Decriminalizing Marijuana for Health, Legal and Economic Reasons

Legalize it
In this paper I intend to show that the motives for the criminalization of marijuana was not for the
public good, but were inspired by bigotry and fear, and potentially for political and monetary gains.
This paper will also show that contemporary arguments for the continued criminalization of
marijuana are based on skewed studies rather than factual information and that regulation, taxation
and responsible use are the solutions to satisfying the demands of both sides of the issue. Finally,
this paper will examine the constitutionality of marijuana criminalization and whether it should be
decriminalized on this point alone.
The use of marijuana (cannabis sativa) and its industrial component, hemp is not a modern
phenomenon; in fact its use ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
One can draw parallels between the prohibition of alcohol and the criminalization of marijuana to
see the logic behind this premise. Prohibition was championed by groups such as the Anti–Saloon
League who felt that alcohol was a blight on society and spoke out against its 'evil' effects.
Prohibition was intended to curtail crime, yet crime increased in association with the manufacture,
transport and sale of illegal alcohol and led to the birth of organized crime syndicates here in
America. Prohibition did not thwart the public's use of alcohol; it only managed to drive its
consumers underground. These scenarios are all similar to what we see today in connection with the
criminalization of marijuana.
Apart from the psychotropic aspects of marijuana, there is no dispute that it has industrial uses.
Hemp was being used in the manufacturing of rope well into the 20th century. A point could be
made that there were political and financial benefits to banning the cultivation of hemp in order to
create a demand for nylon, a new synthetic material that was being developed by DuPont, a
company owned by the affluent du Pont family. Currying favor with a family such as this obviously
could reap certain rewards politically and monetarily and this fact could have been yet another
motivation to criminalize
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

The War On Drugs And Drugs
James Gombas
10/4/15
Political Economic Thought
When President Richard Nixon called for increased federal spending in an attempt to curb the
number of drug users and the sale and importation of illicit narcotics the war on drugs began in
earnest. The war on drugs has also played a major role in politics as well as having a significant
impact on the economy. While there are many arguments in favor for the war on drugs and an equal
number of arguments against it I will attempt to show an unbiased look at the war on drugs and drug
prohibition and how it has affected society as a whole.
Since 1971 the United States government has spent $1,000,000,000,000 on the war on drugs. This is
a staggering number and shows how much money is spent ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
The massive increase in those incarcerated has also led to the growth of the prison system and in the
U.S. alone the amount spent on prisons rose 127% from 1987 to 2007. This also led to the creation
of the prison industrial complex which is a collection of private prisons. These prisons profit off of
those they incarcerate and directly benefit from the drug war and the increase in incarceration rates.
Some groups such as the DEA argue that the money spent on drug legalization is minimal compared
to the "social costs of drug abuse and addiction ." An important aspect of the war on drugs is that
while the federal budget for drug enforcement in 2009 was 14.8 billion the budget for education was
over 137.6 billion. This brings up an interesting point in that education is seen as a serious social
issue so addiction should also be looked at in the same way. When looking at the war on drugs it is
important to keep in mind that the goal is to eradicate drug abuse and henceforth create a better,
safer environment for all citizens. Lastly, the DEA makes the point that through legislation the
consumption of drugs has decreased.
The war on drugs in the U.S. is mainly a supply–side war which targets drug importers and users in
an attempt to cut the supply of illicit drugs instead of focusing on the rehabilitation of users which
would help decrease the demand for illegal

The War on Drugs is Failing Essay
The War on Drugs is Failing
"Prohibition will work great injury to the cause of temperance... for it goes beyond the bounds of
reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation and make a crime out of things
that are not a crime. A prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principle upon which our
government was founded" Abraham Lincoln
On January 16, 1920 the Eighteenth Amendment was ratified by thirty–six states and became part of
the Constitution. The intention of this new amendment was to lower alcohol consumption by
Americans. At the time each American consumed on average thirty gallons of alcohol a year.[1] This
new amendment took away the license to do business from the brewers, distillers, and the ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The War on Drugs intends to rid America of drugs, hard and soft, just as prohibition attempted to rid
America of drink. The arguments against the War on Drugs are the same arguments that persuaded
politicians sixty years ago to end Prohibition. Just as the movement to rid America of alcohol failed,
so will the War on Drugs because social engineering works no better today than it did then.
The War on Drugs has given birth to many of the modern day evils. The most widespread
repercussion of the War on Drugs is the crime rate. " In 1990, the number of people sent to state and
federal prisons for drug offenses exceeded the number of offenders sent to prison for violent
crimes.... Drug offenders currently make up 62 percent of the federal inmate population, up from 22
percent in 1980."[3] Add to this the fact that most of these prisoners are nonviolent offenders put
there under mandatory minimum sentencing laws and the explanation for why this country is
running out of prison space should be readily apparent.
The second most prevalent, as well as disheartening, result of this movement is the death of innocent
victims. The support for this result can be found in the obituary section of the daily newspaper or on
the five o'clock news. Even the smallest of towns have been afflicted with death due to drugs. Back–
alley heroin and basement–lab manufactured amphetamines present the same problem as

Position Paper-Khadijah Shabazz
Position Paper
Khadijah Shabazz
CNSL 5203
Dr. Sampson
Prairie View A&M University
9/20/2015
The legalization of drugs is one of the most controversial and debated topics of the 21st century.
There are both negative and positive reasons to legalize them as well as negative and positive
reasons to keep them prohibited.
According to LEAP, Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, drug prohibition is the true cause of
much of the social and personal damage that has historically been attributed to drug use. It is
prohibition that makes these drugs so valuable – while giving criminals a monopoly over their
supply ("Why Legalize Drugs? | LEAP").LEAP goes on to say that criminal gangs are driven by the
huge profits from this monopoly, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Antilegalization proponents also point out that drug dealers and hardcore addicts would not
suddenly become productive, law–abiding members of society (Hartnett, 2005). The antilegalization
point of view is that dealers will still be involved in crime and violence and that users will still need
to support themselves by engaging in criminal activity (Hartnett, 2005)Also, opponents of
legalization often cite statistics that show that drug prevention initiatives, drug awareness curricula
in schools, and drug treatment programs are working (Hartnett, 2005). They point to the fact that
there are fewer addicts today than there were 20 years ago (Hartnett, 2005).
An article in the Wall Street Journal, titled "Don't Legalize Drugs", discusses additional reasons why
drugs should not be legalized. Drug abuse alone cost an estimated $55 billion in 1998 (excluding
criminal justice costs), and deaths directly related to drug use have more than doubled since 1980
(Walters, 2002). Legalization, by removing penalties and reducing price, would increase drug
demand (Walters, 2002). Make something easier and cheaper to obtain, and you increase the number
of people who will try it (Walters, 2002). However that many not always be the case. Alcohol is, in
my opinion, a dangerous LEGAL drug that causes thousands of deaths per year due to alcohol
related accidents and mistakes such as DUI's. Yet although alcohol is legal not everyone buys

