Incensed by the steadily growing number of deaths, crime and corruption created by illicit drug trade and use in the recent years, a number of persons drawn from both the government and the private sector have been calling for the legalization of drugs to curb the problems associated with the abuse and trade in drugs such as cocaine, heroin, and marijuana.
They argue that such a move would do more than any single act or policy in removing the biggest of societys social and political problems. However, these calls are unfortunate and could throw an already grave problem completely out of hand. If examined carefully, it becomes clear that legalization of drugs would not bring a solution to any of the problems associated with drug abuse.
Proponents of the move to legalize argue that drug use should be an individuals choice and the government should not control it in any way. This argument has two key shortcomings. First, we cannot just do anything we want with our bodies, just the same way a person cannot walk down the street naked, or say anything we want anywhere. The government has to step in at some point. Drug use is obviously more harmful than these two inconceivable acts.
Secondly, when people opt to do whatever they want with their bodies, such as drug use, it not only affects them, but also those around them (DEA, 2003). To put it practically, a driver who is high on drugs puts the life of others on the road in danger. Such a person cannot operate machinery or even tend for their children and families as required of them. Therefore, the argument that every one has a right to do whatever they want with their bodies is simply misplaced.
Proponents of the debate to legalize drugs argue that this move will discourage drug use, citing a report by the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction that the Dutch are the lowest users of cannabis. They attribute this to Netherlands soft stance on drugs which permits cannabis sale at coffee shops and the possession of not more than 5 grams of cannabis. However, this is a shallow argument.
The Dutch governments soft policy on marijuana use has created a much bigger problem: the differentiation of markets between hard drug users and dealers (heroin, cocaine and amphetamines) and soft drug users (marijuana) (NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2001).
Consequently, the number of marijuana users has fallen as most people have resorted to hard drugs, making the country a criminal center for illegal artificial drug manufacture, especially ecstasy, in addition to becoming a home for the production and export of marijuana breeds that have been reported to be ten times higher than normal (DEA, 2003). Besides, a 2001 study in Australia that found that prohibition deters drug abuse (NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2001).
Drug laws are very important in keeping these harmful substances out of reach of children. As long as drugs laws are put in place, the prices will continue to be higher, beyond the reach of most underage persons and even youths. The link between pricing and rate of drug use among young adults is evident in alcohol and drug use.
Studies show that high prices of alcohol and cigarettes result into decline in use of the substances (DEA, 2003). In addition, legalization of drugs would encourage sellers to recruit children sellers who can easily convince their peers to use the substances, hence increasing drug penetration into society. As long as drugs are not legalized, such a move is very unlikely, or can occur only in small scales.
References
DEA (U.S. Department of Justice: Drug Enforcement Administration). (2003). Speaking out against Drug Legalization. Web.
NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research. (2001). Does prohibition deter cannabis use? Web.
Various studies have attempted to determine the causes, progress, and other aspects of drug abuse. Nevertheless, few studies have attempted to describe the perception of law enforcers towards drugs, drug abuse, or drug enforcement process. Petrocelli, Oberweis, Smith, and Petrocelli (2014) have chosen a relatively unique topic and area of study. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to develop a comprehensive critique of the journal article in order to achieve the aforementioned goal.
Study problem
The article provides an in-depth background of the drug problem in the US. First, the authors recognize the huge amount of resources the federal government has been using every year to deal with this crime and provide support to the affected people. Secondly, the authors further describe the findings by previous researchers such as Miron (2008) and Miron and Waldock (2010), which provides evidence that the federal government spends more than $44 billion every year in enforcing drug laws. Thirdly, the researchers argue that the relationship between social norms and compliance and the law enforcement system is not well understood. The researchers suggest that the cause of these gaps in knowledge is the lack of large-scale scientific studies of the perceptions or perspectives of the police.
Underlying assumptions in the development of study problem
According to the researchers, it is known that the drug problem is a major issue in the US. For instance, it is statistically known that police officers are the major players in the war against drugs, with statistics indicating that they have been arresting about 3 million people per year for crimes associated with drugs and drug abuse. However, what is not known is that the perceptions or attitudes of the law enforcers are important in determining various variables in the problem. Therefore, their attitude towards crime is important because their perceptions of the war against drugs have a profound impact on the process of law enforcement.
