Legalizing narcotics
The war on drugs has been a constant problem not only in the United States but also in different countries across the world. Drugs have become a part of society where, despite being illegal, drug users find a way to get a hold of various types of drugs. While the legal punishment for being found in possession or using drugs is very strict, drug dealers and drug users have established connections that enable them to indulge in the harmful and illegal act of taking drugs. One of the approaches that the government has taken to reduce the sale and consumption of drugs such as narcotics is prohibition. Any person found in possession of narcotics risks being sent to prison or made to pay a fine. Although prohibition has had some positive results in controlling the sale and consumption of narcotics, the impact is not significant enough to say that prohibition is working. Prohibiting the sale and use of narcotics has also created a black market for such products for those willing to break the law in order to get the drugs. The environment created has led to a lot of violence and insecurity as most drug traffickers operate in places where the law enforcement officers cannot find them. In order to control issues that arise from illegal sale of drugs such as trafficking and violence, a different approach must be considered. An ideal solution will therefore be to legalize narcotics as this will create a platform where the government can control where they are sold, who sells them and how to mediate between those handling such drugs so as to ensure that violence is prevented and that trafficking issues are regulated.
In the United States, people found in the possession of illegal drugs either for sale or personal use make up over 59% of the prisoners in federal custody. Dealing in drugs has become so common that more than 1.5 million people are arrested for drug possession every year in the United States (Goldstein, 2010). In a bid to cub this menace, governments spend billions of dollars in an attempt to prevent the sale and use of illegal drugs and this is something that has been done over the years. During his term, president Regan spent more than 22 billion dollars in drug enforcement. President Bush on the other hand spent over 733 million dollars in the fight against drugs (Goldstein, 2010). Every year, the United State government approves millions of dollars to fund the war against drugs. Despite their efforts, the drug industry has continued to grow with the war on drugs having no significant efforts in curtailing the growth of the illegal drugs market. The various attempts from various presidents is proof that the war on drugs has always existed in the United States and if any change is to be experienced, a different approach ought to be considered.
Rather than finding solutions that have desired results in combating drug abuse as long as issues related to drugs such as drug trafficking, the government has been throwing money at the issue hoping that it will eventually go away. More than 19 billion dollars are spent each year in the United States all in the name of enforcing drugs laws intended to curtail the growth of the illegal drugs market (Cato Institute, 2004). Rather than solving the problem it is intended for, the money is used up in policies that have little impact in preventing the sale, distribution and use of illegal drugs such as narcotics. Despite that no significant reduction in drug use and drug related arrests, tax payers are forced to pay even higher taxes whenever the drug use goes up. Even when drug related issues appear to be on the increase, citizens are told to provide more capital through taxes so as to accommodate this growth in the illegal drugs market. When a significant, though rare, reduction in drug abuse and drug related cases is experienced, citizens still experience high taxation as they are informed that more money is needed to ensure that the success in the fight against drugs needs the capital to ensure the achieved results are maintained (Cato Institute, 2004).
The mistake that prohibition of narcotics has is that it operates on the promise that making drugs illegal will have in the future. Instead of solving the current problem of drug abuse in the country, policies like prohibition are based on the hope that enough people will be arrested in future to discourage or cause a significant shift on the war against drugs (Cato Institute, 2004). However, the fight against drugs is a serious matter that must be based on more than hope. Rather than making narcotics illegal in the hope that arresting drug barons and users will discourage the use of narcotics, the government must consider a more realistic and time conscious approach such as legalizing such drugs (Cato Institute, 2004). By doing so, the government will be able to do away with the high profits that make the illegal drugs industry lucrative to drug barons. Prohibiting the use of narcotics makes them difficult to attain. However, since people are still willing to buy narcotics despite their being illegal, drug lords take it upon themselves to ensure that the drugs are available to customers. Since dealing with narcotics is illegal, the drug lords charge more money to compensate for the risk they put themselves in. prohibiting them also means that fewer people can provide narcotics and this reduces competition. Those providing the drugs have the freedom to set their own prices which gives them high profits and thus makes the drug dealing business very lucrative (Cato Institute, 2004).