The War On Drugs : Illegal, Healthy Or Unhealthy And Safe...
Whether legal or illegal, healthy or unhealthy and safe or unsafe; Drugs form a very significant part
of the global society today. As the world 's drug problem persists, issues continue to haunt
communities. The US government has spent and will continue to spend billions of precious tax
dollars every year on the war against drugs. And the parties that insist that criminalizing drugs is the
way persist, however, there is much more reason to decriminalize drug use. Wilson's argument
against decriminalization is based the general belief that there is a strong likelihood of greater social
harm resulting from the legalization of drugs than from their prohibition. He also argues that the
effects of drug use an "destroy the user's humanity" and so are immoral. He only believes in the
harms of decriminalization with very little empirical basis for his conclusions.
The war on drugs has been declared so many times against the background of understanding. The
US government conducted a study in which they did the cost benefit analysis of various ways of
treating the drug problem, to find out the most cost effective way. They found not to my surprise is
that the most cost effective is prevention and treatment. This is the way one of the worst drugs,
tobacco, was handled in the past. Tobacco kills far more people than hard drugs like cocaine does
and was handled by cultural change. Through the 1980s people with more education adopted a
healthier lifestyle and stopped smoking. There was

Illegal Drugs: Should they be? Essay
There are very few people who can honestly claim that current drug policies have been a success.
Aside from being ineffective the costly current drug policy of prohibition has created a set of
unwanted consequences including; a high prison population of non–violent offenders, corruption,
violence, and whole set of health issues. Albert Einstein is quoted as saying, "Insanity: doing the
same thing over and over and expecting different results." and despite the failures of the current
policy in deterring drug use that is just what the government is choosing to do. Perhaps it's time to
consider a different approach to the drug issue. An approach which will address drug use in an
innovative way while solving the problems which prohibition has ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Furthermore according to the White House Drug Policy website the percentage of those ages 12 and
over who admit to having used illegal drugs withing the last year is 12.6%. With numbers like these
it's clear that the current drug policy is not only costly but ineffective at preventing drug use that
combined with the nation's tough drug laws has helped make the US the the world's leading jailer.
By the end of 2008 2,304,15 people inmates were incarcerated according to a December 2009 report
by the US Bureau of Justice Statistics, with drug offenders accounting for 25% of the US prison
population according to the . And with the cost to house an inmate at $35,000 a year, according to an
New York Times article by Jennifer Steinhauer that is a lot of money that could be better spent
somewhere else.
In countries with more liberal drug policy such as the Netherlands where cannabis has been
decriminalized and where drug use is seen not as a criminal issue but as a health issue, drug use is
actually much lower than the US. According to the United Nations only 5.2% of those 12 and over
in the Netherlands have used drugs in the past year. This thanks to the Netherlands approach to drug
education , which sees drug experimentation as part of normal growing up and thus aims at
providing the youth with "the most accurate information possible so they will know what they're
getting into." according to Susan T Marting. Giving them honest

Persuasive Essay : Should Drug Prohibition Be Legalized?
Drug prohibition is a law that by which governments prohibit the supply, production and possession
of substances classified as drugs, exempt is those with a license. The policy is enforced
internationally and for decades has come under constant scrutiny for its many impacting failures and
brief but futile successes. This has led to many advocating for the legalisation of drugs as a viable
solution due to its proven success in countries like Portugal. This essay will cover why prohibition
should be abolished whilst also looking at how drug legalisation can remedy the issues caused by
prohibition as well as posing an argument against legalisation to give a rounded assessment of the
issue.
Drug prohibition spawn black market corruption whilst damaging overall public health by exposing
them to a variety of drugs. Drug market participants are forced to conduct business illegally, thus
resorting to bribery and extortion of various high ranking public officials. According to (Steel, Alan,
2006), a negative spinoff from drug prohibition is the creation of an international black market
'worth over $100 billion a year'. The black market is aided by 'corruption of governments such as
Columbia' and Brazil(source) who are dominated by drug gangs and organised crime. However, the
biggest effect the black market has on the public is that the government has no control over the
purity of drugs and unregulated drugs can have dire effects. Users of low impact drugs like cannabis
are forced

Should Marijuana Be Legalized?
Almost everyone in their lifetime has been involved with a person that was addicted to drugs. Most
people, when dealing with a family member or a friend addicted to drugs, want to help the drug
addict in any way possible. However, many people's attitudes change when the drug addict is not
directly related to them. According to Department of Justice statistics, forty–eight percent of all
prisoners in federal prison were incarcerated for drug–related crimes in 2011(Carson). Therefore,
rather than being helped, drug users are being incarcerated. If our goal, as a country, is to reduce the
rate of drug use and help drug addicts receive treatment, then why are we merely incarcerating those
who use drugs? Although many people are against decriminalization of drugs because they are
afraid of how it will affect them, few people think of how decriminalization will affect drug addicts
and our country as a whole. Drugs should be decriminalized because it would benefit the economy,
drug addiction treatment, drug addicts, and increase personal freedom for all United States citizens.
As Martin states, in the early 20th century, the ideas of prohibition overtook the country. In 1914,
America first saw the government attempt to regulate the drug market with the Harrison Narcotics
tax act, which required opium and coca dealers to pay annual taxes. This law showed that we were
headed in the right direction, However, in the 1920s and 1930s, we prohibited alcohol. However,
that prohibition

Essay on War on Drugs
The so–called "War on Drugs," as declared by the Nixon administration in the signing of the
Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, marked the beginning of the
current era of mandatory minimum sentencing, racism, privatized prisons, and a powerful
constituency that profits as a result of the prohibition of drugs. Psychoactive substances have been
apart of the human experience as long as humans have walked the earth. There is little hope that
drug production will ever be curtailed, so long as there is a demand; a demand that has remained
steady even though it has been forty years since the beginning of said war. As Judge James P. Gray
from the Superior Court of Orange County has so plainly put it: "Where did this policy ... Show
One thing that must be made obvious is that the government makes money regardless of the results
that they produce. A good majority of the criminal justice system is paid with this budgeted drug
money. There has been a historical increase in judges, lawyers, police officers and the creation of
entire government organizations that directly make money as a result of the prohibition. It is not
only law enforcement side that would like to see prohibition remain intact; it is also the drug dealers
that would like the policies to remain as they are. (Harvey) Prohibition causes the handling of drugs
to become a risky business and, therefore, drives the prices up astronomically allowing for a
business that has a profit in the thousands of percent with no tax. Ricky Ross, the most infamous
crack–cocaine dealer in Los Angeles, while being interviewed in jail told the interviewer, "I became
addicted to the money and also the power too I believe" (Booth). These people will have the
opportunity to make extraordinary amounts of money so long as current prohibition stays intact.
There is clearly something wrong if both the government and drug dealers would both like to see
prohibition perpetuated.
In some cases, it so happens that the government is working both sides of the law. It has been
alleged that the CIA, with its support of the Contra resistance group in Nicaragua, has actively
participated in the importation of cocaine while being protected from prosecution as a

