For Better Or Worse On Drug Legalization

Essay, Research Paper

For Better or Worse?

America has been plagued with drug problems for years, and in recent years it isn t proving to get much better. Society has been left to deal with the pain, fear, terror, and crime that the drug world has brought upon us. Many believe that America s problems with drugs, crime, and the drug trade economy could be easily decreased if America turned to the legalization of illicit drugs. If someone chooses to kill themselves with drugs let them.

In the 1920 s, alcohol was made illegal by Prohibition. The result: Organized Crime. Criminals jumped at the chance to supply the demand for liquor. The streets became battlegrounds. The criminals bought off law enforcement and judges. Adulterated booze blinded and killed people. Civil rights were trampled in the hopeless attempt to keep people from drinking (Schmoke 1). Sound familiar? It s very true when people say that history repeats itself. Now drugs, which are currently illegal, have raised the same problems as alcohol did when it was prohibited. However, it is safe to say that drugs have taken this country by force, and that it s effects on society are much more harsh than alcohol. It is also probably safe to say that prohibition resulted in more people drinking than ever before, including many children and many who were poisoned by bad booze (Wayburn 1).

When America saw what prohibition was doing to them, they supported its repeal. When they succeeded, most states legalized liquor and criminal gangs were out of the liquor business (Schmoke 1). If that is taken into consideration and placed into our modern world of drugs, crime would have a tremendous decrease. About 75% of our robberies, thefts, burglaries, and related assaults are committed by drug abusers. Numerous studies show that drug users commit far fewer crimes when undergoing outpatient drug therapy or even when the price of drugs drops (Duke 2). Now just picture if even half of that 75% of drug related crime was cut. Our society would be a much more peaceful place. Approximately 40 million Americans are occasional, peaceful users of some illegal drug who are no threat to anyone (Schmoke 1).

As for the so-called junkies that are thrown in jail, most of them are first time law offenders that have been caught with a small amount of drugs. Of course some of those 40 million peaceful users are going to get caught eventually, but what is the real crime? They are not looting stores, robbing houses, or mugging people on the street. Chances are that they got pulled over for speeding while they had a little marijuana or cocaine in their possession. As a result of all these little offenders that are made out to be full-blown criminals our prison systems are over flowing, but yet we still continue to pile people in them. We should be filling them (prisons) with the people we built them for the violent predator and repeat offenders. Not the guy who got caught with a few bucks worth of crack. The law currently has the identical 8 to 25 year maximum sentencing range, for a person who commits a forcible rape and for a person who sells a dollars worth of cocaine I believe it would tell you that our legal sense of priorities is totally out of whack (Coughlin 1-2). So why do we continue to fill our prisons with small time drug offenders when the people who are locked up for murder are getting the same sentence?

It would be logical to keep the rapist, murderer, or robber in the prison system for a longer period of time as opposed to spending the money to keep the small time drug offender in the prison. There is no room in our prisons: 40 states are under court order for overcrowding. Violent criminals are being paroled early or are having their sentences chopped to make space for drug users and dealers (Duke 2). I firmly believe that drug addiction affecting the street level addict can be far more successfully treated in community settings, instead of the prison environment. It used to be that offenders came to prison and got the high school diploma they never earned on the outside. Now, street addicts are coming to $100,000 prison cells that cost $27,000 a year to operate to get the same drug treatment that could be available at $5,000 to $10,000 per person on the street (Coughlin 2).

The total annual costs of the drug war are about $100 billion. If drugs were legalized, most of this money could be spent on long-term crime prevention (Duke 2). The saved money could also be put towards drug rehabilitation programs for abusers who are actually seeking help, as opposed to locking them up were very little rehabilitation is ever achieved. If people are allowed to drink publicly, which in reality cause more physically aggressive crimes than drugs do, why shouldn t people be able to use drugs legally as well? It is easy to prove that the laws against drugs are unconstitutional. The Declaration of Independence states that the rights to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness are unalienable rights, rights that are incapable of being sold or transferred. Clearly, the rights of liberty and to the pursuit of happiness, specifically mentioned in the Declaration of Independence, are retained by the people. Many people take drugs to pursue happiness. Thus, any law that denies them the liberty to take drugs is unconstitutional (Wayburn 1). The personal choice of individuals to take drugs in the privacy of