Legalizing narcotics is therefore the most ideal solution for reducing issues related to illegal drugs. Making narcotics legal will mean that different people can apply for a license allowing them to sell narcotics. An increase in the number of distributors will create competition and this drastically reduces the amount of money that drug lords are currently making. The drugs market will therefore become less lucrative because the profits will not be as high as they are now for those distributing the drugs (Cato Institute, 2004). Legalizing narcotics will also do away with the trafficking issue since legal means of making the drug available will be provided. People will no longer have to go through dangerous trafficking methods such as swallowing the drug in small bags which endangers the individual’s life. All those who intend to sell the drugs will have a proper channel of acquiring the drugs and making them available to the customer. Legalizing will therefore have more control in the sale and consumption of narcotics that prohibition has had throughout the time it has been used as a means of discouraging the sale, distribution and consumption of the drugs (Cato Institute, 2004).
Over the years, legalization has proved to be more effective than prohibition when it comes to controlling the use of drugs. An example is the case where consumption and sale of alcohol was prohibited in the 1920s (Luban, O’Sullivan & Stewart, 2014). However, the prohibition did little to control the consumption of alcohol but rather increased the number of people being arrested for engaging in alcohol or violent crimes as a result of consuming the drug. As a result, congress made the decision to do away with the prohibition and legalize alcohol as a way of controlling its sale, consumption and behavior related to alcohol consumption. Similar to the case of alcohol, the prohibition of narcotics has had similar results. Although more people are being arrested for either selling or using the illegal drugs, there has been little impact in reducing the amount of narcotics being trafficked in and out of the United States (Luban, O’Sullivan & Stewart, 2014).
Prohibition does little to stop the use of narcotics because drug lords find more secretive ways to move the drugs across the country to ensure that their customers have access to them. Since most of the dealings are conducted through the black market, police have little control over the transactions that take place since they are not even aware of what is going on. Such environments greatly promote violence as individuals take it upon themselves to settle disputes at times in the most gruesome ways (Balkin, 2005). Regardless of whatever efforts made through prohibition, narcotics are still available on the streets and the policy has proved inefficient in controlling the distribution of narcotics. It is estimated that almost half of the student population in the United States have used an illegal drug before graduating with over 54.1% admitting to the fact that they have tried an illegal drug at least once. Also, 82% of students in the senior level claimed that attaining narcotics was rather easy as one only needed to know a dealer or someone who could connect them and this was not something difficult to do (Goldstein, 2010). Despite the claims that the war on drugs has been successful, arresting a large number of drug dealers does not warrant a victory because the existence of such drugs in the streets means that more people will have access to them.
The reasoning behind narcotics being declared illegal is due to the harmful effects that they may cause to the body if used excessively as well as the violent nature of people under the influence of narcotics (Roe, 2005). However, prohibiting one drug because of its effects on the user would make more sense if there were no other drugs that have the same effect on their users being legalized. The government is yet to clarify why some drugs are prohibited while others are legalized despite all of them having undesirable effects on the user if used in excess. It operates on the basis that drugs that are poisonous, addictive and cause harm to the user ought to be declared illegal and prohibited. However, the government tends to be biased when it comes to making the decision to prohibit one drug and legalize another (Roe, 2005). Take the case of alcohol for example. Alcohol has been declared legal despite it being addictive to those who ever indulge in its consumption. While some people are more likely to be addicted than others, this does not take away from the fact that alcohol, like most narcotics, is just as addictive. Prohibiting narcotics on the basis that they cause addiction is therefore a misconceived notion since other drugs that have the same effect have been legalized. Another example is the use of tobacco which is legal despite it being addictive and poisonous to the user. Tobacco has been dubbed as one of the most addictive drugs yet narcotics are prohibited on the basis that using them will result to addiction (Roe, 2005).
Another reason behind the prohibition of narcotics is that they are poisonous and can cause harm to the body. However, the same narcotics are used for medical purposes during surgeries or as pain relievers (Roe, 2005). If the drugs were as poisonous as they are said to be, there would be no rational reason to use them on people. Legalizing the use of the drugs in some occasions and then prohibiting the use of the drugs in others creates a sense of confusion as one is not clear as to why the drug is illegal in the first place. If it is okay to use a narcotic to relieve pain in the hospital, it is only fair that people be allowed to use them for the same purpose at home without the fear of being arrested (Roe, 2005). Having different standpoints on when it is okay to use a drug and when it is illegal to indulge in the same confuses people and since the government has already demonstrated the benefits that some narcotics have, the goal should be to educate people on how to use them rather than resulting to prohibition. Narcotics have the same effects as alcohol or tobacco. When taken in excess, alcohol may lead the user into engaging in violent behavior the same way that a person who has consumed a narcotic would behave. The users may also get addicted from the narcotics the same way that tobacco users get addicted to the drug (Roe, 2005). It is therefore wrong to prohibit the use of narcotics while drugs such as alcohol and tobacco are legalized.