The United State War On Drugs
The United States government has been wasting millions of dollars each year on a worthless war
that cannot be won. This war is explained in detail by author Art Caden in their essay "Let's Be
Blunt" about the United State war on drugs. The war on drugs began in 1971 under the order of
President Richard Nixon, and it was one of the worst decisions he ever made. It has been nothing
but a waste of government funding, time, and manpower that can only be described as a dismal
failure and should be repealed or at the very least medical marijuana should be made legal. The
essay "Let's Be Blunt" was written to show the flaws and failure of the war on drugs. I nits intro the
essay takes a very pro drug legalization stance Caden states"". Early on the author compares the
current drug war to prohibition, the banning of alcohol decades ago. Caden compares the current
drug related crime to the massive amount of crime that arose during prohibition. He claims that the
bans on these substances are what cause the crime not the drug themselves. By having drugs do
illegal it results in people have to resort to using underground and dangerous methods to obtain them
which they clearly are willing to do. Next an argument is presented against the way the government
goes about fighting this war. Stating that the government focus its efforts on catching "Mr. Big" a
theoretical mastermind drug dealer responsible for the vast majority if drug sales. However such a
person does not exist. Finally

Prohibition Of The Face Of Drug Prohibition Laws
Drugs or Don't? Tied Liberty in the face of Drug Prohibition Laws
"Prohibition goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man 's appetite by
legislation and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes. A prohibition law strikes a blow at
the very principles upon which our government was founded." –Abraham Lincoln
Prohibition is a word for containment; it is an act of limiting and holds a spirit of negation. It limits
our independent and individualist choices. It is not a democratic value unless devised by the
citizens. Prohibiting something on the basis of unsure logistics and deviant arguments is not the way
a democracy thrives. There is a fine line between democracy and authoritarianism. Maybe the
governments today need to realize this fine conception!
Abstract
It has been in our history and we all have suffered through this centered decision–making!
Prohibition by the reasons of certain group of elites in the power structure is the major malice of
democracy. Drug Prohibition is one such veiled prophecy/execution that provides a disastrous
outcome. The central argument of my paper is– How modern day capitalism in all its variations
offers an explanation (negative) to the entire scenario of drug prohibition? What can be the benefits
of this entire arrangement and who are the major beneficiaries remains a crucial query. The recent
outrage in Philippines, the age old war on Drugs led by the US and the billion dollar

Drug Prohibition – The solution that never worked Essay
Countries have been making drugs illegal over the years for varieties of reasons – be it to combat a
perceived moral or health epidemic, to single out certain groups of people, or to reflect religious
influences. Even when some drugs do not present notable health dangers, governments ban them.
While there are many drugs that are unhealthy when abused, the drug policies around the world,
particularly the United States, are inconsistent and oppressive. Drug laws were supposedly created
for the good of society, but the prohibition of drugs only serves to cause problems, violence, and
unrest. Starting from a historical standpoint, we can see that past endeavors to ban substances were
often motivated by discrimination and racism. Drug ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
These deaths are due to drug wars and fights over territory between the various organized crime
groups, who get their business by trafficking drugs over the United States border. Their booming
business and death count directly depend on the prohibition of drugs to continue. Former US
narcotics officer Michael Levine worked undercover with some Colombian cocaine cartels and
talked about what he learned:
"I learned that not only did they not fear our war on drugs, they counted on it to increase the market
price and to weed out the smaller, inefficient drug dealers. They found U.S. interdiction efforts
laughable. The only U.S. action they feared was an effective demand reduction program. On one
undercover tape–recorded conversation, a top cartel chief, Jorge Roman, expressed his gratitude for
the drug war, calling it "a sham put on for the American taxpayer" that was actually "good for
business" (Lynch, 92).
Prohibition of drugs continues to allow organized crime to raise their death toll and make massive
profits. Further evidence on how prohibition can fail and give rise to crime is quite clear looking
back to the attempted prohibition of alcohol in the 1920s in the United States. The Volstead Act and
Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution banned the sale of alcohol and caused much unrest
among the citizenry of the country. Widespread criminal

Our Right to Drugs Essay example
Our Right to Drugs
You might be tempted to label Thomas Szasz, author of Our Right to Drugs, The Case for a Free
Market, a counter–culture hippie. However, this analysis couldn't be further from the truth. Szasz, a
Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry at the State University of New York Health Science Center in
Syracuse, is a major supporter of civil liberties. He sees the so–called "War on Drugs" as one of the
worst atrocities that the American Government has perpetrated on its people. Szasz contends that the
prohibition of certain drugs, including common prescription drugs, is nothing more than the
government telling the people that "father knows best". It is this paternalistic attitude that Szasz
finds so oppressive. Mr. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In this system of laissez–faire, the government has a very small role. According to Szasz, the
government should have a passive role in any market, including the market for drugs. Once the
government gives up its active role, which is represented by the "war on drugs", a free market for
drugs which Szasz proposes can be attained. As we delve into Mr. Szasz's first argument, we begin
to see major problems with the government's "War on Drugs". According to Szasz, the prohibition of
drugs is a blatant violation of human rights guaranteed to American citizens by the Constitution. In
order to prove his point, he equates drugs to personal property. According to the Constitution, every
American citizen shall have "the inalienable right to life, liberty, and property, the first two elements
resting squarely on the last." (Szasz, 1). Thus, Szasz contends that "because both our bodies and
drugs are types of property–producing, trading in, and using drugs are property rights, and drug
prohibitions constitute a deprivation of basic constitutional rights." (Szasz, 2). In other words, just
like the prohibition of alcohol required a constitutional amendment, so does the prohibition of drugs.
Without that amendment, the prohibition of drugs is in direct violation of the

War on Drugs Essay examples
I. Thesis and Literature Summary In our contemporary society, the media constantly bombards us
with horror stories about drugs like crack–cocaine. From them, and probably from no other source,
we learn that crack is immediately addictive in every case, we learn that it causes corruption, crazed
violence, and almost always leads to death. The government tells us that we are busy fighting a war
on drugs and so it gives us various iconic models to despise and detest : we learn to stereotype
inner–city minorities as being of drug–infested wastelands and we learn to "witchhunt" drug users
within our own communities under the belief that they represent moral sin and pure evil. I believe
that these titles and ideals are preposterous ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
They assert that the government has invested considerably in studies whose results could be used to
wage the perennial "war on drugs" while to politicians, that war has amounted to nothing more than
a perceptual war on poverty and urban crime. Since politicians have had little else of marketable
interest to debate over the years, this aggressive attack on drugs has existed as one of their only
colorful means by which to create debate, controversy, and campaign fuel. In other words, when
balancing the budget and maintaining an effective foreign policy became two boring to handle,
Reinarman and Levine assert that the "crack epidemic" became the focus of politicians with the
intent of luring public interest to their flashy anti–drug campaigns. Finally, in addition to the media's
excess attention on the 'war against drugs,' Reinarman and Levine make the point the constant
coverage of crack in the news media has only been counterproductive to the alleged goals of any
anti–drug program. With descriptions of the "crack high" that glorify it considerably– the
politically–charged media campaigns to fight drugs have worked somewhat ironically as huge
advertising campaigns for crack–– increasing public awareness and stimulating the interests of
venturous junkies. II. Application of Theoretical Framework While Reinarman and Levine are rather
adamant about

