War on Drugs Policy Formulation
History of War on Drugs Policy
The war on drugs policy can be described as an aggressive drug prohibition policy that is purposed at generating fights against the drug cartels and the suppliers respectively (Adler, Adler, & O’Brien, 2012). The fight against drugs started at the Nixon’s regime when the issue of drugs has intensified in America. The resolution was later expanded by president carter and Ford as their war was mainly based on fighting b the drug supplier’s paths (Adler, Adler, & O’Brien, 2012). Military strikes attack was organized by president Regan to both the drug cartels and suppliers through utilization of funds to eradicate the use of drugs (Adler, Adler, & O’Brien, 2012). Writers who offer law essay help at Edudorm essay writing service notes that drugs become signs of youthful rebellion, political opposition, and social disturbance which pressured the government to halt scientific studies in order to assess their medical efficacy and safety. The war on the drug was declared by President Nixon in the year 1971 with the declaration the size and the presences of legal control federal agencies were increased (Adler, Adler, & O’Brien, 2012). This was emphasized with the use of measures like lack of knock warrants as well as mandatory sentencing. The most restrictive drug based on the declaration of the president was the use of marijuana. In developing this paper’s analysis this research will utilize a literature review for several scholarly sources.
The war on drugs policy was signed into law by President Nixon in the year 1972 on 28th January (Bancroft, 2009). The formulation of war on drugs policy was developed by the state level of government and is currently being utilized by federal states levels. The United States has been fighting drugs supply and cartels for almost a decade today. The war on drugs policy holds different objectives. First, the policy is purposed to provide education and enable the youths in America in rejecting the use of illegal drugs tobacco as well as alcohol. The second objective is developing safety to the American populace through dealing sustainability and decreasing the occurrence of violence and occurrence of crimes related to drugs (Bancroft, 2009). The policy is additionally aimed at decreasing social and health costs due to illegal public’s drug usage. These objectives are aimed at providing America’s land, sea and air frontiers with the protection of the drug threat (Bancroft, 2009).
Prohibition of Substance Use through War on Drugs Policy
Drugs have been utilized for thousand years in the United States and only less than a single percent of the usage has been prohibited by the war on drugs policy since its implementation (Bancroft, 2009). The war on drugs efforts holds reduced impact on usage and supply of illegal drugs and the policy holds less capability so far in reducing the growing illegal drugs demand. The drug war fighting era is mainly characterized by corruption as well as increased propaganda which are the hindrances to the success of the policy in the society today (Bancroft, 2009).
It is highly evident and believed in the United States that the trafficking of drugs is the most deliberate law direct and this, therefore, compels the society to punish such acts (Goldberg, 2010). Vengeance and topping the act of trafficking punishment are currently the main paths of stopping the traffic of drugs. Based on the war on drugs policy those that disrespect the law by trafficking drugs are put behind bars (Goldberg, 2010). This, therefore, implies that them being shut down reduces the availability of drugs to the users which reduces the rate of abusers which is a major objective of the policy. In other words, the war on drugs policy is mainly focused on tackling the side of rugs supply at large more than the users. This is mainly because the policy emphasizes that the usage of drugs cannot be in existence without adequate supply. Experts who offer law dissertation writing help at Edudorm essay writing service indicates that the government of the United States puts much of its efforts in the abolition of the supply paths as cartels in order to stop completely the drugs supply in the society. The elevation of the policy in the neighboring states by the United States was basically a request of compelling the states to offer protection to their nations populace through maintaining safety as well as health by ensuring that the morals of the youths are not corrupted by drugs (Goldberg, 2010). The spread of the policy to different states generally shows that the issue of drugs supply and usage is not an issue of a single state. The issue of drugs is an international human issue that required adequate and immediate handling.
International Influences on War on Drugs Policy
The war on drugs policy has some international influences mainly the Latin American states such as Mexico (Musto, 2002). This is mainly because Mexico is highly affected by drugs supply as well as cartels and it is attempting to generate a solution to the growing issue in the modern society. From this policy, the potential international impact is mainly strengthening nation’s relations and increasing safety. The policy affects Mexico and other nations negatively in terms of cost as the nations have to utilize approximately more than 800 million up to a billion dollars every year in handling the issue (Musto, 2002). This is mainly because for Mexico it does not want the United States to invade its operations like how it did to Panama and therefore the state has opted to solve the issue on its own.
The war on drugs policy is a force that is mainly aimed at fighting of preventing and controlling the abuse of drugs as stated by the 1970 Drug control and prevention Act (Vogt, 2015). The notion of this policy is therefore aimed at ensuring that there is complete drug abuse prohibition within the United States boundaries. The declaration of the policy by Nixon additionally introduced programs aimed at reducing federal demand and offering treatment to those affected by the usage of drugs. Authors who offer legal case study help at Edudorm essay writing service points that the war on drugs policy has so far demonstrated remarkable transformations in achieving its objectives. However, even with the changes the lives of the individuals who have been affected by the implementation is on the rise. The drug suppliers are currently proving to be too strong for the United States to stop despite the effort of the policy which is put in place to curb the issue globally (Vogt, 2015).
Challenges Facing War on Drugs Policy
Drugs cartels are currently growing rapidly in the modern society in the United States as well as in other states such as Mexico, Columbia, India and more others (Vogt, 2015). This is occurring despite the implementation of the war on drugs policy measures. The war on drugs policy is aimed at generating a free drug surrounding in the United States society. The intention of developing the policy in the past 45 years was mainly to eradicate the utility of drugs in the American society (Vogt, 2015). The goal has been achieved partially mainly because there is not even a single state in the nation that has been able to declare a free drug society up to date. The failure of achieving a drug-free society has thus been limited by different limitations (Vogt, 2015).