Essentially, the researchers have identified an area that most studies tend to ignore. Noteworthy, the study problem takes a unique approach to the drug problem in the US. It attempts to fill the gaps in knowledge by examining the attitudes of the law enforcing institution rather than examining the impact of the problem or perceptions of the society.
Research questions
The researchers fail to provide a detailed description or presentation of the research question of their study. It is worth noting that the conventional requirement for scientific journals is to provide a clear description of the research question that encompasses the entire problem. In this article, the researchers have failed to provide this important feature. Nevertheless, the study problem, as well as a comprehensive and clear description of the background, has been provided. Within the background, it is evident that the researchers were interested in answering the question, what are the perceptions/attitudes of the police officers towards drug crime and the war against drugs? In addition, they wanted to answer the question, what impacts do these perceptions have on the war against drugs in the US?
Research Design
The study is empirical in nature. The researchers developed a quantitative study that primarily works with statistics to describe the phenomenon. It seeks to fill the gap in knowledge about the perceptions of police officers towards the war on drugs. Moreover, the researchers target population for the study was a group of police officers enrolled in a national training course on drug interdiction. One of the tutors at the course was a member of the research team, but the identity has been blinded for ethical purposes.
Secondly, the researchers used survey questions to collect data from the study population. Survey questionnaires were used as the appropriate means of capturing data from the study population.
Ethical considerations
It is unfortunate that the researchers did not provide a clarification of the ethical concerns in the article. In fact, in social science research, a number of ethical issues are likely to occur. For instance, it is worth noting that the researchers touched a critical and sensitive sociopolitical and economic field. Drug crime is a major threat to national and international security. In addition, the researchers touched on a critical aspect of the problem- attitudes of the individuals tasked with eliminating the problem. In fact, the study worked with individuals rather than the institution. By eliciting and attempting to examine police attitudes towards a critical issue like drug abuse, the researchers were prone to elicit individual emotions.
Thus, it is worth noting that the researchers faced some ethical problems. For example, they were supposed to obtain informed consent from the participants. Secondly, the participants identities were supposed to be blinded. Third, they were supposed to generalize the results rather than attributing some types of attitudes to a single department or regional police. In addition, they were not supposed to elicit emotions in the participants by asking too much personal questions. Despite the critical nature of research ethics in the study, the article fails to show this feature.
Measurement of variables
The purpose of using the survey method of data collection was to ensure that a wide range of variables was captured. For instance, the study captures individuals as well as agency-level variables such as race, gender, experience, ethnicity, and type and size of the police department. Measurement of the variables was done by relating each variable to the perceived extent of application of law enforcement. For instance, the officers were asked to report whether a given aspect of law enforcement was (1) too strict, (2) adequate, (3) fairly adequate, (4) not adequate, or (5) not strict at all. A scoring system similar to a Likert scale was used to measure each variable.
Validity of responses
Despite a number of failures to address some ethical issues, the researchers successfully obtained a high degree of validity in the responses given. For instance, the participants were aware that their identities were concealed, which made them give honest answers. This is evident because the answers given vary widely across the Likert-like scoring system.
Sample population
The study targeted more than 1,000 officers as the study sample. They argued that the homogeneity of the police force allows the study to use a small sample as a representative of the entire force with more than 1 million police officers. This makes sense because the police department has a relatively high degree of homogeneity. Nevertheless, it is recommended that future studies use a relatively higher sample to represent a large population.
Statistical analysis
Being quantitative research, the study was successful in using statistical analysis to address the research problem. In this context, the researchers used simple statistics and measures of central tendency. Percentages of individuals giving a certain answer to a given question were the main aspect of the study.
Results
The results indicate that police officer have strong and relatively similar attitudes towards drug enforcement. The statistical results are well described using percentages. Percentages were used widely to determine police attitudes towards the problem, which means that they suit the question.
References
Miron, J. (2008). The budgetary implications of drug prohibition. Economics of criminal law, 17(2), 553-570.
Miron, J., & Waldock, K. (2010). The budgetary impact of ending drug prohibition. Washington, DC: The Cato Institute.
Petrocelli, M., Oberweis, T., Smith, M. R., & Petrocelli, J. (2014). Assessing police attitudes towards drugs and drug enforcement. American journal of criminal justice, 39(1), 22-40.
