Shelfari: Book reviews on your book blog
Fearless Philosophy For Free Minds: Anyone Who Believes America is Winning the Drug War Must Be High

Wednesday, November 10, 2004

Anyone Who Believes America is Winning the Drug War Must Be High

Could legalizing drugs be the answer to reducing drug use in America? Most people would probably call that idea crazy. Why would the government want to encourage drug use? This is a misconception most people have when the taboo topic of legalizing drugs is brought up. Many people believe that because something is legal, the government is somehow saying it is right. Tobacco is a legal product yet it is constantly under attack. When was the last time the surgeon general told the public that tobacco is safe and healthy? Could this reasoning apply to other drugs that are currently illegal, yet kill far fewer people than tobacco? In fact, tobacco kills more people every year than all illicit drugs combined (McWilliams, 1996). What would happen if tobacco was suddenly illegal? Would people who want to smoke try to find and buy cigarettes despite it being a banned substance? What would the consequences be of this prohibition? The result of course would be a complete failure, just as the prohibition of drugs has been a failure. There are three main reasons why the prohibition of illegal drugs should end: it is ineffective, it causes unnecessary strain on the criminal justice system, and above all, it is dangerous.

Prohibition is Ineffective
America spends roughly $30 million (Federal and State) a day to fight the war on drugs (Stossel, 2004). The White House is requesting for congress to appropriate an additional $556.3 million for the 2005 fiscal year above the 2004 figure of $12.1 billion (The White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, 2004). If money was the solution to the drug problem, it would have been solved by now. Unfortunately, money and the programs the money supports has done very little to solve the problem.

While politicians fight this war from the comfort of their air conditioned offices, law enforcement officers see things from another perspective. An organization of police officers who oppose the drug war known as Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP), conducted a national survey among police officers. The survey found that 95% believe America is losing the drug war. Over 90% believe that treatment and prevention is more effective than incarceration. When asked what would happen if drugs were discriminations or legalized, 30% of the police officers believed there would be no effect or that usage would go down (McNamara, 1995). Based on these statistics, one could imagine the frustration these police officers are dealing with and the morale for fighting on cannot be very high. Retired narcotics officer and LEAP board member, Jack Cole put it this way:

After three decades of fueling the [drug] war with over half a trillion tax dollars and increasingly punitive policies, illicit drugs are easier to get,cheaper,and more potent than they were 30 years ago. While our court system is choked with ever-increasing drug prosecutions our quadrupled prison population has made building prisons this nation’s fastest growing industry, with two million incarcerated-more per capita than any industrialized country in the world. Meanwhile drug barons continue to grow richer than ever before (2002).

One might conclude that with this number of people serving time for drug offences, this would be an effective deterrent. While some people may decide not to take drugs because of the sentences associated with them, most rightly conclude that the odds of getting caught are very slim. The people who are most likely to get caught are the poorest Americans. Police concentrate their efforts to fight drugs on the poor neighborhoods. The rich are less likely to get caught because police do not typically patrol rich neighborhoods unless there is a reason to suspect the illegal activity (McWilliams, 1996). Even innocent people who happen to be poor are not exempt from punishment. Strict drug laws for public housing tenants go beyond the offenders themselves. The law states that tenants are responsible for anyone who enters the property, who participates in illegal drugs in any way, on or off the premises. This means that parents who are doing the best they can to be productive citizens could be evicted from their home if their teenager brings drugs into the home. The Supreme Court ruled that the law does, in fact apply to the tenant regardless of whether the tenant has knowledge of the criminal activity or not (Pilon, 2002). Is it right for the government to remove innocent people from their homes in the name of fighting the war on drugs?


Prohibition Puts Unnecessary Strain on the Criminal Justice System
Mandatory minimum sentencing laws for drug offenders is a major cause for prison over crowding. Violent offenders, who have no mandatory minimum sentence requirements for their crimes, are released early to make room for non-violent ‘criminals’ who do (Cole, 2002). Federal sentencing guidelines require a five year prison sentence for possessing a single gram of cocaine. One gram is equivalent to a single packet of sugar (FAMM, 2002). Approximately 4,000 people are arrested daily for selling or using drugs. Roughly a half million non-violent drug offenders are in prison right now, who committed no other crimes (Stossel, 2004). A drug felon is more likely to spend more time in prison than someone who steals, rapes, molests children or even kills (McWilliams, 1996). Is society better off locking up someone for drugs than any of these other more serious offences?