First, the war of fighting drugs supply and usage in the United States has continuously failed mainly because it works with the assumption that the rate of drug users and suppliers’ imprisonment is an indicator of its efficiency (Labate, & Cavnar, 2014). This is however not true because the imprisonment has led to the development of more issues such as mass incarceration and health problems due to overpopulated prisons. For instance, in the year 2011 the federal released the report that those that were serving drugs related sentences in prison held the highest number which was 94, 600 persons as compared to those that were serving public sentencing which totaled to 69,000 (Labate, & Cavnar, 2014). Tutors who offer constitutional law assignment help at Edudorm essay writing service acknowledges that the high rate of person’s imprisonment due to drug issues is associated with social and economic effects. This is mainly because the society’s productivity level is reduced when individuals are imprisoned which lowers economic development is a significant level. On the other hand, offering health treatment for the individuals affected by drugs in the society is 20,000 dollars less than the amount utilized for the incarcerated person each year (Labate, & Cavnar, 2014). This, therefore, demonstrates clearly that huge money amounts are spent in prisons incarceration which subjects huge taxes on the American population.
The United States utilizes more than 50billion dollars every year with the objective of generating a society that is free from drugs. For instance, in 2010 the federal government spent: $15 billion at the rate of $500 every second (Brownstein, 2016). In 2010 the local and state government utilized- $25 billion in addition. In 2016- $12.4 billion dollars spent by the federal government. In 2016 state government spent more than $21.1 billion dollars which total to $33.4 billion (Brownstein, 2016). The war on drugs policy limitations exceeds the achieved success since it has generated more harm as compared to wellness. This is mainly because less than 10% of success has been achieved so far. It is the role of the government to ensure that adequate reforms are made to the policy to ensure that efficiency in the stated goals is achieved (Brownstein, 2016). The government is also responsible for developing solutions to the existing policy’s limitation.
The war on drugs policy is ineffective. This is mainly because it is continuously causing harm to the American population and the society in general. In addition, the policy is mainly affecting the minority groups such as the blacks and those from the Latin origins based on the fact that more than 60% of the drug related imprisoned population are from minority groups (McWhorter, 2016). Instructors who offer law assignment help services at Edudorm essay writing service argues that the policy is additionally designed poorly since it seeks to punish the suppliers and the users which act as the major influence of a health crisis, violence, crime, mass incarceration and economic instability. The war on drug is the concentrated efforts by the government in penalizing and prohibiting the supply, trafficking, possession and utility of drugs (McWhorter, 2016). The policy, therefore, necessitates reforms in order to achieve efficiency in the near future because the issue of drug abuse in increasing in the American society which is causing issues.
Different Alternatives
There are different alternatives that the policy developers can utilize in developing the policy. The first alternative is decriminalization, which is the general removal of the sanctions of criminals for the conduct of minor offenses that are related to drugs issues (Hanson, Venturelli, & Fleckenstein, 2015). In such instances, the policy should focus on civil sanctions like voluntary punishments as well as fines instead of jail sentences. This strategy will help in decreasing the issue of mass incarceration which is additionally connected to high cost. The health coast will additionally be reduced since the offenders will be treatment more effectively while still generating positive gains for the society.
The second alternative in reforming the policy is depenalization. This is the retention strategy where the drug offenses are retained as basic crimes but with the enforcement of a discretional law that is mainly grounded on practical approaches as well as requirements of the society (Lynch, 2012). Mentors who offer criminal law assignment help at Edudorm essay writing service recognizes that this strategy will help in reducing the occurrence of instability, health crisis, mass incarceration and the rise of crime in the society. The third alternative in war on drugs policy is the use of regulated access. In this strategy the government is responsible for controlling illegitimate drugs so that it can conduct an investigation with a widened options range and in some instances the use of commercial markets for drugs like cocaine and marijuana or a tighter control of drugs which are associated with a greater risk to the general society (Lynch, 2012). Drug usage can be described as an issue of health and adopting the alternatives will require less money concentration as well as resources on the system of criminal justice thus playing a role in reducing the abuse and supply of drugs.
Conclusion
The issue of drugs abuse and supply is a society issue that requires an adequate and efficient solution as it impacts the society negatively. The war on drugs policy has so far proved to be ineffective as it is challenged by different aspects in the modern society. The policy, therefore, necessitates reforms which will help in ensuring that a society that is free from drugs is attained. This, therefore, requires the corporation of both the American population and the government.
References
Adler, P. A., Adler, P., & O’Brien, P. K. (2012). Drugs and the American dream: An anthology. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Bancroft, A. (2009). Drugs, intoxication, and society. Cambridge: Polity.
Brownstein, H. (2016). The handbook of drugs and society. John Wiley & Sons, 2015
Goldberg, R. (2010). Drugs across the spectrum. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Hanson, G., Venturelli, P. J., & Fleckenstein, A. E. (2015). Drugs and society. Jones & Bartlett Publishers, 2011
Lynch, M. (2012). Theorizing the role of the ‘war on drugs’ in US punishment. Theoretical Criminology, 16(2), 175-199.
McWhorter, J. (2016). How the war on drugs is destroying black America. Democracy.
Musto, D. F. (2002). Drugs in America: A documentary history. New York [u.a.: New York Univ. Press.
Vogt, W. (2015). The War on Drugs is a War on Migrants: Central Americans Navigate the Perilous Journey North. Landscapes of Violence, 3(1), 2, 11-36.
Labate, B. C., & Cavnar, C. (2014). Prohibition, religious freedom, and human rights: Regulating traditional drug use.
