The War on Drugs here in America has been a stable talking point in politics for at least the last 30 years. And our view on how the war is being handled has been changing every year also. To understand why the current view of the War on Drugs is as it is today, one must look at the history of this war and its effects on the citizens. At the start of the twentieth century, there weren’t any nationwide laws stating that drugs were illegal. There were some state laws that made certain drugs illegal, but those laws were mainly targeting a certain group of individuals like the anti-opium laws that were directed at Chinese immigrants. The first big nationwide law on drug use was passed in 1937 called the Marijuana Tax act, which was developed to tax it to stop the use and distribution of it. The next big law to be passed would be in 1951. The Boggs Act established mandatory minimum federal sentences for possession of certain drugs, such as marijuana, cocaine, and other opiates. Which in 1956 they would increase the sentences with the Narcotic Control Act. While these bills were being enacted into law, the president at the time, Eisenhower established the U.S. Interdepartmental Committee on Narcotics, where in by being the first president to call to arms a war on drugs. The War on Drugs wasn’t officially declared until President Nixon declared drugs as public “enemy number one” in a speech in 1971, which a year earlier the government passed the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act that made government take a bigger role in drug enforcement. Nixon not only declared War on Drugs here in the home front, but also overseas, for in Vietnam, soldiers were seen getting highly addicted to heroin, which lead to an operation called Golden Flow which started urine analysis of all returning serviceman that made it so if they wanted to come home, they had to be drug free. President Nixon also set up a “super agency” to handle all the aspects of drug enforcement; he created the Drug Enforcement Administration. With the DEA created and laws punishing drug abuse, the War on Drugs came into full effect. Not only did we see a rise in the enforcement of drug laws, but also an increase in programs that tried to prevent drug abuse at an early age. The most widely known of these programs or campaigns would be Nancy Reagans “Just Say No” campaign that started in 1982 and the DARE drug education programs. With the start of this war, the amount of people arrested for drug crimes be it distribution or even simple possession have increased dramatically. For example between 1973 and 1983 the federal prison population was around 660,800, but then just 10 years later, with more stricter laws in drug enforcement, the population doubled to 1,408,685 in 1993. This trend didn’t stop there with the population by the end of 1998 with around 1.8 million prisoners. With the latest statistics we can see that there are over 501,500 drug offenders alone in the federal prison population for just simple drug crimes in 2011, not even counting the thousands on probation and parole. The War on Drugs has certainly left a mark on modern U.S. culture and is still continuing to this day. Though there have been a rise in people against the war, it is still considered going on strong and still doing what it has intended to do from the start. That of which is prosecute heavily people associated with drugs and drug culture.
Bibliography:
Federal Fact Sheet http://sentencingproject.org/doc/publications/inc_Trends_in_Corrections_Fact_sheet.pdf Why Our Drug Laws Have Failed: A Judicial Indictment Of War On Drugs By James Gray
Timeline of the War on Drugs http://eyachallengeandchange.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/71323754/History%20of%20the%20War%20on%20Drugs%20-%20War%20on%20Drugs%20History%20and%20Timeline.pdf Part 2 1. The legal standard for marijuana usage in Holland is that it is still illegal, but just considered a schedule 2 drug, meaning leaner penalties that make it so it is not really enforced. On the other hand, in Colorado it is completely legal for use in public and personal use. Holland also has rules that state it is legal to sell pot from “coffee shops” but these coffee shops can only get their weed illegally. 2. The coffee shop system in Holland states that marijuana can be sold in designated shops to anyone as long as they are willing to pay. It is considered semi legal for it is possible for the shops to sell the weed, but how they obtain their product is illegal for it is still illegal to grow marijuana. Therefore the large scale pot productions to supply the coffee shops are unregulated and taxed by the government. I think if America followed suit with the coffee shop system that is identical to Holland’s, it would be just as confusing here. For since it would be legal to by, the production would still be illegal, therefor the big producers of weed (i.e. Cartels) would still be in business and the government would still have to combat them and not earn the profits of receiving taxation from the sell and distribution of the pot. 3. The issue of drug tourism in Holland is that of a negative one for local towns but also a positive. For the local people had to deal with the tourists coming in, buying the weed, and then pretty much dirtying up the streets, but the city as a whole is still seeing profits from the sales. Some towns however had set up laws that make it illegal for the coffee shops’ to sell to non-locals, but since that is in place, street dealers have gone into the public to push their sales onto just everyone to try to make a profit. 