Drug abuse is a global problem affecting countries all over the world. Common drugs that are being abused include bhang, cocaine and heroin just to mention a few (Lyman 102). The increasing number of companies producing and distributing drugs is the reason behind the increasing drug abuse. It is important to note that the most numerous group of drug abusers in the world is the youth. The reason for that is the pressure from their peers who are using the drugs.
Drug abusers get the drugs from drug dealers who manage drug cartels (Lyman 145). Mexico is one of the nations where drug cartels are rampant. This is attributable to the geographical location and the fact that it is the origin of drugs such as cannabis and heroin. This paper seeks to analyze the history of drug dealers in Mexico as well as the impact they have on Mexico and other nations.
History of drug dealers in Mexico
The historical link of drug trafficking in Mexico has a lot to do with Mario Villanueva who was known as the governor of narco and General Gutierrez Rebello who was an antidrug czar (Oyarvide 1). While Mario is currently imprisoned in the USA, Gutierrez is serving his term in a Mexican prison.
According to sociologist Luis Astorga, the history of drug cartels in Mexico has a correlation with the political eras in the region. This means that drug trafficking in Mexico is rampant in political periods. Astorga gives a four period timeline of the years 1914 to 1947, 1947 to 1985, 1985 to 2000 and from 2000 to date. The last period is during the reign of Vincente Fox who was a member of a non-PRI political party. Astorga indicates that most of the drug dealers in Mexico began operating during the 1910 industrial revolution.
Despite the fact that the laws inhibiting the production and sale of drugs such as marijuana and opium were enforced, the sale of drugs was facilitated by the governors who worked together with the drug dealers. Above all, the origin of drug cartels in Mexico can be traced to Miguel Gallardo, the founder of Guadalajara cartel. Miguel was a federal police agent who controlled drug trade across the border of Mexico and USA (Oyarvide 1). He is the man behind the smuggling of drugs such as marijuana and opium into the American soil.
Effects of Drug cartels
Drug cartels in Mexico are arranged in ranks, with the falcons being the lowest in rank. The falcons have the responsibility of getting information on the ground and pass it on to the other members of the cartels. As such, they are the eyes and ears of the drug cartels. The hitmen, lieutenants, and the drug lords, who are highest in rank, follow the falcons respectively.
Nevertheless, other groups of people operating in drug cartels include producers and suppliers of the drugs. Common drug cartels in Mexico include La Familia, Los Negros, Tijuana, Los Caballeros, Los Zetas, and the Gulf Cartel just to mention a few (Grillo 1).
Mexican drug cartels have had significant effects on the economic, social, and political stability of Mexico. First of all, they have been the reason behind the unending violence in Mexico, which has claimed the deaths of many people. In fact, statistics from the attorney generals office in Mexico indicate that nine out of ten victims of drug war were die-hard members of the Mexican drug cartels.
The reason for this conflict is the fight against drug cartels by the Mexican president Calderon. Calderon doubled the number of federal police officers in charge of seizing drug traffickers. This conflict is also the reason behind the September 2008 grenade attacks in Morelia, which led to the death of over 100 people.
Drug cartels in Mexico have also led to corruption of government officials as they take bribes from the leaders of drug cartels. Most leaders favor particular cartels and in turn, they are guaranteed votes from the members and followers of those cartels. This brings about the issue of corruption. In addition, drug cartels are responsible for social problems such as human trafficking, exploitation of immigrants, and murder of politicians among other problems (Oyarvide 1).
Impact on other nations and the USA
Mexican cartels have also had a significant impact on other nations such as USA, China, countries of Europe and the Middle East. For instance, Mexican cartels pose the greatest threat in crime to the United States. They are also responsible for several killings, home invasions, and kidnappings in the United States of America. Statistics indicate that about 19 citizens of the United States were killed in 2008 and another 92 killed in 2009 and 2010. These deaths are claimed to be linked to the Mexican drug cartels.
Conclusion
Taking all of that into account, it is clear that drug cartels in Mexico have had a negative impact on the stability of Mexico and the world at large. The reason is that the Mexican government has put measures of fighting drug cartels in an effort to eliminate them. Elimination of drug cartels in Mexico will not only make the nation stable but it will also rejuvenate the peace status that the nation enjoyed before the emergence of drug cartels.
Works Cited
Grillo, Ioan. Mexico cracks down on violence. 2006. Web.
Lyman, Michael. Drugs in Society: Causes, Concepts and Control. Cincinnati: Anderson Publishing, 2010. Print.
