How To Decriminalize Drugs

In terms of public safety, only 3% of individuals who were involved in treatment programs committed violent crimes after treatment; this number doubles for those who were sentenced to jail and prisons. New York has made the necessary changes to start viewing The War on Drugs and its influence on Mass Incarceration as not only a criminal justice issue but also now a mental health and public health problem. From the beginning, stakeholders saw the flaws and have spent about 36 years working out the issues. The reform is a good stepping stone toward a more just system, but just as the original Rockefeller drug Laws had their issues, the new reforms will have issues that will be worked out through the years to

While there are many reasons to be for the legalization of drugs, many people forget that the reason they’re illegal is to discourage drug

In 2014 there were 215,000 people incarcerated in federal prisons, almost half were there for drug-related offenses with the enactment of mandatory minimum sentencing laws for drug offenses in the 1980s, increasing the population by more than 800 percent (Malcolm, 2014.) “Moreover, drug offenders make up the single largest category of incarcerated offenders in Tennessee, serving an average sentence of 9.7 years” (Malcolm, 2014, paragraph 21.) By limit sentencing, we can address the issues of high cost, by using probation and parole for more misdemeanor

After analyzing 69 adult Drug Courts, every practice found there was higher recidivism reduction compared to another program (NREPP , 2017, p. 4). Through studies on individual participants, SAMHSA found that “drug courts ‘significantly reduced the incidence of incarceration from a base rate of 50% to roughly 42% for jail, 38% for prison, and 32% for overall incarceration’” (NREPP, 2017, p. 6). Drug Courts save people from getting put in jail and this study shows how it works in keeping them out after completion. Low recidivism percentages are another huge plus to the courts.

To really break the cycle of drug addiction individuals and wrongdoing in America, we should put a Drug Court inside scope of each American criminal justice systems as needed. Qualified drug-addict dependent people might be sent to Drug Court in lieu of conventional sentencing or consequences due to their illegal drug use and addiction. Drug Courts keep people in

As of September 26, 2015, there is a total of 93,821 inmates in prison for drug offenses, which is equivalent to 48.4 percent of the prison population. The use of illegal narcotics has been an issue within the country for decades; however, is incarceration the way to solve this problem? I think not. During the late 1960’s, poverty was a substantial issue within urban cities and secluded rural areas. On the other hand, recreational drug usage promoted by fashionable young, white Americans as a symbol of social upheaval and youthful rebellion coincided with the deprivation within many of these areas.

While this policy would not make prescription opioid abuse legal, it would remove the criminal charges associated with breaking the law (Kwiatkowski 2000). Some may argue that this makes the law pointless or that it will increase the number of addicts, but the opposite is actually true. One desirable side-effect of the decriminalization of prescription opioid abuse is that it allows drug addicts to seek help without fear of legal retaliation. Additionally, the decriminalization of prescription opioid misuse would save the government and tax payers millions of dollars each year. This money could instead be used to fund programs aimed at prevention or rehabilitation.

government provides help to drug addicts, such as helping them find jobs and providing them with housing, instead of locking them up or punishing them, the cost of drug control in the United States will increase significantly. The most important reason for taking punishment is that the US government does not expect to gain economic benefits and support by providing help to drug addicts. On the contrary, they want to spend the least amount of money to reduce drug trade as effectively as possible. Let's imagine that when the US government punishes drug addicts, they only need to build a prison to isolate drug addicts, and hire some prison guards to watch them until they no longer crave drugs, or simply fine drug addicts. These are the most effective and cheapest means of arresting drugs.

Drug abusers may influence other young or impressionable individuals to also experiment with drugs leading to more addiction in a society which is not healthy. Nevertheless, research shows that prison is not always a suitable place for people who possess and use drugs. In fact, it may have an adverse effect on drug users such as further progression of their mental health disorders. Placing drug abusers in prison might just be a punishment not a cure to drug abuse. Removing them may temporarily improve society and reduce drug abusers in society however, this just means that we have relocated the same number of drug abusers from society into one location where they actually become worse, as being in an environment with other drug offenders provokes the aggregation of the continual conflict subculture.

The current system that incarcerates people over and over is unsustainable and does not lower the crime rate nor encourage prisoner reformation. When non-violent, first time offenders are incarcerated alongside violent repeat offenders, their chance of recidivating can be drastically altered by their experience in prison. Alternative sentencing for non-violent drug offenders could alleviate this problem, but many current laws hinder many possible solutions. Recently lawmakers have made attempts to lower the recidivism rates in America, for example the Second Chance Act helps aid prisoners returning into society after incarceration. The act allows states to appropriate money to communities to help provide services such as education, drug treatment programs, mental health programs, job corps services, and others to aid in offenders returning to society after incarceration (Conyers, 2013).

However, there are many that argue that the decriminalization of possession of drugs would redirect focus of the law enforcement system of any country to put more effort into arresting dealers and big time criminals, instead of arresting minor criminals for mere possession, and thus be more effective. It also has more focus on the drug user instead of drug lords which is a more humane approach as compared to the others. Decriminalisation then includes diversion programmes instead of incarceration. Decriminalisation also removes the stigma attached to a criminal conviction for the use of

However drug usage constitutes an action which results in not only in the mental and physical harm upon the drug user but also the direct and indirect harm upon the surroundings of the drug user which further proves why soft paternalism would support the criminalisation of drug usage. Drug usage often directly and indirectly harms the following aspects of the drug user’s life; their marriage or personal relationships with other people, the stability of their family life, their financial issues which others may depend on as well as the law and order of a country (Medic8.com 2014). For example in the United States, approximately $50 billion is spent annually by the government in an attempt to curtail the use and collateral damage caused by illegal drugs (Ahmad 2004). This serves as evidence of indirect financial harm incurred upon non-drug user citizens who pay taxes to finance governmental expenditure so that the needs of all citizens are adequately provided for. However instead of the government spending additional money on education or infrastructure it is covering rehabilitation health and crime related costs which are caused by 9.4% of the American population whom are illegally abusing illicit drugs (Ahmad 2004).

“The opioid epidemic has ravaged communities around the nation — deaths from overdoses now outnumber deaths from car crashes” (Spencer). This quote from a recent New York Times article provides some evidence towards the idea that the United States of America is sprawling with addicts hooked on drugs so widespread, and with no segment of the population more susceptible to them than young adults. The same drug prevention policies and punishments have remained in place at the federal level down to school systems, despite evidence of this growing trend towards usage. Therefore, the changes should occur starting with the group most at risk: children. Schools persist to be locations to buy, sell, and even use illicit materials, but now in greater

Prohibition on certain drugs may prevent a certain number of people from taking drugs, but in the process, it is causing huge damage to society as a whole. For instance, prohibition actually makes drugs stronger. It was the same during alcohol prohibition, which led to an increased consumption of strong liquor over beer. Just think of how many criminal organizations that exist which depend on the sale of illegal drugs. If the government made all illegal drugs legal for recreational use for adults all those criminal organizations wouldn’t exist because they wouldn’t be making any money.

As of recent, the war on drugs has been a very often discussed topic due to many controversial issues. Some people believe the War on Drugs has been quite successful due to the amount of drugs seized and the amount of drug kingpins arrested. I believe this to be the wrong mindset when it comes to the war on drugs. The war on drugs isn’t a winnable one so we must do all that is possible to assist those who struggle with drug addiction and decriminalize small amounts of drugs. These minor changes in the way we combat drugs will create significant change and have lasting effects.