4. The drug policy in Portugal is one that is completely different from everywhere else in the world. Portugal had decriminalized the use of all drugs but still had distribution and manufacture of it illegal. Portugal however had a slight tweak though in the policy, stating that drug use does not fall under the jurisdiction of law enforcement, but instead the Ministry of Health is in control of drug policy. Drug use under this law is considered exclusively a health issue. 5. I personally would like the policy that Portugal has been implemented here in the U.S. I feel as though the results would be even more drastic here for a large amount of people in prison are there just for drug crimes, so we would probably see a dramatic decrease in the prison population, and ones who truly need help from drug abuse would actually get medical help rather than sit in prisons or jails. 6. The three main models that exist out there for drug policy are the Holland model, Portugal model, and Uruguay model. The Holland model leads to a largely decreased punishment associated with drug use, leading to some being decriminalized. The Portugal model that has drug policy completely removed from criminal justice and now is a medical issue. While the Uruguay model is that of complete decriminalization of drugs. 7. John Hawkins five reasons for why marijuana uses should be illegal are as follows: a. It is extremely addictive: I however do not believe this to be the case though, for Hawkins even says the people who are addicted are predisposed to being addicted, which means they can really be addicted to anything, so with this reasoning why should we stop at just marijuana then? b. The Marijuana experiment in Amsterdam hasn’t really worked out: this I disagree with a little less than the one above, but is still disagree with this, for yes there is the alarm that children are getting into it, but the rest of his reasoning’s are a bit off, for Holland has seen less crime overall since the allowance of coffee shops. c. Marijuana is terrible for mental health: I do agree with this statement though, for studies have shown that it has effects on IQ and memory centers in the brain. d. It is bad for your physical health: This I partially agree with, for his big example is the use of marijuana while pregnant, of course it’s bad for babies in the womb, and for it still is smoking of sorts. I just feel as though this is common sense. e. The drug decimates many people’s lives: This I agree with only because it does in the sense that since the drug is illegal, people can be arrested for the simple possession of the substance and that could lead to ruining their life. 8. The 3 lessons that Erik Voeten says that Colorado should learn from Holland is: f. Legalization does not mean increased usage: I believe this lesson is a good one, for people who would want to do marijuana would probably do so anyways if it were legal or not. g. Colorado and Washington may well remain the outlier states: This is because even though public opinion is changing, it is still hard for some states to change their policies. For some states are looking at Colorado and Washington as experiments and want to see how it plays out there. h. Once legalization is in place it is hard to change: this is true also for it can go both ways, people are learning how hard it is to change to legalization, so it would be just as hard to change back also. 9. A. If I had policy making power I would make marijuana legal for all uses, for in my own opinion I see it not as that harmful of a drug, it is on par with alcohol and cigarettes if not as bad. The classification of it as a schedule 1 drug is just plain ridiculous.
B. For other drugs however I would like to keep the harder drugs illegal, but not so much stiffer sentences, more so take a medical approach to drug abuse, a bit like how Portugal has it, for some of the harder drugs are still a problem for they truly do ruin lives, and since they do it should be a more medical approach to treat said individuals.
10. Under the policies I said in the previous question I would have to change the way we prosecute the harder drug offenses, making the possession and use be treated more medically especially if they are addicted to said substances. I would however keep the laws for distribution and manufacturing of illegal substances, for this is where the true problem lies. So I would like police to be lenient on those possessing the substances as long as they aren’t selling the drugs or making it, but still crack down on the manufacturing and distribution networks of the illegal drugs.