Latin America has been the central region within which drugs are manufactured and trafficked to other regions of the world for decades. For instance, cocaine is majorly produced in Peru, Colombia, and Bolivia. The drugs are then transported through the Caribbean Islands and Mexico to other parts of the world. However, the drugs have caused severe damage to these countries, especially to the youth (Indie, 2015). Drugs have been the major cause of the rise in the levels of corruption, disobedience to the law, and human rights abuses
The selection highlights the key challenge of drug cartels in Latin America. Drug cartels have positioned themselves central to the economy and the money obtained through drug trafficking is used to finance violent activities across different parts of Latin America. The selection also depicts the problem of insecurity in Latin America caused by constant entanglement between the government and drug cartels. The problem has spread even to the regions near the border of the United States. The challenge at the border is contributed to by the violence characterized in Mexico as a result of the war on drugs. The situation has demanded the involvement of law enforcement officers who are engaged in a bloody confrontation with the drug cartels to contain the situation (Indie, 2015). The events also highlight the main idea of the selection which is to show the struggle between law enforcement officers and the violent activities propagated by the drug cartels.
The selection has various points that raise interest. The main point of interest is the commitment of two police officers who have resolved to commit themselves to the war against drug cartels. Another issue of concern is the insecurity caused by the confrontation between the law enforcement officers. During a fierce engagement between the police officers and the groups organized by drug cartels, dangerous weaponry, especially guns. The general population is threatened during such combat because they are left to defend themselves. If not lucky, some people may die out of stray bullets. The third notable issue of concern is the proliferation of the drug war in Mexica up to the border with the United States (Indie, 2015). It has necessitated the deployment of soldiers to the border to ensure that the war does not cross over into the US. The three elements discussed above have been emphasized in the trailer and seem central to the recording of the video.
The selection highlights two key themes in its presentation. The first theme is war, and the second key theme is death arising out of the war with the drug cartels. The selection is important in showing the negative effects of drugs. It also provides support for the need for governments to continue the war on drugs. However, the selection highlights violent situations that are not entertaining to all viewers (Indie, 2015). Also, the selection could provide motivation to the drug cartels to continue engaging the security apparatus in war.
I would recommend anyone interested in learning about Latin America to watch the documentary. It highlights the key challenge that the region faces in dealing with the drug cartels. Finally, I support the secret meeting between Sean Penn and El Chapo in Mexico. Although it has not been proven, the meeting could have been the tipping point leading to the capture of El Chapo . El Chapo has contributed significantly to the drug war in Mexico through financing violent groups. He has also been a key player in the production and trafficking of drugs around the world. Therefore, his capture means the trade would be significantly affected.
The juvenile drug court is a problem-solving institution that has a huge impact on the court system. Like any other court, it requires interaction among agencies, comprehensive treatment, continuous program assessment, and development of new models for change. It is highly important to find out what programs really make a positive difference in improving life and self-perception of teenagers, and what components a successful evidence-based practice must feature (Henggeler et al., 2006).
Evidence-based intervention is the one relying on the premise that the program can prove its effectiveness through the use of scientific methods. Despite the fact that a lot of juvenile courts are now encountering financial challenges, there are still many evidence-based interventions that can be implemented without additional expenses involved (Chandler, Fletcher, & Volkow, 2009). It has been proven that the most effective among them are those that target negative family experiences and encourage the participation of parents (Carr, 2009).
Brief Strategic Family Therapy (BSFT) is a program designed to improve adolescents behavior by addressing family issues that are in any way connected with the problems of this or that teenager. It is a short-term approach that helps youths abusing drugs and alcohol get rid of their addiction by establishing normal communication with their families (Miller, Sorensen, Selzer, & Brigham, 2006).
Thus, the paper at hand is aimed to investigate the effectiveness of this evidence-based program that has been developed and tested for over 35 years. It will start by identifying the facts supporting the application of the program and then describe its main components including the goals, principles, and domains, as well as conceptual influences on its evolution.
The Reasons to Implement BSFT for Addiction Treatment
The program relies upon the assumption that negative behaviors can be prevented or dealt with through improving family interactions. Maladaptive patterns are targeted and transformed into new, more effective ones (Szapocznik, Schwartz, Muir, & Brown, 2012).
BSFT program is capable of addressing teenagers problems providing their families with the necessary means to overcome addictions and return to normal life. The risk of drug and alcohol abuse is reduced in two major ways:
through correction of ineffective communication patterns in the family;
through the implementation of skill-building strategies that could help families be strong, enduring, and supportive.