The Pros And Cons Of Drug Legalization
Pros and Cons of Drug Legalization
Many feel today we are losing the war on drugs. When a battle goes to the point where there is no
winner, there needs to be a re–evaluation of how to solve the problem. In the case of the war against
drugs, years of fighting have caused increased crime, overcrowding of prisons, and the wasted use
of money and resources with no results. It is now time to look at alternative methods to solve the
nation's drug problem.
Although, legalization will increase use of the drug a majority of use will be by those who already
use drugs not by new comers who might only try it once out of curiosity. Proof of this can be found
in Holland when in 1970 the government legalized the use of marijuana for adults. The legalization
of illicit drugs has proved that just because a drug is made legal it does not mean it will cause a
rapid rise and abuse by society (Friedman). However, many supporters of continuing the prohibition
of drugs believe that by legalizing drugs they will become more accessible and use will therefore
increase. They base this argument on past experiments ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
By implementing such a program the American population can use its money and resources to
combat the problem through rehabilitation and education instead of stalling the problem through the
legal system. Legalization will decrease violent crime associated with drug dealers; it will decrease
the number of users and will lower the wasteful cost, which is connected with the current system.
Such legalization will not destroy our youth in any way, because the drugs will only be accessible to
adults in the country. If we continue with our current system we will never solve the problem. Drug
dealers and addicts will continue to crowd our prisons and plague our streets with violent crime with
no hope for help and a better

The Drug Prohibition Of The United States Of America
The cohorts of drug prohibition argue that the benefits of the prohibition are self–evident and
undeniable. The basis of this assumption argument is that without prohibition the consumption of
drug would skyrocket, and therefore, lead to disastrous outcomes. However, there is no evidence on
the commonly held belief. The empirical evidence that exists does not support the notion of souring
drug consumption. For instance, in the Netherland and Switzerland, where marijuana is legalized,
the consumption rate is lower than in the United States of America, where consumption of
Marijuana is prohibited in most of the states. This study argues for the legalization of the
consumption of drugs and decriminalization of possession and use of drugs in the United States of
America.
Drugs were legal for many years before the 1914 Harrison Act. The period of massive availability of
drugs and the consumption of the same was in the 19th century (Defeis 101). For the better part of
the century morphine, cocaine, and opium were legally available at drugstores as well as grocery
stores without prescription (O 'donnell et al. 66). What is significant is that the period was not
characterized by drug–paralyzed workers or drug–crazed criminals, rather it was a period marked by
unprecedented economic development and productivity (Defeis 102).
Whereas there were many powerful organizations that called for the prohibition or suppression of
alcoholic stimulants, there were no anti–opiate organizations

Legalization of Marijuana
Legalization of Marijuana Jimmy Martin, II Saint Leo University Author Note This paper was
prepared for Drugs, Society, and Human Behavior CRM 328, taught by Dr. Pappas. Abstract With
exception to the debate surrounding the Affordable Health Care Act and the attacks on the United
States Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, public policy regarding legalization of recreational and
medical marijuana has reached a boiling point in most state legislatures. However, possession and
use of marijuana is still viewed by many as comparable to consuming an alcoholic beverage.
Regardless, it (marijuana) is still classified as a Schedule I Controlled Substance by the Drug
Enforcement Administration (DEA). Introduction After ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The poll provides an additional break–down by age, gross income, political party affiliation, and
educational level. Outside of the preconceived notion that minorities are the only ethnic group that
uses marijuana, percentages show that whites use it as equally. However, black people have the
probability of being arrested 3.73 percent more times than whites (www.aclu). Under Maryland
criminal statues, the punishment for possession of marijuana in the amount of 10g or less is 90 days
incarceration and a maximum fine of five–hundred dollars, 10g to 50lbs is 12 months of
incarceration with a maximum fine of one–thousand dollars (http://mgaleg.maryland.gov). Like any
other drug, marijuana provides the human body with a brief sense of euphoria and some
hallucination if mixed or "laced" with other drugs. Additionally, marijuana use can increase blood
pressure, irritate lungs, and promote short term brain memory. From a medical perspective,
proponents believe that marijuana could be used to treat patients suffering from diseases such as:
AIDS, cancer, multiple sclerosis, pain, glaucoma, and epilepsy
(http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org). There is also the financial aspect of legalizing "recreational"
marijuana. At the end of the first day of business, Colorado marijuana businesses netted 1 million
dollars in sales (Barasch, 2014). It is the opinion of many

Marijuana Legalization Essay
Marijuana Legalization Why is it the Best Choice for America? Marijuana, the most abused drug in
America, has had a lot of publicity recently. Marijuana has caused multiple economic problems
within the U.S. A controversial question has arisen from the increased popularity and troubles of this
drug. The question is whether or not the U.S. government should legalize marijuana possession and
sale in the country. Many Americans believe that the drug should be legalized for various reasons;
others, however, are against the legalization of the dangerous drug. While legalization has both pros
and cons, the positives of legalizing marijuana for those people over the age of twenty–one far
outweigh the negative aspects of legalization. Marijuana ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
The United States government, in order to solve the marijuana problem, needs to completely
legalize the drug and place similar regulations on marijuana as it does alcohol. It should not only be
decriminalized; decriminalization would only legalize the possession of marijuana. If the
government chose to decriminalize the substance, it would still waste millions of dollars in
prosecuting all other marijuana related crimes. Decriminalization would also fail to make the sale of
marijuana legal in the country, thus losing a product with the ability to provide the country with a
substantial source of revenue. Marijuana should be legal for sale to all individuals over the age of
twenty–one. The reason for the age restriction of twenty–one is due to the similar effects of alcohol
and marijuana. Both of these substances are mild intoxicants (Ford). The government must also
place the same sales tax on marijuana as it places on tobacco and alcohol; without this special tax,
the government's profit on the taxation of marijuana would be noticeably less. There are several
benefits which would come to the government through the legalization

Drug War On Drugs, By Jeffery A. Miron
In recent years, laws concerning marijuana has seen some dramatic and controversial changes. A
British journalist named Johann Hari decided he try to get to the roots of the drug war to find
answers to help those affected by the drug war which he loved. He wrote the book 'Chasing the
Scream The first and Last Days of The War on Drugs', which condensed all the results of his
research. This book has received much praise since its publishing and makes many valid points
concerning the drug war. Another book titled, Drug War Crimes the Consequences of Prohibition, by
Jeffery A. Miron, discusses and compares the benefits and detriment of prohibition of alcohol with
prohibition of drugs. These two books capture many important views and evidence that ... Show
has no problem distributing harmful substances such as tobacco and alcohol, which have little to
none positive health benefits is astonishing. There is no record in the history of the entire world,
where a person has overdosed and died from marijuana alone. One could even say marijuana heals
more people than it actually kills. This is why marijuana should have never been placed within a
category of heroin which has ruin a countless number of lives. Keeping marijuana illegal only will
make things worse not any better. Children in low income families and rundown neighborhoods
look up to people dealing drugs more than hard working citizens. They would rather follow the
actions of the dealers than work a nine to five because of the glitz and glamor that drug dealers
possess. By legalizing and taking control over the marijuana industry the black market for marijuana
will begin to shrink. Violence and arrests for marijuana would also begin to decline since there'd no
longer be a strong incentive to rob or kill over something that could be purchased at the store. Most
of the stigma of violence related to marijuana comes from the lifestyle that comes with illegal drug
dealing. Having an illegal market for marijuana only makes the gangs and black market dealers
better off. This is probably the reason gangsters were originally for prohibition and even help
enforce it against their competition. In a legal system, tax revenue and other money produced from
sales