Since prohibition has clearly failed, the most ideal approach will be to legalize the use of narcotics so as to have a sense of control over the narcotics market. Since the prohibition policy made the sale of narcotics illegal, drug lords had to operate in secret while users ensured that they were not caught in possession of narcotics (Luban, O’Sullivan & Stewart, 2014). This secrecy made it difficult for law enforcement officers to intervene or encourage safe use of such drugs. By legalizing narcotics, the government will be able to directly control the sale of narcotics and therefore implement regulations as well as taxation. Getting the government involved will also help control the irresponsible behavior that users engage in while under the influence of narcotics. Similar to how people are advised against operating heavy machinery or driving under the influence of alcohol, legalizing narcotics will mean that users are advised on the safety measures to take when under the influence so as not to endanger their lives and the lives of others (Balkin, 2005).
Legalization will also be beneficial as it will help do away with the violence brought about by the prohibition of narcotics. When narcotics were made illegal, drug lords had to sell their products in the black market. Since the black market operates underground away from the interaction of the law enforcement officers, it created a lot of violence as different suppliers fought for supremacy and the right to operate in certain areas. Since sellers cannot advertise their products or settle disputes through legal means, they often result to violence as this is the only way they can solve disputes (Miron, 2009).
According to The Economist (2009), the illegal drug industry makes over 320 billion dollars each year. Instead of preventing drug use, prohibition has done more to promote drug related crimes and violence amongst drug peddlers and drug users. Through prohibition tax payers are forced to provide billions of dollars meant to support the war on drugs. The money is mostly used to equip law enforcement officers with the tools needed to fight drug trafficking as well as send drug traffickers and those in drug related crimes to prison. However, the people who benefit the most from the prohibition are the drug lords who secretly traffic narcotics into the country and sell them making more than 50 billion dollars every year (ACLU, 2005). Since it is done in the black market, the drug lords do not pay taxes, nor are they concerned about the quality control that legal businesses have to abide to. The drug lords only have to ensure that the supply meets the demand not to mention their ability to control prices however they see fit. Other than making the drug industry more lucrative, prohibition has led to more than 58% of the federal prisons being occupied by non violent individuals who were caught with narcotics (ACLU, 2005). A larger percentage means more people to take care of in prison which adds on to the already strenuous conditions in prisons.
Due to the strictness in the laws prohibiting the use of narcotics, people are in more risk of being harmed by the drugs. It is clear that making narcotics illegal has done little to discourage people from using them. However, due to the trouble that drug dealers have to go through just to make the products available, a lot of risks are incurred when dealing with narcotics. One of the core issues has to do with trafficking where drug lords use various means to transport their product between states and across borders. Some traffickers have lost their lives in the process of trafficking drugs such as cocaine (The Economist, 2009). One method that is the most dangerous is swallowing cocaine bags to pass them through airport security. The bags tend to open while in the stomach leading to the individual’s death. Another problem has to do with the quality of the products. When moving the drugs, traffickers may contaminate them with all the means of concealment thus making them dangerous to the consumers. However, since there is no quality control, dealers sell narcotics to their customers regardless of their impurity or the threat they pose to their health. Users of narcotics also put themselves at risk by use of dirty needles. Since it is illegal, users are forced to share needles and may end up sharing diseases such as HIV (The Economist, 2009).
By legalizing narcotics, the problem of drugs will shift from being regulated by law and order to public health. Through taxation, the government will be able to use the money collected to help those who are addicted as well as create awareness and educate people on the dangers of abusing drugs (The Economist, 2009). Although narcotics are a group, different drugs have different effects and taxation will be based on the effect that a certain drug has on the users. Legalization will however not allow minors to engage the use of narcotics and selling to minors will be treated as a crime. Legalization will therefore help in controlling who sells narcotics, their level of quality, who they sell to as well as educating people on the harm involved in overindulging in the use of such drugs. The problem will therefore be better controlled through legalization as it will prevent most of the trafficking issues related to drugs in the market (The economist, 2009).