The program views a family as the most influential driving force in both development of addiction and its treatment. The changes introduced in the family environment must be continuous and self-sustaining. Thus, the program is aimed not only to eliminate problems but also to create better functioning and more closely tight families. Since family members change the way they communicate, the effects produced usually last after the treatment has been finished (Szapocznik et al., 2012).
Another reason to implement BSFT is its precision and briefness. A session with a teenager (alone or with a family member) usually lasts from 60 to 90 minutes. It is enough to complete from 8 to 16 sessions within 3-4 months. However, severe cases of drug abuse often require doubling the number of sessions and their frequency. It is very convenient for adolescents that the treatment can be exercised in any place that seems to be the most suitable: home, the therapists office, or community settings (Robbins et al., 2011).
BSFT is designed as an integrative model that includes both structural and strategic techniques that are used to deal with problematic behaviors. Such a combination of approaches makes the program comprehensive, problem-oriented, well-structured, and practical as it is focused mostly not on theoretical implications but on developing real changes that can reduce the risks of addiction (Robbins et al., 2011).
BSFT is a flexible program that can be transformed to adapt to different situations and different kinds and severity of substance abuse. As it has been mentioned above, treatment modalities can be chosen according to the particular needs of this or that patient (Santisteban, Suarez-Morales, Robbins, & Szapocznik, 2006).
Besides being highly personalized, the program is also context-oriented, which means that it takes into consideration backgrounds of problem teenagers in order to identify what cultural factors could have led to drug abuse (Szapocznik et al., 2012).
Theoretical Framework of the Program
BSFT is supported by theoretical evidence provided by the following conceptual frameworks (Szapocznik et al., 2012):
communicative theory, which considers that a family is one inseparable whole and the problems of one family member is a collective responsibility of all the others;
interactional family therapy, which provides a concept map featuring blueprints for successful family communication;
strategic family therapy, which features specific interventions to deal with particular cases;
Social-Ecological Theory, which treats teenagers in the small family context that is a part of the larger social context;
Cognitive Behavior Theory, which is focused on the perception of the addiction problem by different family members and the ways they are likely to act under the suggested conditions;
affective therapy, which has a primary objective of developing closer connections in the family through the pragmatic use of emotions.
The Goals and Basic Principles of the Program
The major goals BSFT pursues when it is implemented in juvenile drug courts are to eliminate addictions and to modify family interactions so that they can reinforce positive behaviors (Henggeler et al., 2006).
There are three basic principles BSFT adheres to (Santisteban et al., 2006):
It is a family-system program, which implies the interdependence of family members experiences that have an impact on one another. Therefore, a teenager who is addicted to drugs reflects failures in family interactions.
It considers that repetitive patterns of accepted habitual behavior of the whole family influence individual decisions of each individual member.
It is practice-oriented. The program plans interventions that can eliminate negative behavior patterns, especially those that cause drug abuse. At the same time, BSFT strives to enhance the positive aspects of family interaction.
The Domains of the Program
All the interventions the program offers can be organized into four theoretically and empirically supported domains (Robbins et al., 2011):
Joining is the domain that has a purpose to create a union with the family. The therapist is required to show respect to the family members and the way the whole family is structured.
Tracking and diagnostic enactment help elaborate a treatment plan based on the practices observed in the family. The most important condition here is that the family should behave as they normally do as if the therapist were absent.
Reframing is applied to create motivation for improvement. For this purpose, negative experiences must be brought down to a minimum.
Restructuring is performed to modify family relations so that they would be based on trust, support, and mutual respect. It also has the purpose of developing conflict-solving skills.
Outcomes Supporting the Efficacy of the Program
BSFT has proven to be effective in dealing with not only general teenager problems but also with severe cases of drug abuse. The program has undergone a number of trials and is now on the list of model programs that constitute the National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices (Robbins et al., 2011).
BSFT strategies can be successfully implemented in drug courts in order to address both intrinsic and extrinsic factors that lead to deviant behavior. The initial research was carried out with a Hispanic population of Miami. The focus group consisted of 126 teenagers who used marijuana and other substances. The results showed that BSFT was more effective than group therapy as it managed to enhance family engagement by up to 93% (Rowe, 2012).