Legalization Of Marijuana Essay
What is the problem? In the past decades, one of the most discussed problems in the country has
been whether or not the US government should approve the legalization of marijuana. Since the
prohibition of marijuana in the 1930s, there have been more problems than solutions about the topic.
There is no evidence that the prohibition of marijuana has decreased the use of the drug, and
according to the NORML (Working to reform marijuana laws), banning marijuana has not been very
effective since over 20 million of citizens have been charged with marijuana infractions since 1965
(NORML). One of the most important problems this country is facing about marijuana being illegal
is the amount of money that the government spends trying to control the ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
It is common to hear opinions about the pros and cons of legalizing marijuana. Many people will
benefit from this policy, and there are many other important reasons why passing this policy
beneficial for the country. Also, instead of costing money to the government, it will be a form of
income. Like I mention before, if the country stops the prohibition of marijuana and replace it with a
system of legal regulation, we can use Colorado as an example: "The Colorado Department of
Revenue in June collected slightly more in tax revenue than the month before, according to its
recent sales report. The state collected $4,775,679 from marijuana–related sales tax in June 2014, up
from $4,511,668 collected in May 2014. To date, Colorado has collected $25,307,067 in pot taxes.
Officials projected the state would collect $60 to $70 million by the end of the fiscal year (June
2015)" If the policy gets passed, all the income that is collected from taxing marijuana can be used
towards higher education. There are many students with high potential who cannot afford college,
and this can be a great opportunity to develop an educated society. Health is another area where the
money would be used. Since there is not enough research on the effects of marijuana on the human
body, this income can help to pay for research to create new affordable and quality

The Libertarian Argument Analysis
In the United States institutionalized prohibition–based cannabis policies defy widely accepted
societal values, delegitimizing the state's authority of law, neglecting its responsibility to respect
individual free will and ultimately, the right of self–determination. These unjustified policies take a
heavy financial and social toll on society, forcing law enforcement to spend time and money to
arrest a majority of non–violent, low level–offenders. In addition, marijuana policies and
enforcement have been seen as inherently biased and discriminatory. Not only that, but the medical
applications of cannabis are increasingly becoming recognized and accepted as a standard in terms
of treating diseases and relieving physical or mental ailments. Furthermore, statistics have shown
that legalization leads to a decreased use of marijuana among teens and minors. Dollar wise,
cannabis ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Political activist and Libertarian representative J. Wilson comments on this saying "We believe that
people own their own bodies and what they choose to put in them. That also means people own the
products of their labor"(The Libertarian Argument for Legalizing Marijuana 2015). Accordingly,
this accounts for why the state should have no say to arbitrarily decide what people can and can't
consume. Prohibition must be measured against the deprivation of personal freedom. Likewise, the
United States has an obligation to the people to respect the right of self determination and individual
free will. In this case, self ownership prevails over government regulation in regards to prohibition–
based cannabis policies. Hence, reform is necessary so the fundamental of self ownership isn't
denied to individuals. The principles of human freedom should be respected by the federal

Essay about Criminal Law and The War on Drugs
Criminal Law and The War on Drugs
"These records of wars, intrigues, factions, and revolutions, are so many collections of experiments,
by which the politician or moral philosopher fixes the principles of his science, in the same manner
as the physician or natural philosopher becomes acquainted with the nature of plants, minerals, and
other external objects, by the experiments which he forms concerning them." (David Hume.)2
"Our long armed and hairy ancestors had no idea of redress beyond vengeance, or of justice beyond
mere individual reprisal."3
To determine what constitutes criminal law, is, as one learned judge has opined, "a work of art, it is
something that may be easier to recognize than define ..."4 ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
That effect may be in relation to social, economic or political interests; and the legislature has had in
mind to suppress the evil or to safeguard the interest threatened."8
And further, it cannot be "neither a static catalogue of offences nor order of sanctions. The evolving
and transforming types and patterns of social and economic activities are constantly calling for new
penal controls and limitations and that new modes of enforcement and punishment adapted to the
changing conditions are not to be taken as being equally within the ambit of parliamentary power is,
in my opinion, not seriously arguable."9
In the relatively recent case of RJR – Macdonald v. Canada (1995), the Supreme Court of Canada, it
was determined that the exercise of the power to make an act a criminal one, a test is to be applied;
one "of substance, not form."10 To be fully fledged criminal law, the act prohibited "must pose a
significant, grave and serious risk of harm to public health, morality, safety or security ..."
And, so, how does this established judicial view apply to the business of keeping in check those
substances which may prove to be harmful to the individuals who misuse them?
As to the nature of the various illegitimate drugs and their effect on human beings –– well, I shall
have to leave that to the medical doctors; but, I just simply wonder, what is so wrong with

The War On Drugs And Its Effects On Society
The War on Drugs is a deep–rooted controversial campaign of prohibition and military aid that has
been disputed for many years. There are constant debates as to whether there will ever be a viable
solution to the problem. However, as we continue to pursue the "war on drugs," it has become
increasingly evident that "winning" the war seems to be an impossible task. Drug prohibition and
the undertaking of the war on drugs have stirred much controversy over its moral and logical
implications. While there are many drugs that exist that are unhealthy when abused, it has become
apparent that the drug policies in the United States, as well as many parts of the world, are
inconsistent and oppressive. Ironically, drug laws were initially created for the good of society, but it
has become increasingly clear that drug laws and our undertaking of the drug war have only served
to cause problems. The current war on drugs has led to devastating effects on society both
economically and socially. Violence and corruption have subjugated throughout the United States,
Mexico and many other parts of the world. Additionally, drug prohibition efforts have had very little
impact on the supply of illegal drugs and have had little to no success in reducing the demand for
illegal drugs. The war on drugs, which is fueled by corruption and propaganda, needs to come to an
end for the betterment of society. Drug prohibition has not always been accepted in society as it is
today. In fact, there

Michael Huemer's Arguments Against Prohibition
Michael Huemer addresses two arguments that are presented by those in favor of drug regulation
and prohibition. The first argument for the enforcement of drug control is that drugs are known to
negatively affect those who use them, many believe that the government should limit self–harming
activities in society and as such the government should prohibit said drugs because self–harming
things are not societally beneficial. Huemer addresses this argument by outlining problems such as
the fact that many other things are harmful but not prohibited by the government. The second
argument for drug prohibition is the idea that drug use negatively affects others related to users, and
being that the government has a job to restrict harm befalling others,