Making room for a half million non-violent drug offenders means allowing a half million violent felons to roam free. Peter McWilliams, author and expert on consensual crimes, made this observation and stated:

Here’s how over worked law enforcement is in the United States: Only 21% of the
people who commit murder and negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, theft, motor vehicle theft, or arson are ever arrested; 79% of them -
almost four out of five – get off scot-free (1996, p200)

In an effort to alleviate the problem of overcrowding prisons, some jurisdictions have turned to ‘drug courts’ as a solution. Recognizing the ineffectiveness of incarceration, Florida policy makers created drug courts as an alternative for first time non-violent drug offenders. Through the drug courts, drug offenders are given a chance to seek treatment instead of serving prison time. Florida’s drug courts have served as a model for the rest of the country (Facts.com, 2002). In fact, the White House is recommending an increase of an additional $32 million for fiscal year 2005; nearly twice the amount appropriated in 2004 for these drug court programs (The White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, 2004). While forced treatment is a better alternative than prison, treatment is only effective for those who truly want to get help. Even if drug users kick the habit, the criminal record that goes with it still has its consequences.

Drug Prohibition is Dangerous and Breeds Crime
Drug prohibition, as well intentioned as it may be, has at least one more consequence: it breeds crime and is dangerous. Why is it that people who, after being released from prison, return to a life of crime? Do they like being criminals? To answer these questions one must consider this: convicted felons cannot apply for federal student loans, have a difficult time finding jobs, have a difficult time buying or renting homes and are prohibited from voting (unless their civil rights are restored). There are no distinctions made between violent and non-violent offenders; a felon is a felon (McWilliams, 1996). The criminal record leaves ex-convicts with very few choices. The only market these most of these people qualify for is the black market. The experience of being locked up with violent criminals teaches inmates how to commit more crimes better.
Only 15% of people who try illicit drugs become addicts (Cole, 2002). For this unfortunate 15%, they find themselves desperate for more. Because prohibition artificially inflates the price of drugs, addicts resort to crime that does harm other people. Unless the addict happens to be very wealthy, stealing, selling drugs and prostitution are a few options for those whose daily drug habit can cost between $200 and $400 (McWilliams, 1996). Participating in the drug trade is very profitable but dangerous. When one dealer encroaches on another dealer’s territory, very bad things happen. Things like drive-by-shootings, which oftentimes endangers the lives of innocent people (Cole). If drugs were legalized, the price would drop dramatically and the drugs could be obtained safely. Even chronically addicted people would spend no more than $5 a day. Supporting a $5 habit would be a great deal easier than supporting a $400 habit. All that would be required would be a part-time job (McWilliams, 1996). In fact 80% of all crime is related to drugs one way or another. It is then reasonable to believe that legalizing drugs would reduce crime by 80% (Cole). Law enforcement could then use its limited resources on the other 20%.
Prohibition is also responsible for much of the health risks commonly associated with banned drugs. Risks include: selling drugs to minors, dirty needles and paraphernalia, uncertain dosages, and contamination (McWilliams, 1996). If drugs were legalized, the government could regulate and set quality control standards for all drugs; much like alcohol and tobacco. To keep children from purchasing drugs, the seller would have to be licensed and could only sell to adults. Currently, drug dealers sell to anyone who will buy them, including children. Quality control standards would result in a lower occurrence of overdoses. The users would know how potent the product is by its labeling. Dirty needles and paraphernalia would no longer be an issue (Cole, 2002). The drugs could also be taxed to fund treatment programs to help those who want to get off drugs as well as drug education programs for schools.

Conclusion
The very idea of legalizing drugs is a scary prospect to most people. Upon further examination however, one thing is very clear: the current strategy is not working. Though the risks would be dramatically reduced, a number of people would still overdose. Regrettably, though drugs would be less accessible to children, some would still get their hands on them. Minors drink alcohol and smoke cigarettes despite both products being illegal, legalizing drugs would have similar effects. As terrible as that may sound, the drug problem could at least be contained through legalization. Granting amnesty to those who have been convicted of non-violent drug offences along with legalization, regulation, treatment and education would go a long way to reducing drug use and crime in general. It is unrealistic to believe that America will ever be 100% drug free. A certain number of people will use drugs no matter what the laws are. Prohibition continues to do more harm to society than drugs ever will. Ending prohibition, though not a perfect solution, would do much less damage. This effective solution would relieve much of the burden on the criminal justice system and would make America a safer place to live. Until America as a whole believes this and plans to do something about it, our society will remain ‘high’ on its arrogance.