Recently, another study, which involved 400 adolescents and their families, was tested in NIDA showing even more promising results (Santisteban et al., 2006). The number of self-reported days of substance- and drug-abuse was considerably higher in the treatment as usual condition (TAU) than in the BSFT implemented during a period of 12 months, The model is now applied to various population groups including Hispanics, African Americans, and white Americans. It has also been successfully implemented in some European drug courts (Robbins et al., 2011).
Conclusion
Brief Strategic Family Therapy (BSFT) is an evidence-based program that is designed to address teenagers suffering from drug abuse through tracing related issues (capable of provoking deviant behaviors) in the family. Juvenile drug courts using the model provide therapists with a working tool, which deals not only with consequences of drug addiction but with its route causes that can be found in family maladaptive communicative patterns.
Studies of various population groups have demonstrated the effectiveness of the model in increasing family integration in the process of treatment and retention. Despite its short-term implementation, BSFT gives long-term results as the family gradually adopts a new model of communication-based on mutual trust, respect, and support.
References
Carr, A. (2009). The effectiveness of family therapy and systemic interventions for childfocused problems. Journal of family therapy, 31(1), 3-45.
Chandler, R. K., Fletcher, B. W., & Volkow, N. D. (2009). Treating drug abuse and addiction in the criminal justice system: improving public health and safety. Jama, 301(2), 183-190.
Henggeler, S. W., Halliday-Boykins, C. A., Cunningham, P. B., Randall, J., Shapiro, S. B., & Chapman, J. E. (2006). Juvenile drug court: Enhancing outcomes by integrating evidence-based treatments. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 74(1), 42-54.
Miller, W. R., Sorensen, J. L., Selzer, J. A., & Brigham, G. S. (2006). Disseminating evidence-based practices in substance abuse treatment: A review with suggestions. Journal of substance abuse treatment, 31(1), 25-39.
Robbins, M. S., Feaster, D. J., Horigian, V. E., Rohrbaugh, M., Shoham, V., Bachrach, K.,& & Vandermark, N. (2011). Brief strategic family therapy versus treatment as usual: results of a multisite randomized trial for substance using adolescents. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 79(6), 713-727.
Rowe, C. L. (2012). Family therapy for drug abuse: Review and updates 20032010. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 38(1), 59-81.
Santisteban, D. A., Suarez-Morales, L., Robbins, M. S., & Szapocznik, J. (2006). Brief strategic family therapy: Lessons learned in efficacy research and challenges to blending research and practice. Family Process, 45(2), 259271.
Szapocznik, J., Schwartz, S. J., Muir, J. A., & Brown, C. H. (2012). Brief strategic family therapy: An intervention to reduce adolescent risk behavior. Couple and Family Psychology: Research and Practice, 1(2), 134-145.
Drug use has always been identified with marginalized populations and treated as a threat to public order rather than an issue of public health. This perception has led to its criminalization and prohibition rather than prevention and treatment (Roberts 110). In the 1970s, Richard Nixon launched the war on drugs (Crandall 144). Marijuana and heroin were categorized as Schedule 1 drugs with the harshest punishments of any controlled substances. Nixons domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman admitted these drugs were purposefully publicly associated with the antiwar left and black people as a pretext to disrupt those communities (Baum).
In 1984, Reagan increased federal penalties for drug possession and launched the advertising campaign Just Say No , propagating the idea that drug addiction results from individual failure. Crack cocaine, used mostly by African Americans, was heavily criminalized compared to powder cocaine used by the low-income white population. Drugs were presented as a moral threat to American culture but were actually used as a tool of social control, specifically targeting low-income minorities.
Recently, people have begun questioning the narrative around drug addiction and the effectiveness of government prevention measures. After forty years and a trillion dollars, the volume of drugs in the United States has remained relatively the same (Crandall 321). Overdose deaths have increased by 137%, and ballooning incarceration rates disproportionally represent black, Latino, and low-income populations (Crandall 320-321). In 2012, Latin American officials denounced the United States military counter-supply strategies for creating havoc in their fragile democracies (Crandall 324). Given the financial burden and lack of results, the consensus is that the war on drugs has brought more damage than good.
