Why the War on Drugs Needs to be Reassessed
Remember learning in history about the Hundreds Years War (1337-1453) that actually went on for more than a hundred years. It seemed so absurd to think that a war could go on for so long. Then there was the Thirty Years War (1618-1648) which was a minor improvement. As we learn about these incidents we smugly feel we have progressed but in reality these phenomenon are still occurring but in a different form. We now have "The War on Drugs" and it has certainly been going on for more than thirty years and no one is really sure who is winning.
American technology writer and columnist Dan Gillmore believes that the war on drugs is pointless, costly and has done more harm than good (2009). His comments are interesting and relevant and can be seen to be true, if we look at history again. In England in 1955 "The Times" a reputable newspaper in England made "The Case for Heroin." This commentary revealed that there were fewer drug addicts in England, where they could get the drug legally, than in America where the substance had been banned since 1925. However, in 1964 the methods of legally procuring drugs in England underwent a change. Instead of going to the regular family doctor, which had been the system, specific doctors working from specific clinics were established and these were the only legal outlet. In 1968 further regulations were added and in 1971 the system was disbanded entirely. And this was when the number of addicts and the social problems that accompany them started to become more serious.
One of the main jobs of governments is to keep law and order in society. But by declaring drugs illegal, governments ended up doing the exact opposite of what they are meant to do: they helped increase the lawlessness in society. Part of the problem is that anyone who does something illegal is automatically classified as a felon, a person who is breaking the law. But people who take drugs are sick and in need of help and if that help does not come then they will break the law in order to get their next fix. Drugs are addictive and with the cravings of the body, come a moral and intellectual decline. Human beings in need of feeding this addiction are reduced to their most base instincts and behave much worse than animals. What the two reputable newspapers; "The Times" in 1955 and "The Economist" in 2011, showed is that illegality is making the situation worse. Treat the addicts as sick and see if a cure can be found. Don't ban the substance and it won't be so popular. The reasons for legalizing drugs are many but unfortunately the politicians do not acknowledge this or show the slightest interest in legalizing drugs no matter what facts the journalists and researchers provide them with.
An increasing number of people are beginning to question the "War on Drugs". In their book "Drugs and Drug Policy: What Everyone Needs to Know." (2011) Mark A.R. Kleiman, Jonathan P. Caulkins and Angela Hawken discuss different aspects of the problem. The book questions why drugs are not legal but alcohol and tobacco are? This is a valid question. They also analyze the criminal trade that automatically accompanies the illegal status of drugs. This book is not alone in realizing that drugs and crime are intertwined due to the fact that drugs are classified as illegal substances. The National Center for the Victims for Crime states that "more than half of all the people arrested in the United States test positive for illegal drugs. Drug addiction can lead to increased property crime and robberies. Drug and alcohol abuse contribute to higher rates of domestic violence, child abuse and sexual violence." These figures come from the U.S. Department of Justice, and are from 2007.
Since governments the world over are clearly losing the War on Drugs, the sensible thing to do would be to reconsider the strategy and consider legalizing drugs or at least certain drugs? The money that could be saved in law enforcement, the courts and the prisons would be significant. But that of course is the reason it will never happen. Never mind people's mindset, in that we have all been brainwashed to think drugs are bad and, drug addicts are criminals, the bottom line is money. While a mindset can in time be altered, the financial loss that would be incurred if this war ever ended, is what ensures that it not only continues, but that it increases. When a drug lord is vanquished the politicians and the police look good and hence justify the money they have spent or can ask for more money. Then there are the numerous lawyers looking for jobs. Drugs provide a ready-made and full market in which they can either defend drug dealers or prosecute them. From the top to the bottom, modern economy has become entwined in this war, and unfortunately as long as those in power have a vested interest in seeing it perpetuate itself, the War on Drugs will end up competing with the hundred years war.
Copyright: Academic -Reading
American technology writer and columnist Dan Gillmore believes that the war on drugs is pointless, costly and has done more harm than good (2009). His comments are interesting and relevant and can be seen to be true, if we look at history again. In England in 1955 "The Times" a reputable newspaper in England made "The Case for Heroin." This commentary revealed that there were fewer drug addicts in England, where they could get the drug legally, than in America where the substance had been banned since 1925. However, in 1964 the methods of legally procuring drugs in England underwent a change. Instead of going to the regular family doctor, which had been the system, specific doctors working from specific clinics were established and these were the only legal outlet. In 1968 further regulations were added and in 1971 the system was disbanded entirely. And this was when the number of addicts and the social problems that accompany them started to become more serious.
One of the main jobs of governments is to keep law and order in society. But by declaring drugs illegal, governments ended up doing the exact opposite of what they are meant to do: they helped increase the lawlessness in society. Part of the problem is that anyone who does something illegal is automatically classified as a felon, a person who is breaking the law. But people who take drugs are sick and in need of help and if that help does not come then they will break the law in order to get their next fix. Drugs are addictive and with the cravings of the body, come a moral and intellectual decline. Human beings in need of feeding this addiction are reduced to their most base instincts and behave much worse than animals. What the two reputable newspapers; "The Times" in 1955 and "The Economist" in 2011, showed is that illegality is making the situation worse. Treat the addicts as sick and see if a cure can be found. Don't ban the substance and it won't be so popular. The reasons for legalizing drugs are many but unfortunately the politicians do not acknowledge this or show the slightest interest in legalizing drugs no matter what facts the journalists and researchers provide them with.
An increasing number of people are beginning to question the "War on Drugs". In their book "Drugs and Drug Policy: What Everyone Needs to Know." (2011) Mark A.R. Kleiman, Jonathan P. Caulkins and Angela Hawken discuss different aspects of the problem. The book questions why drugs are not legal but alcohol and tobacco are? This is a valid question. They also analyze the criminal trade that automatically accompanies the illegal status of drugs. This book is not alone in realizing that drugs and crime are intertwined due to the fact that drugs are classified as illegal substances. The National Center for the Victims for Crime states that "more than half of all the people arrested in the United States test positive for illegal drugs. Drug addiction can lead to increased property crime and robberies. Drug and alcohol abuse contribute to higher rates of domestic violence, child abuse and sexual violence." These figures come from the U.S. Department of Justice, and are from 2007.
Since governments the world over are clearly losing the War on Drugs, the sensible thing to do would be to reconsider the strategy and consider legalizing drugs or at least certain drugs? The money that could be saved in law enforcement, the courts and the prisons would be significant. But that of course is the reason it will never happen. Never mind people's mindset, in that we have all been brainwashed to think drugs are bad and, drug addicts are criminals, the bottom line is money. While a mindset can in time be altered, the financial loss that would be incurred if this war ever ended, is what ensures that it not only continues, but that it increases. When a drug lord is vanquished the politicians and the police look good and hence justify the money they have spent or can ask for more money. Then there are the numerous lawyers looking for jobs. Drugs provide a ready-made and full market in which they can either defend drug dealers or prosecute them. From the top to the bottom, modern economy has become entwined in this war, and unfortunately as long as those in power have a vested interest in seeing it perpetuate itself, the War on Drugs will end up competing with the hundred years war.
Copyright: Academic -Reading
About the Author:
Want to find out more about reading academic English reading comprehension #1, then visit www.academic-reading.com and learn how to read like a pro strategies and skills #2 to make English easy.