References
Cole, J. A. (2002). End prohibition now!. Retrieved April 22, 2004, from http://www.leap.cc/publications/endprohnow.htm

FAMM (2002). Crack vs. powder cocaine sentencing. Retrieved April 7, 2004, from http://famm.org/si_crack_powder_sentencing.htm

Facts.com (2002, February 15). Drug courts. Retrieved April 8, 2004, from http://80-www.2facts.com.ezproxy.apollolibrary.com/ICOF/Search/i0700280_1

McNamara, J. D. (1995, April 9). Cops view of the 'drug war'. San Francisco Examiner,. Retrieved April 7, 2004, from http://www.leap.cc/publications/copsview.htm

McWilliams, P. (1996). Ain't nobody's business if you do: The absurdity of consensual crimes in our free country. Los Angeles, CA: Prelude Press.

Pilon, R. (2002, September 9). Tenants, students, and drugs: A comment on the war on the rule of law. Retrieved April 7, 2004, from http://www.cato.org/pubs/scr2002/pilon.pdf

Stossel, J. (2004). Give me a break: How I exposed hucksters, cheats, scam artists and became the scourge of the liberal media.... New York: HarperCollins.

The White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (2004, March 1). National drug control strategy FY 2005 budget summary. Retrieved April 10, 2004, from http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/policy/budgetsum04/index.html


15 Comments:

Blogger Christian said...

I could not agree more, Stephen. This is exactly what I have been thinking about for years. Just look at the attitude of children and teenagers. The only reason they start smoking because it's "bad" and "cool". They go through the rebellious stage of doing anything to set them apart from children and anything rebellious or forbidden. I think lowering the drinking age can make teenagers less prone to excessive drinking because it will seem more like a social event then getting F'ed up . Europe is a perfect example of that. Although I believe that marijuana, mushrooms, LSD, and other less harmful drugs should not be completely unregulated, I think the government can legalize and contain these substances which would result in a more effective way of dealing with them. My basic philosophy with this is that if you tell someone you can't do something, they will just want it more. I grew up with alcohol in my household with my parents drinking every night at dinner, so I grew up not thinking it was a big deal. On the other hand, I have seen some kids with serious alcohol problems and I wouldn't doubt that these kids have rarely seen alcohol before. Cocaine and heroin I would think would be a big mistake to legalize. I know many people who have died from heroin overdoses at such a young age, and I know many people who have done cocaine only to change their whole personality and destroy their lives. So, I think the government needs to step in with these kinds of drugs, ones that are so addictive they control a person's thoughts and are obviously harmful to society. Amsterdam legalize marijuana and other soft drugs to lower heroin use and it worked. People's misconception about the city has given it a bad name among some, but I went there and it's a very charming city. So I think you are right....we need to stop this method because it's not working. I'm going to put your link on my site!
Christian http://liberalnonsense.blogspot.com/

9:54 AM  
Anonymous Regis said...

I've been thinking about this myself. I tend to agree, but I have one concern. I don't want people roaming the streets high on heroin/LSD or something similar. I really don't have a problem with people screwing up their own lives with drugs, I'd just rather they not so in the privacy of their own homes.

9:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is all very reasonable. Unfortunately, reason has not won the day. Laws already exist to address concerns like Regis' (impaired driving, no matter the source, is a crime). The citizenry generally still feels government must intercede to protect people from themselves (look at the growth of smoking bans). And politicians are quite content to receive the power that citizens continue to cede to them.

10:12 PM  
Blogger Cris Ericson said...

MAKE MARIJUANA LEGAL
2006 VOTE CRIS ERICSON
UNITED STATES SENATOR FOR VERMONT
http://makemarijuanalegal.com
MAKE MARIJUANA LEGAL

2006 VOTE CRIS ERICSON

Cris Ericson was on the official election ballot twice in 2004:
http://www.times.com/ref/elections2004/2004VT.html
CRIS ERICSON MJP

Cris Ericson is the only candidate in the U.S.A. to be on an official election ballot for Marijuana party affiliation.

6:50 PM  
Blogger AllanErickson said...

Can you provide a citation for the LEAP survey where you say:

-
"Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP), conducted a national survey among police officers. The survey found that 95% believe America is losing the drug war. Over 90% believe that treatment and prevention is more effective than incarceration."
-

I work with LEAP and am unaware of any such survey.

Thanks,

æ

11:26 AM  
Blogger Stephen Littau said...