Essay about Against the War On Drugs in America
The Case Against America's War on Drugs
The legal prohibition on most psychoactive drugs has been in place in this country for the better part
of a century. This policy of prohibition, however, has never been based on reason or careful
consideration, but on the paranoia of a small segment of society and the indifferent willingness of
the majority to accept this vocal minority's claims without question. Outlawing any use of a
particular drug is a violation of the basic freedom of individuals to act as they please in their private
lives. However, even if one does not accept this belief, an objective analysis of the United States'
history of prohibition clearly shows that attempts to enforce this policy have done far more harm
than good, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
First of all, the Harrison act was only intended to regulate the sale of these drugs, making them
available over the counter in small doses and in larger doses with a doctor's prescription. Only later
did the courts and law enforcement interpret this law as a prohibition. Reasons for the law included
the association of opium with the widely despised Chinese–American community and lobbying by
medical and pharmaceutical associations who sought a monopoly on the sale of narcotics, but the
primary concern was to meet international obligations created by the new international drug control
treaty. Marijuana was not banned until 1937, but no medical testimony was presented to congress at
this time. Thus prohibition of these drugs occurred with little deliberation and with little rational
justification (Ostrowski).
Alcohol prohibition, the "noble experiment" began in 1918. Few, if any, would deny that this
experiment was a disaster. I will discuss the details of this experiment throughout the paper as it is
relevant to the current war on drugs, but suffice to say that prohibition utterly failed to curb alcohol
consumption while creating a black market for liquor which was dominated by violent criminals,
and encouraging the consumption of hard liquor which was not subject to any legal quality controls.
Alcohol prohibition was repealed in 1933.
The Argument for Legalization
Public fears that drug use poses a real threat to society and the general stigma attached to

Prohibition Of Marijuana, Heroin, And Other Drugs
It is also possible that drug users are irrational decision makers and might not understand the
adverse long–term effects and addictive properties. Prohibition should reduce demand through legal
penalties; however, since not all drug users are rational choice makers, demand can increase by
creating a "forbidden fruit" effect. The consequences of increased use add to the complexity and
costs of enforcement on both drug users and the general population. Drug users, trying to avoid the
legal consequences of their use, often times interact with non–users in ways that are harmful and
costly. Additionally, non–users are also impacted by increased taxes to pay for the enforcement, by
regulations to check for drugs that take time and are inconvenient, and by becoming innocent
bystanders that can get caught in the middle of attempted arrests, often with deadly affects.
The long federal experiment in prohibition of marijuana, cocaine, heroin, and other drugs has given
us unprecedented crime and corruption combined with a manifest failure to stop the use of drugs or
reduce their availability to children. The factor that determines the amount of violence created by
prohibition is the level of enforcement. There are two main reasons for this. One, black markets only
form when the enforcement is very strict and, two, increasingly strict enforcement leads to violence
both in making arrests and as competing suppliers seek to capture market share. The violence not
only impacts those

Arguments For Drug Reform Essay
The argument over drug reform and the current prohibition has been going on for years. It seems to
be an argument between a wise parent and a young teenager, but as generations change more and
more of the parents seem to switch sides. While prohibitionists say the mainstream drugs like
cocaine, heroin, LSD, and marijuana are harmful and immoral, legalizers argue the opposite
(Rachels 223). While they are both valid and interesting arguments the drugs named above still
remain illegal. Many organizations and respected citizens have come to America's attention in their
support for drug reform or complete legalization of certain drugs. These people range from normal
citizens who support the recreational use of marijuana to judges and ex– law ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
Some prohibitionists just believe that drugs are immoral. An extremely outspoken opponent of
decriminalizing drugs is William J. Bennett who said, "Law enforcement is not a political option or
a policy question; it is a moral imperative" (Gottfried 76). Prohibitionists also believe if drugs were
made legal they would be cheaper and more readily available and they are afraid that children could
be at risk (Gottfried 77).
Citizens who are for the reform of marijuana or any drug have obvious opposite feelings towards the
previous statements. First of all citizens for drug reform state that although marijuana causes
adverse health effects so do many other activities that are perfectly legal. Should the government
outlaw alcohol, tobacco, and having unprotected and promiscuous sex (Rachels 224)? Also, the
claim that drugs cause harm to family and friends can be rebutted with the fact that people are
harmful to family and friends without the influence of drugs (Rachels 228–229). Alcohol is a
completely legal drug and many people are killed in car accidents involving drunk drivers, yet
alcohol is still not outlawed. In no way am I condoning driving under the influence, but it is a
thought provoking argument. A great argument made by supporters of drug reform is a question
posed by Michael Huemer. He says "is it unjust for the state to punish people without having a good
reason for doing so?" (Rachels 229). With valid

Should The United States Legalize Drug Drugs?
Should the United States Legalize or Decriminalize Drugs? I am certain in my belief that most
students who have attended any university in the US have in one way or another been around drugs.
However, whether or not they partook in them is debatable. They have more than likely made a
decision: to do the drug, or not to do the drug. If they are like me, they did not do the drug, but
continued to socialize with those that did partake. If they are not like me, they may have taken the
drug and continued to socialize with those they are around. Drugs have become a large part of
college culture, and more ultimately, human culture. The reasons vary as much as the reasons why
people personally choose to partake in the drug of their choice. Peter De Marneffe states in his
article "Decriminalize, Don't Legalize", that "people use drugs because they enjoy them; they find
them fun and relaxing. If it is easier, safer, and less expensive to do something fun and relaxing,
more people will do it and do it more often" (De Marneffe, 200). Currently, the US is dealing with
drug prohibition (War on Drugs) which has become a topic of hefty discussion. As David Boaz
states in his article "Drug–Free America or Free America?", political entities have attempted to stop
the use of various drugs since drugs were first used. He goes on to say the most familiar example to
the American people is the prohibition of alcohol (Boaz, 194). In this position paper, I will do the
following: I will define

Against Prohibition Of Marijuana
They're are many people in the states that are for and against the prohibition of marijuana. The
people who are for the prohibition of marijuana, they beileve that the drug causes loss of brain cells
and will have the negative impact of your health. The other side of the argument is that it's not
harmful as other illegal drugs and can be useful in curing or stopping fatal disease from killing you.
Where I fall in this spectrum is against the prohibition of marijuana. One of the main reason I'm
against the prohibition is because of the medical uses. Examples of marijuana for medical uses are
to treat and prevent glaucoma, can prevent epileptic seizures, and prevent cancer from spreading to
name a few. In the article "Why I changed my mind on

Marijuana Legalization Why is it the Best Choice for America?
Marijuana, the most abused drug in America, has had a lot of publicity recently. Marijuana has
caused multiple economic problems within the U.S. A controversial question has arisen from the
increased popularity and troubles of this drug. The question is whether or not the U.S. government
should legalize marijuana possession and sale in the country. Many Americans believe that the drug
should be legalized for various reasons; others, however, are against the legalization of the
dangerous drug. While legalization has both pros and cons, the positives of legalizing marijuana for
those people over the age of twenty–one far outweigh the negative aspects of legalization.
Marijuana is an emergent problem in the United States; the main reasons ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The United States government, in order to solve the marijuana problem, needs to completely
legalize the drug and place similar regulations on marijuana as it does alcohol. It should not only be
decriminalized; decriminalization would only legalize the possession of marijuana. If the
government chose to decriminalize the substance, it would still waste millions of dollars in
prosecuting all other marijuana related crimes. Decriminalization would also fail to make the sale of
marijuana legal in the country, thus losing a product with the ability to provide the country with a
substantial source of revenue. Marijuana should be legal for sale to all individuals over the age of
twenty–one. The reason for the age restriction of twenty–one is due to the similar effects of alcohol
and marijuana. Both of these substances are mild intoxicants (Ford). The government must also
place the same sales tax on marijuana as it places on tobacco and alcohol; without this special tax,
the government's profit on the taxation of marijuana would be noticeably less. There are several
benefits which would come to the government through the legalization of marijuana. These benefits
range from economic profit to