Legalizing narcotics will go a long way in reducing the lucrative source of income that organized crimes benefit from by selling drugs in the black market. With more people being allowed to legally sell narcotics, the price charges will significantly drop since the product will be easily available (Luban, O’Sullivan & Stewart, 2014). More sellers will create more competition and the organized crime will not benefit from such dealings as the profits will be far much lower than they currently are. There will also be lesser criminal activity since dealers will be able to advertise their products as well as settle disputes through legal channels. Drug peddlers will be able to involve the police in the case of any disagreements thus encouraging safer means of solving drug related disputes (Luban, O’Sullivan & Stewart, 2014).
Another advantage of legalizing the sale of narcotics is the amount of money that will be saved by the government. Instead of using billions of dollars on the war on drugs, the money will be put to better use such as educating people on the harm of over indulging in drugs or rehabilitating those that get addicted (Intelligence debates, 2017). The money acquired through taxation will also help in promoting awareness on the effects of drugs so as to ensure that legalizing does not do more harm than good. Legalization will also help reduce the number of non violent individuals sent to federal prison after being found in possession of narcotics. Most people make the assumption that violence is as a result of drugs such as narcotics. However, most of the violence results from the fact that most of these drugs are sold illegally. Legalizing narcotics will ensure that all activities are conducted legally therefore leaving little room for crime or violence (Intelligence debates, 2017).
While legalizing narcotics will have positive results, there are those against the move as they believe that it will have no impact on the war on drugs. Although making narcotics legal will increase competition, it will not do away with the black market as people will still seek to deal under such environments so as to evade issue like taxation and quality control. Since the black market will still remain in existence, the violence and trafficking issues will remain regardless of the narcotics being legalized (DFAF, 2005). Another problem raised is that legalizing will encourage addiction and over indulgence since they will be easily available. More distributors will mean competition and this will attract cheaper prices. Low prices will encourage more people to indulge in drug taking since they are easily available and cheap. It will also lead to more addiction cases since those willing to use narcotics will have no limitations to do so. The government will therefore have more problems related to drug use such as addiction, rehabilitation cases as well as violence and accidents committed under the influence of narcotics. Legalizing will therefore increase on the problems associated with narcotics rather than solving them (DFAF, 2005).
Legalization of narcotics holds the key to solving the issue that prohibition has failed to achieve. By legalizing narcotics, the approach on drug control will be more successful as people will be more willing to buy from legal distributors rather than going to the black markets. As a result, the government will have managed to regulate the quality of narcotics sold as well as reducing the amount of crime associated with the illegal trafficking of narcotics. Legalizing their sale means that vendors get assistance from the police whenever a problem is encountered. Since the dealers will be taxed, the drug industry will be a source of income instead of the consumer of government funds like it is today. Similar to how people who consume alcohol or tobacco are allowed to control their consumption of the drugs, narcotic users will be able to use the drugs in ways that do not harm their health. By making narcotics legal, users will be more careful when buying and using the drugs and this will reduce the risks involved in using narcotics. Although prohibition seems as an ideal solution, legalization of narcotics is better equipped to end the war on drugs in the case of narcotics.
References
American Civil Liberties Union, (2005) “Against drug prohibition” retrieved from, http://aclu.procon.org/view.source.php?sourceID=001737
Balkin, K. (2005). Drug legalization. Farmington Hills, Mich: Greenhaven Press.
Cato Institute, (2004) “Cato handbook for congress” retrieved from, http://aclu.procon.org/view.source.php?sourceID=002163
Drug Free America Foundation, (2005) “Myths about the drug war” retrieved from, http://aclu.procon.org/view.source.php?sourceID=002166
Goldstein, M. J. (2010). Legalizing drugs: Crime stopper or social risk?. Minneapolis, MN: Twenty-First Century Books.
Intelligence Debates, (2017) “Legalize drugs” retrieved from, http://www.intelligencesquaredus.org/debates/legalize-drugs
Luban, D., O'Sullivan, J. R., & Stewart, D. P. (2014). International and transnational criminal law.
Miron A, (2009) “Commentary: Legalizing drugs to stop violence” CNN, retrieved from, http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/24/miron.legalization.drugs/index.html?iref=
Roe B, (2005) “Why we should legalize drugs” retrieved from, http://aclu.procon.org/view.source.php?sourceID=002161
The Economist, (2009) “How to stop the drug wars” retrieved from, http://www.economist.com/node/13237193