Allan, I don't have the survey itself, I got these figures from the following article posted on the LEAP website:

McNamara, J. D. (1995, April 9). Cops view of the 'drug war'. San Francisco Examiner,. http://www.leap.cc/publications/copsview.htm

I probably should not have referenced an article with data this old. I would suggest contacting Officer McNamara himself and find out if he still has the survey. In the mean time, I'll see if I can get in contact with someone from LEAP and see if they can help me. I'll let you know what I find out. I would appreciate it if you could tell me what you find out as well. If this survey cannot be found, I want to correct the record.

Thank you for bringing this to my attention

11:20 PM  
Blogger Victor said...

We are the best of the best in Bongs with a beautiful accessories and we have the best service.
Be one of the ones that have the privilege to enjoy our Bongs.
we have all the ones that need to obtain not late more and contact us now.
Head Shop and Bong Amazing Legal Herbal Highs, featuring Herbal Smoke, Bongs,

8:20 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

My dad saw the police set up a home in the black part of town, a home that sells illegal drugs and has now been in operation for years.
My dad's rental home is across the street.
My dad's renter thinks it's hilarious when my dad says "if you want to buy drugs, I know where to get them (while indicating across the street)".
EVERYONE knows. So where do the profits go?

10:58 PM  
Blogger pedro velasquez said...

In August 1999, federal agents announced that they had broken up one of America’s twenty largest drug rings in a yearlong operation dubbed “Operation Southwest Express. sportsbook” In all, agents indicted 100 suspects, arrested 77, and seized 5,622 pounds of cocaine, 2 tons of marijuana, $1 million in cash, 2 Ferraris, a Land Rover, and 7 weapons. In the process, they disrupted a network of smugglers and dealers that were bringing drugs into the country from Mexico through El Paso and supplying several major cities in the eastern and Midwestern United States, bet nfl including Chicago, New York, and Boston. While officials consider drug busts like Operation Southwest Express crucial to America’s antidrug efforts, critics of the nation’s drug war contend that breaking up one drug ring will have virtually no impact on the sportsbook availability of drugs. Due to the great demand for illegal drugs in America—and the astronomical profits to be made by supplying them—another drug operation will quickly replace every one dismantled by the federal government. As David D. Boaz, vice president of the Cato Institute, states, http://www.enterbet.com “As long as Americans want to use drugs, and are willing to defy the law and pay high prices to do so, drug busts are futile. Other profit-seeking smugglers and dealers will always be ready to step in and take the place of those arrested.”

3:16 PM  
Blogger qingchengzhilian said...

Your blog is wonderful, I like it very much, thank you!
By the way, do you like polo shirts, which are very chic, especially the polo t shirts, I love them very much. I also like playing tennis rackets, it can keep healthy, what do you like to do?
We are the outlet of polo t shirts women, polo t shirts on sale, polo t shirts for women, polo shirts on sale, these products are best-seller in our store online.besides we also sell polo shirts men, men's polo shirt, men polo shirt, mens polo shirts, mens polo shirt and cheap polo shirts, discount polo shirts, men's polo shirts, women's polo shirts We are also the outlet of cheap tennis racket, discount tennis racket and the main product is prince tennis racquet, head tennis rackets, wilson tennis racket, babolat tennis racquet. So if you love sports, you should not miss our store, we can meet what you want, and you can find many surprise in our store

10:43 PM  
Blogger Samuel Zamora said...