Isaac Campos' Book, Home Grown, about Mexico's Use of...
Isaac Campos wrote this book in order to provide a background history of Mexico's use of
marijuana and the effect it had in Mexican society. He displays marijuana's extent both, socially and
politically. He scripted his book to carry the reader from the arrival of cannabis (would later be
referred to as marijuana) in Mexico through the substance's prohibition in 1920. With this book, he
attempts to "decipher the psychoactive riddle of cannabis in nineteenth and early twentieth century
Mexico" (p.8). The "psychoactive riddle" is the way the drug, set, and setting are imposed on the
resulting influence of marijuana. Home Grown is significant in understanding the War on Drugs and
the impact marijuana has had on society in North America. It provided history of notable events due
to the production and prohibition of the drug ranging from its introduction until the 1920s when it
was banned. Campos argued that the negative stereotypes of marijuana, often thought to have
originated in the United States, actually originated in Mexico as a way to control the use of the drug.
Citizens of Mexico related the drug to causing the users to go mad, hence the reason of the term
"Reefer Madness." Campos presented a series of questions in his introduction that he used to build
his argument. Were the stereotypical effects really caused by the use of marijuana? Why were the
stereotypes believed so easily? Why did the media not investigate into the stereotypes? How and
where did the

War On Drugs : Pros, And Consequences Of The War On Drugs
War on Drugs
Christina Echeverry
October 2017
ALC Class 18–002
War on Drugs
Introduction
In 1971, President Nixon created the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of
1970 commonly known as the War on Drugs. The war on drugs was implemented to combat
production, distribution, and consumption of illegal drugs (Olaya & Angel, 2017). In 2007, law
enforcement officers made approximately two million drug arrests in the United States (Potter,
2014). Supporters state that the war on drugs was successful because it lowered the amount of drug
users in the United States, created a deterrence in crime, as well as it provided stability in areas that
were volatile and impoverished. On the other hand, critics of the war on drugs argue that the war on
drugs did not diminish crime rather it created an international drug enterprise. In addition, critics
would debate the misallocation of resources and funds and it lead to an increase of crime and
overcrowded prisons.
War on drugs successes
To start, the war on drugs effectively decreased the amount of drug users, which are the basis of the
entire campaign; to ban drugs and its use. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services, 14.8 million Americans were drug users, compared to 25 million users in 1979 since the
implementation of the war on drugs. The amount of drug users was decreased due to awareness,
tougher laws, and the reprisal that is issued when the war on drugs law is violated (9

It's Time to Make Drugs Legal for Personal Use Essay
It's Time to Make Drugs Legal for Personal Use
Drugs are such a controversy and people have such strong opinions about whether they should be
legal or illegal. I don't have a strong opinion on this topic; I'm easily swayed. For the most part
though, I think that they should be legalized because people do it anyways and if they were legal the
government could regulate their use and sale more, the government should be receiving the profits
of the drug business rather than dealers, marijuana has most of the same effects as cigarettes, and it's
been proven over and over how prohibition doesn't seem to work.
Each year, the government wastes $20 billion dollars on the war against drugs, but it doesn't seem to
do any good (Liberty For ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The most important thing for me is that people do it anyways; they always have and most likely
always will. "Drug prohibition has not stopped 30 million people from trying cocaine and 60 million
people from trying marijuana. Prohibition also has not stopped the number of heroin users from
increasing by 150% and the number of cocaine users from increasing by 10,000%. Moreover,
prohibition has not kept drugs out of the hands of children: in 1988 54% of high school seniors
admitted to having tried illicit drugs; 88% said it was fairly easy or very easy to obtain marijuana:
and 54% said the same about cocaine" (Boaz 229). Nobody can deny these facts, and these are even
facts from the times where the war on drugs was passing stricter laws. None of the laws seemed to
make a difference accept if you get caught with drugs, you have a longer sentence. The sentence for
marijuana possession usually averages longer than a murder sentence. I really don't think it's worse
to have marijuana than kill another human being; that doesn't even begin to make sense to me.
I think that, like many other things in history, drugs will someday be legal. I mean coffee, gin, and
tobacco all used to be illegal, but now all are in regular use in the United States. The Netherlands,
who is the only country I know to legalize marijuana, surprisingly has a lower percentage of 10th
graders who have tried marijuana when compared to the United States. Maybe people wouldn't do it

The Drug War : An Oxymoron
The Drug War: An Oxymoron
What if I told you that a crusade against narcotics has resulted in an overdose epidemic? This has
been exactly what the United States Drug War has done. The War on Drugs is considered to have
started in 1914 with the ban on opium and cocaine. Prohibition of alcohol in the 1920s is considered
to be an important chapter of the War on Drugs. But it was not until June 1971 that President Nixon
officially declared a "war on drugs." He enforced this by drastically expanding federal drug control
agencies and mandatory minimum sentencing for those arrested for drug crimes. Defenders of the
drug war assert that zealous enforcement is the correct way of dealing with America's drug dilemma.
However, it has only accomplished increasing the prison population by putting nonviolent offenders
behind bars. It has also done nothing to lessen the overdose crisis. This catastrophic, failing war has
to meet its end, as it is having many tragic effects such as the production of stronger, deadlier drugs,
increased drug use, and has been wildly ineffectual throughout history.
To begin, the drug war has led to the production and wide accessibility of much stronger and
deadlier drugs. This has been observed throughout the past century with every wave of prohibition.
For example, Johann Hari, journalist for the LA Times, explains that before Prohibition in the 1920s,
beer and wine were the most popular form of alcohol, the same being true after Prohibition ended.
During that

The War On Drugs Ruins The Economy
Nguyen 1
Linh Nguyen
LSP 200
Professor Ashley Bohrer
Final Paper
November 21, 2015
The War on Drugs Ruins the Economy
The global War on Drugs has existed for four decades as a movement of prohibition of drugs with
military intervention with the aim to decrease the illegal drug trade. Nevertheless, instead of
avoiding growing of drug supply and demand, the war brings about many unintentional
consequences that include the creation of a profitable illicit market and mass incarceration. This
criminal market caused variety of negative impacts on the economy. In this paper, I will argue that
the War on Drugs is costing billions of tax dollars and a misuse of government budget. After forty
years since the War on Drugs began, the U.S government has spent up to one trillion dollars of
taxpayers'money on mass incarceration, drug law enforcement and prohibition. The drug war caused
the prison population to increase significantly. According to Richard Branson in his article, "War on
drugs a trillion–dollar failure", America leads the world in the number of incarcerated citizens, 2.3
millions prisoners and more than a half of a million are serving sentences for drug offense. People of
color with a minor or non–violent drug offense are the main victims of the drug war. Increasing
imprisonment and extensive prison sentences is the burden of the economy. The government spends
a lot of money on arresting and incarcerating of millions of people each year. According to the
report "State