I believe Portugals progressive drug policy should serve as an example to our legislature. In 2000, Portugal decriminalized all hard and soft drugs at the recommendation of a panel of experts formed to combat the heroin epidemic. Problematic users decreased by half, and the number of people seeking treatment increased by 60% (Crandall 323). Clearly, decriminalization effectuates a positive change. Drug possession is still illegal on a federal level, but state laws are beginning to favor a more compassionate method similar to Portugal. Organizations such as the Drug Policy Alliance advocate legislative reforms, for instance, sterile syringe access, establishing supervised consumption services, and drug checking. Several states have adopted the 911 Good Samaritan Law that allows people to receive emergency medical care without fear of arrest (Jakubowski et al. 233).
In 2016, California legalized the possession, cultivation, and sale of marijuana. Tax revenue was rededicated to youth programs, environmental damage clean-up, and public safety. In 2020, Oregon approved Measure 110, the first measure to decriminalize all drugs in the U.S. and use excess marijuana tax revenue to expand drug treatments. At the moment, the recreational use of cannabis is legalized in eighteen states. Overall, voters are ready for the war on drugs to end and reallocate resources to more effective programs.
In conclusion, drug prohibition was unfairly used as a tool of social control against marginalized communities. Since the 2010s, the failure of strict prohibition laws to reduce drug consumption had led to different legislative policies. If the goal is truly to decrease addiction and overdose, there needs to be a change in the social perception of drug addiction, and society needs to prioritize safety and health over punishment. The current shift in drug policy is only the first step in the right direction.
Crandall, Russell. Drugs and Thugs: The History and Future of Americas War on Drugs. Yale University Press, 2020.
Jakubowski, Andrea, et al. Knowledge of the 911 Good Samaritan Law and 911-calling behavior of overdose witnesses. Substance abuse, vol. 39, no. 2, 2018, pp. 233-238. Web.
Roberts, Bryan R., and Yu Chen. Drugs, Violence, and the State. Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 39, 2013, pp. 105125.
Sutton, Matt. Drug Policy Actions Measure 110 Prevails. Drug Policy Alliance, 2020. Web.
International drug trafficking is defined as an illicit trade of narcotics that involves the cultivation, production, distribution, and sale of various substances which are prohibited by law (United Nations n.d.). It is considered a transnational threat and dangerous to the health and social fabric of society. The global drug trade is so large that similar to any industry it can be measured through economic terms of distribution, sales, and revenue.
Since the industry operates on the black market as an illegal enterprise, it is difficult to determine exact figures. However, many governments and organizations rely upon analyzing the demand for narcotics. Since drug enterprises receive revenue solely from sales based on demand (which is always exceeded), this method provides an estimation for the scale of the global narcotics trade. The UN estimates the illicit drug market to be worth $320 billion or 0.9% of the worlds GDP (Organization of American States 2013).
Organized crime and illegal terrorist groups are directly linked to the global drug trade. They have developed a sophisticated system of drug production, transportation, distribution, and sale. The unregulated and illicit market serves as a method to finance their operations. The income is used to expand production, intimidate or influence politicians, and invest in ideology. The drug-related activity involves at least 35% of organized crime groups (UNODC 2017c). The large-scale of the global drug trade has grown primarily due to the levels of financing and expansion that organized crime has invested in the industry.
The globalization of the 21st-century world economy has created a widespread distribution network for drug trafficking. To this point in history, drugs have been a relevant societal concern, causing socio-economic decay and numerous population health issues. Most countries focused on combatting the epidemic domestically. With time, the industry grew to the point of becoming a national security concern. Governments and international organizations began to focus efforts on protecting borders and using geopolitical conflicts as a method to combat drug trafficking. The drug trade is considered a major issue for social stability around the world.
However, some nation-states benefit tremendously from the industry as the countries serve as centers of drug production. The resulting cash flow contributes to the countrys economy, usually suffering from widespread poverty (Jenner 2011). The drug trade has an impact on legal businesses and the international economy. Large sums of money are laundered and integrated into the global financial system, having no legitimate origin or the support of proper business practices.
Also, the money is used for purposes of corruption that destabilize national and financial institutions. Businesses become involved as their distribution networks are utilized for drug trafficking. Furthermore, money laundering schemes can create false market parameters that impact competition and revenues (European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction 2016). Modern financial controls are negligent in controlling the finances associated with the international drug trade.
Legal Status
Potent and addictive drugs (particularly opiates) were historically present as far as the 17th century. In the 19th century, nations began to enact regulations after seeing societal effects. At one point, China took an isolationist position on trade with Europe as the British sought to legalize the opium trade. The British Pharmacy Act of 1868 is the first legislation seeking to regulate drug usage and commerce in a Western country (Musto n.d.).