NATIONAL REVIEW has attempted during its tenure as, so to speak, keeper of the conservative tablets to analyze public problems and to recommend intelligent thought.sportsbook The magazine has acknowledged a variety of positions by right-minded thinkers and analysts who sometimes reach conflicting conclusions about public policy. As recently as on the question of troops to Bosnia, there was dissent within the family from our corporate conclusion that we'd be best off staying home.For many years we have published analyses of the drug problem. An important and frequently cited essay by Professor Michael Gazzaniga (Feb. 5, 1990) brought a scientist's discipline into the picture, shedding light on matters vital to an understanding of the drug question. He wrote, for instance, about different rates of addiction, and about ambient pressures that bear on addiction. Elsewhere, Professor James Q. Wilson, now of UCLA, has written eloquently in defense of the drug war. Milton Friedman from the beginning said it would not work, and would do damage.march madnessWe have found Dr. Gazzaniga and others who have written on the subject persuasive in arguing that the weight of the evidence is against the current attempt to prohibit drugs. But NATIONAL REVIEW has not, until now, opined formally on the subject. We do so at this point. To put off a declarative judgment would be morally and intellectually weak-kneed.
Things being as they are, and people as they are, there is no way to prevent somebody, somewhere, from concluding that ``NATIONAL REVIEW favors drugs.'' We don't; we deplore their use; we urge the stiffest feasible sentences against anyone convicted of selling a drug to a minor. But that said, it is our judgment that the war on drugs has failed, that it is diverting intelligent energy away from how to deal with the problem of addiction, that it is wasting our resources, and that it is encouraging civil, judicial, and penal procedures associated with police states. We all agree on movement toward legalization, even though we may differ on just how far.We are joined in our judgment by Ethan A. Nadelmann, a scholar and researcher; Kurt Schmoke, a mayor and former prosecutor; Joseph D. McNamara, a former police chief; Robert W. Sweet, a federal judge and former prosecutor; Thomas Szasz, a psychiatrist; and Steven B. Duke, a law professor. Each has his own emphases, as one might expect. All agree that the celebrated war has failed, and that it is time to go home, and to mobilize fresh thought on the drug problem in the context of a free society.www.canadacasino.com This symposium is our contribution to such thought.

11:25 PM  
Blogger kiara said...

Costa Rica Tours
Tours Costa Rica

8:40 AM  
Blogger Bayan Ankara Escort said...

Ankara Escort, Escort Ankara, Escort Ankara Bayan
Escort Ankara, Escort Ankara Bayan, Ankara Escort Bayan
Bayan Ankara Escort, Ankara Bayan Escort, Ankara Escort Kızlar
Escort Kızlar Ankara, Escort Bayan Ankara, Escort Bayanlar Ankara
Escort Bayanlar Ankara, Ankara Bayan Escortlar, Ankara Eskort Bayan
Escort Kızlar Ankara, Ankara Escort Kadınlar, Ankara Eskort Bayanlar
Ankarada Tele Kızlar, Ankara Escort Kızlar, Ankara Eskort Bayan
Bursa Escort, Bayan Escort Bursa, Bursa Eskort Bayan
Kayseri Escort, Bayan Escort Kayseri, Kayseri Eskort Bayan
Escort Bayan Ankara
Escort Bayan
Escort Ankara
Escort Ankara Bayan

Escort Bayan Ankara,
Escort Bayan,
Ankara Escort,
Ankara Escort Bayan,
Escort Bayan Ankara,
Escort Bayan,
Escort Ankara Bayan,
Ankara Escort,
Ankara Escort Bayan,
Escort Bayan Ankara
Ankara Escort Bayan
Escort Ankara
Bayan Ankara Escort
Escort Ankara
Escort Bursa
Escort Ankara Bayan
Ankara Escort Bayan
Escort Bayan Ankara


2:32 PM  
Blogger Bayan Ankara Escort said...

Ankara Escort, Escort Ankara, Escort Ankara Bayan
Escort Ankara, Escort Ankara Bayan, Ankara Escort Bayan
Bayan Ankara Escort, Ankara Bayan Escort, Ankara Escort Kızlar
Escort Kızlar Ankara, Escort Bayan Ankara, Escort Bayanlar Ankara
Escort Bayanlar Ankara, Ankara Bayan Escortlar, Ankara Eskort Bayan
Escort Kızlar Ankara, Ankara Escort Kadınlar, Ankara Eskort Bayanlar
Ankarada Tele Kızlar, Ankara Escort Kızlar, Ankara Eskort Bayan
Bursa Escort, Bayan Escort Bursa, Bursa Eskort Bayan
Kayseri Escort, Bayan Escort Kayseri, Kayseri Eskort Bayan
Escort Bayan Ankara
Escort Bayan
Escort Ankara
Escort Ankara Bayan

Escort Bayan Ankara,
Escort Bayan,
Ankara Escort,
Ankara Escort Bayan,
Escort Bayan Ankara,
Escort Bayan,
Escort Ankara Bayan,
Ankara Escort,
Ankara Escort Bayan,
Escort Bayan Ankara
Ankara Escort Bayan
Escort Ankara
Bayan Ankara Escort
Escort Ankara
Escort Bursa
Escort Ankara Bayan
Ankara Escort Bayan
Escort Bayan Ankara

12:11 PM  
Blogger Ankara Kızlar said...

ankara escort,
escort ankara,

ankara escort,
escort ankara,

mersin escort,
izmir escort,
bursa escort,
bodrum escort,
seks hikayeler,

9:26 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Free Hit Counters
devry university