a big problem, according to the text the drug prohibitions started with his opinions on limiting drug use. In 1906 the Pure Food and Drug Act was signed and required the labeling of the ingredients of the products.
Overview: The purpose of the Executive Summary, The Multi-Site Adult Drug Court Evaluation: Executive Summary (Rossman, Roman, Zweig, Rempel, Lindquist, 2011), was to show how Urban Institute’s Justice Policy Center (UI-JCP), RTI International (RTI) and Center for Court Innovation (CCI) conducted research on how drug courts impact the overall crimes related to drugs. The main issue being explored is how well the drug courts are doing to help lower crime revolving around the drug epidemic. This issue is significant to criminal justice because it shows that the United States has a serious drug dilemma that started in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s that has to be combated by government and law enforcement agencies. This includes the issue you of whether or not drug courts are actually helping reduce crime.
Inasse Slaoui Bernadette Varela AP English Language 23 February 2023 A Modest Proposal: For preventing drug abuse and overcrowding in prison the United States of America must legalize all drugs. The War on Drugs was declared by the United States in 1973, and like the similarly unsuccessful War on Terror, it was riddled with inconsistencies and hampered by irrational policy goals. Forty plus years and a trillion dollars later, the U.S. has the largest prison population in the world and a racist two-tiered judicial system under which teenaged blacks caught with a few crack rocks do hard time in state prisons, while the bankers who launder the Mexican cocaine cartel’s blood-stained billions simply pay fines.
Overall, Gore Vidal’s argument of legalizing drugs is very compelling. The style of writing is unique and keeps the reader interested. Vidal takes a popular argument (in 2016) and provides a sound argument in support of
People are using drugs either because they are depressed, in pain, or have a struggle they don’t want to face. Because these drugs are so addictive, people need money and resources to break the habit. This epidemic is a major social problem. Trump talks about how he wants to bring back Nancy Reagan’s idea about the “Just say no”program.
For example, agencies have been established with the sole intent to manage drug use and distribution and technology has been exclusively developed to detect the presence of drugs. Yet, evidence has indicated that such exhaustive efforts have been relatively unsuccessful. First, it has been assumed that drugs have perpetuated violence in society and based on this rationale, it was believed that by the suppressing the pervasiveness of drugs that incidents of violence would simultaneously diminish. However, reality has failed to align with the expectations that had initially been anticipated. Research findings have suggested that the decriminalization of drugs would result in a less adversarial drug market in which conflicts have tended to arise among dealers as well as between dealers and buyers (Common Sense for Drug Policy, 2007, p. 21).
In the name of fighting drug abuse, governments unleashed a war on drugs that continues to rage today. Drugs have numerous negative consequences that can result from an addiction, but some can have positive effects when used appropriately and under the care of a healthcare professional. The War on Drugs is a government-led initiative aimed at stopping illegal drug use, distribution, and trade by issuing increased prison sentences for drug-related offenses, and it increased federal funding for drug-control agencies and treatment efforts. Instead, it has resulted in a disproportionate amount of incarcerations of minorities.
In his article, “Toward a Policy on Drugs,” Elliot Currie discusses “the magnitude and severity of our drug crisis” (para. 21), and how “no other country has anything resembling the American drug problem” (para. 21). The best way to describe America’s drug problem is that it is a hole continuously digs itself deeper. America’s drug issues were likely comparable to other country’s at one point in time, but today it can be blamed on the “street cultures” (para. 21) that continue to use and spread the use of illegal drugs. These street cultures transcend the common stereotype of drug users, such as low income communities in cities or welfare recipients, and can be found in every economic class and location. They are groups of people who have
Drugs are the dangerous substances that will destroy the consumer both physically and mentally; therefore, it is necessary to determine these substances restrictively. In order to do that, I am strongly assuring that the drugs should be legalized. There are three main reasons why the drugs should be legalized: diminution of crime rates, health guarantee, and extending of drugs regulation. Drugs are one of the crime sources, although not by the drugs, itself, but the condition. Illegal drugs are rare products that could not be found in the normal market, the cost for its rarity is totally expensive.
Upon reading Gore Vidals "Case for Legalizing Marijuana" one may wonder why drugs are not legal in the United States of America. Afterall, several valid reasonings were made throughout the article. There is a demand for drugs and many people are supplying them, while also making a small fortune. If drugs were made legal and sold for high prices, their market would decrease because many people would not be able to afford them. Most people involved in the drug world do not know the consequences of that which they consume.
There is much debate on the issue of recreational drug use. Some argue it harms the user, therefore, is wrong. Others maintain that recreational drug use inspired artistic expression in some, religious awakening, and a general feeling of pleasure and positive attitude in others. Timothy Hsiao argues that recreational drug use is immoral because it impairs cognitive abilities and the state based on this fact has an obligation to enact legal restriction to safeguard that people actually exercise their freedom.
As per the reading suggested by the instructor about the philosophical idea of Consequentialism (Utilitarianism) given by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill and the other concept which is given by Immanuel Kant in the critics of Utilitarianism theory which is called Deontological Ethics. The reading given made understand about all these two concept and their possible application in the policy or law making like the universal law. Utilitarianism:- this is the concept used by Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) and the John Stuart Mill (1806-1873). The core idea of this theory is the results comes from the action taken by the group of people or the individual. According to theory the outcomes will be judged weather the action was morally right or wrong.
As of recent, the war on drugs has been a very often discussed topic due to many controversial issues. Some people believe the War on Drugs has been quite successful due to the amount of drugs seized and the amount of drug kingpins arrested. I believe this to be the wrong mindset when it comes to the war on drugs. The war on drugs isn’t a winnable one so we must do all that is possible to assist those who struggle with drug addiction and decriminalize small amounts of drugs. These minor changes in the way we combat drugs will create significant change and have lasting effects.