|
Should We End the War on Drugs?
by Michelle Calderon, staff writer for AnaiRhoads.org
Although the past is forgotten, now illicit-drugs were once legal in the United States. At the beginning of the 20th century, there was “virtually no restriction on opiates, cocaine, or marijuana” (Carpenter, 2003). Today, the war on drugs has resulted in billions of tax dollars spent on trying to make the United States drug-free. “U.S. federal, state and local governments have spent hundreds of billions of dollars, yet heroine, cocaine, methamphetamine and other illicit drugs are cheaper, purer and easier to get than ever before. Nearly half a million people are behind bars on drug charges; more than all of Western Europe incarcerated for all offenses” (Carpenter, 2003). Consequently, the war on drugs has raised issues on family values, on public health, and on our constitutional rights. With such enormous price to pay, its success in accomplishing its goal has not been met.
Many of the problems in the drug war are caused by the drug war itself. Drug-related crimes are a direct result of drug prohibition laws of supply and demand. Public health problems such as HIV and Hepatitis C are all affected by laws that restrict access to clean needles. Instead of the drug war being a promoter of family values, “children of inmates are at risk of educational failure, joblessness, addiction, and delinquency” (Carpenter, 2003).
Although the war on drugs has claimed a decline in recreational use of illegal drugs by casual, occasional users, the bigger objective has not been met successfully. Our prisons are filled with drug offenders and our resources have diverted criminal justice personnel away from serious crimes. The evidence in our economic realities show the policies are not working. The United States waged an intense war on drugs for more than three decades now. However, Ted Carpenter, author of “Bad Neighbor Policy” argues that Washington’s drug policy is the “worst of all solutions and that legalization is the best of all alternatives” (Carpenter, 2003).
One alternative to consider would entail Latin American governments to move more aggressively toward regulating their own economies by spurring economic growth: such as creating new opportunities for those people who are now involved in the drug trade. US import restrictions that only injure Latin American enterprises as well as US consumers by limiting other types of trades such as sugar. A new trade zone would be an important step toward eliminating inequities.
However, even if drug-source countries enact the most comprehensive and worthwhile economic reforms, drug commerce will continue to play a role in many Latin American countries unless the United States ends its experiments in drug prohibition. Without legalization, drug trafficking will still carry a risk to drive up the price and the profit margin to those who undertake the drug business. Ruthless individuals who do not fear the law will dominate the black markets and drug trades. This will remain the domain of violence-prone criminals.
With its history of non-prohibition, the United States was not free of drug-related problems. For example, in the early years of the 20th century, there were an estimated “300,000 opiate addicts” (Carpenter, 2003). That was still a small portion of the population compared to the problems we face today. The United States was certainly not plagued with the same violence, corruption, and economic distortions.
Drug legalization would mean to treat currently illicit drugs the same way as alcohol and tobacco are now being treated. Legalization would eliminate a significant portion of crimes and violence that plague the streets of US cities. Legalization would also minimize the clogging of the court system as well as prisons with such inmates. Ending prohibition would also mean stopping the erosion of civil liberties as well as aiding the effort against the threat of international terrorism. Terminating the prohibition strategy would deprive terrorists an important source of revenue. Equally important, ending prohibition would free up thousands of personnel and billions of dollars for waging the war against terrorism.
Looking ahead, legalization may not be a panacea but it would certainly outweigh the alternative. Additionally, no longer would Latin America suffer massive distortions to their economies and put an end to the political corruption and the escalating violence that accompany the lucrative black market in drugs.
References:
Carpenter, T. (2003). Bad Neighbor Policy: Washington’s Futile War on Drugs in Latin
America. Retrieved September 22, 2005, from:
http://www.theglobalist.com/DBWeb/StoryId.aspx?StoryId=3612
Back
|