Legalize drugs Essay example
Such an issue stirs up moral and religious beliefs; beliefs that are contrary to what America should
"believe". However, such a debate has been apparent in the American marketplace of
ideas before with the prohibition of alcohol in the 1920's. With the illegality of alcohol the mafia
could produce liquor and therefore had considerable control over those who wanted their substance
and service. The role that the mafia played in the 1920's has transformed into the corner drug dealers
and drug cartel of the 1990's. The justification that legalized alcohol under Amendment 21 in 1933
should also legalize drugs in 1996.
With the legalization of drugs a decrease in deaths related to drug deals would occur and also the
price would ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Those who want to be controlled by a substance should have every right to do so, because this right
has equal jurisdiction as any other human right that has emerged from the sea of oppression and
persecuted freedoms. Á Šthe deaths resulting in the acquiring of alcohol have all but disappeared.
When all non©medical dealings in alcohol were prohibited in the United States in 1919, the results
were very similar to today's drug trade. Alcohol oÔ quality was brewed illicitly; importers were
considered criminals and behaved as such; protection rackets, bribes and gang warfare organized
crime in the United States. (Boaz, p.118) The enforcement budget rose from $7 million in 1921 to
$15 million in 1930©©$108 million in 1988 dollars. In 1926, the Senate Judiciary Committee
produced a 1,650©page report evaluating enforcement efforts and proposing reforms.
In 1927, the Bureau of Prohibition was created to streamline enforcement efforts, and agents were
brought under civil service protection to eliminate corruption and improve professionalism. In that
same year, President Hoover appointed a blue©ribbon commission to evaluate enforcement efforts
and recommend reforms. Three years later Prohibition was over and alcohol was legalized.(Boaz,
pps.49©50) Immediately, the bootlegger stopped running around the streets supplying illicit
contraband. People stopped worrying about drunks mugging them in the streets or

The War On Drugs And Its Effects On The United States
In 2014 1,297,348 people were arrested for non–violent drug charges (drug policy, 2015). These
people's lives are now forever changed because of a mistake they made. This mistake is continually
made every single day and Americans are being punished in extreme ways for a non violent crime.
The United States needs to decimalize all drugs because the drug war is costly, causes high
incarceration rates, and isn't effective as European drug solutions. In the 20th century, the United
States would begin a disastrous campaign called the War on Drugs, this started the US on a spiral
that would harm us all. Since the war on drugs would be created under President Richard Nixon, the
federal drug budget has been raised from millions in the 1970's to ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The money raised from taxing the drugs could be used to help train these new agents in their new
fields. The United States has the world's largest incarceration rate 2,224,400 (1 per 111 adults)
which is the largest in the world (drug policy, 2015). In 2013 over 50% of the federal prison
population and 16% of the state prison population were imprisoned for trafficking, possession, or
other drug crimes (drugwarfacts, 2016). Many of these people in prison should not be there due to
many of their charges being non–violent. Harm principal. While these adults are in prison their
families are suffering and are turning towards crime do to having no adult guidance. 71% of high
school dropouts come from fatherless homes (thefatherlessgeneration, 2010). Without an education,
crime will soon follow these teenagers. Portugal is the perfect example of why the drug war should
end, in 2001 Portugal was a country with a drug problem in Europe with over 1% of its population
having a heroin addiction (Zeeshan, 2015) and the president decided to take action by
decriminalizing all drugs. How Portugal handles its citizens with drug problems is very interesting
and thought out. If you are caught with a small supply of drugs you are sent to a commission for the
Dissuasion of Drug addiction. Here social workers, lawyers, and medical professionals will help you
with treatment rather than jail time. Before taking action Portugal had over 40 HIV

Arguments Against The Drug War
Each day it seems America slips further away from the true meaning of individual liberty. I'm sure
you have been raised to think that you grew up in the land of the free, but I question what the true
definition of freedom is. Now don't get me wrong, I agree that other countries may not have as much
freedom as we do in America but that's not my argument. The problem is that "The land of the free"
isn't so free anymore. It seems we go against the constitution more often every year. The drug war is
a great example of us loosening our grips on the constitution because of the precise fact that it takes
away individual liberty. Using drugs is most certainly not anything I would advise, but if it was my
choice to make for you then you wouldn't truly ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
They believe that law enforcement using their powers is making America more drug free. The facts
prove this to be incorrect though, because it is doing everything except for what it was created to do.
Since the day that the drug war began drug use has expanded steadily, which is the complete
opposite of its purpose. What people fail to realize is that others will use drugs regardless of if it is
legal or not. During the 1920's the alcohol prohibition brought similar outcomes as the drug war is.
It's causing violence, lawlessness, gangs, brutality and corruption. The reasoning for the violence
was not that selling or making alcohol was unsafe, but was ultimately caused by the brutal black
market, which sent profits through the roof. As Congressmen Ron Paul once stated "The only
beneficiaries are the drug barons, smugglers and dealers who enjoy exorbitant profits, and those
dark forces in government who try to further suppress our freedoms under the excuse of fighting the
war against drugs." Pablo Escobar's son stated that the United States Government used to work with
Pablo. They worked with him by smuggling more drugs into America and buying or selling drugs to
and from Pablo himself. That is just one man's word but there have been multiple times when the
CIA has been called out in making or selling cocaine. If the drug war were working there wouldn't
be a large amount of people using drugs and there wouldn't be people committing crimes to get the
drugs, because if it were working then the country would be drug free. I iterate that people still use
drugs and the drug war has done nothing but create violence, send people to jail and ruin
opportunities for the person. According to Mona Chalabi, in "a study published in the British
Medical Journal in 2013 found that despite efforts to limit the supply of drugs, since the

Legalizing Marijuana Essay
Legalizing Marijuana
Drugs are a major influential force in our country today. The problem has gotten so out of hand that
many options are being considered to control it or even solve it. Ending the drug war seems to be a
bit impossible. The war on drugs seems to be accomplishing a lot but this is not true. Different
options need to be considered. Legalization is an option that hasn't gotten a chance but should be
given one. Although many people feel that legalizing marijuana would increase the amount of use,
marijuana should be legalized because it will reduce the great amounts of money spent on
enforcement and it will increase our country's revenue. There are also many benefits that can be
uncovered to help people if legalization of ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
. Forty percent of the people in federal prison are drug law violators" (Long 114). One can only
imagine what this figure would be like today. Too much money is wasted on a cause that seems to
be no end to. "In 1989, a Republican county executive of Mercer County N.J. estimated that it
would cost him as much as 1 billion dollars to build the jail space needed to house all the hard–core
drug users in Trenton alone" (Long 128). All of this money could be used on better things.
By lifting the ban on marijuana use and treating it like other drugs such as tobacco and alcohol, the
nation would gain immediate and long–term benefits. This change in the law would greatly improve
the quality of life for many people. Victims of glaucoma and those needing antinausea treatment, for
example, would find marijuana easily available. Also, the cloud of suspicion would disappear, and
doctors could get on with investigating marijuana's medical uses without fear of controversy. In the
essay, "Drugs", Vidal states, " Nevertheless many drugs are bad for certain people to take and they
should be told why in a sensible way" (321–322). It might become possible to discuss the dangers of
marijuana use without getting caught up in a policy debate..
Meanwhile, the black market would disappear overnight. Some arrangement would be made to
license the production of marijuana cigarettes. Thousands of dealers would be put out of business,
and a secret part of the economy would come

Decriminalizing Marijuana for Health, Legal and Economic Reasons

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Christina Padilla

More from Christina Padilla (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Decriminalizing Marijuana for Health, Legal and Economic Reasons