Drug-related legislation always has a standard formula to encompass any related activity such as cultivation, production, transportation, sale, or usage of the substances. However, some countries have taken a more liberal approach and choose to simply prohibit the drugs but do not classify them as a criminal act but rather as a health issue. All known national and international jurisdictions have laws regarding the prohibition of drugs. However, there is a difference in enforcement and punishment of drug-related charges in various countries
Australia criminalizes the transport, possession, usage, and supply of drugs, including cannabis. The country follows the National Drug Strategy which attempts to balance supply-demand and harm reduction strategies. Australia and several other nations have implemented a policy to limit consequences for regular drug users in possession of lesser amounts of narcotics and focused on social rehabilitation (State Library 2016).
Although drug trafficking is illegal internationally, some European nations chose to decriminalize individual narcotic possession. Cannabis has been fully legalized in Uruguay. However, all jurisdictions have no tolerance for the trafficking of hard drugs on a large-scale (Graham, 2014). There are major international drug control treaties that all nations have signed. The most recent is the 1988 United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances. It focuses on establishing methods to combat trafficking and related activities (such as violent crime and money laundering) around the world through international cooperation. This helps to resolve jurisdictional issues such as extradition (UNODC 2017b). Australia is directly involved in these multilateral conventions.
Policing and Sanction
As a major international issue, a significant amount of resources is aimed at policing the drug trade. The UN police and INTERPOL work together with regional law enforcement to disrupt and dismantle networks used for trafficking. Assessments of the local police are made to establish competent mechanisms that deal with drug-related criminal activities (UNPOL n.d.). International and national jurisdictions have policies similar to the Kingpin Act in the US which directly applies sanctions to large narcotics traffickers and their organizations. This including limiting access to the property and financial activity (OFAC 2014).
Furthermore, countries spend a significant amount of money on drug control agencies, specifically to fund treatment programs and law enforcement. Australia spends approximately $1.7 billion (UNSW 2013). Meanwhile, the US which is heavily involved in international drug control spends $27 billion annually (Office of National Drug Control Policy 2017).
Policy Proposal
There are a variety of factors that policy should target to combat the global narcotics trade. Terrorists and criminal organizations depend on drug trafficking as a major source of income. An effective approach to limit production is to target the flow of revenue to these enterprises. The core effort should be focused on cross-border collaboration to prevent supply-chain and distribution networks to restrict illicit money laundering, corruption, and investments.
Financial institutions can collaborate with law enforcement agencies to identify suspicious accounts, persons of interest, and information that can be traced. Further, money and product flows are physically controlled thorough patrol of the main trafficking routes and hubs or via online marketplaces specializing in the drug trade (UNODC 2017a). Policy and implementation resources should be directed at large-scale production and distribution of narcotics.
The three broad components of the historic drug control policy are eradication, interdiction, and alternative development. However, most programs and operations rarely encompass all three aspects, instead of focusing on controlling supply through eradication in hopes of raising costs for producers and consumers of drugs to the point where demand falls. Overall, such an approach failed in the long-term perspective because it did not focus on the core problem which causes the drug epidemic (Fukumi 2016).
The policy should emphasize sustainable development in local communities and internationally to direct resources towards socio-economic development. International cooperation is specifically effective in aiding countries that have limited resources or serve as central points for drug production. The most effective drug control strategy is based on long-term and large-scale sustainable development.
Reference List
European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction 2016, The impact of drug markets on legal business and the economy. Web.
Fukumi, S 2016, Cocaine trafficking in Latin America, Routledge, Abingdon.
Graham, G 2014, Drug laws around the world does anyone get it right?, The Telegraph. Web.
Jenner, M 2011, International drug trafficking: a global problem with a domestic solution, Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 901-927. Web.
Musto, D n.d., The history of legislative control over opium, cocaine, and their derivatives. Web.
OFAC 2014, Narcotics sanction program. Web.
Office of National Drug Control Policy 2017, National drug control budget. Web.
Organization of American States 2013, The economics of drug trafficking. Web.
State Library 2016, History of Drug Laws. Web.
United Nations n.d., Drug trafficking. Web.
UNODC 2017a, Executive summary: conclusions and policy implications. Web.
UNODC 2017b, Legal framework on drug trafficking. Web.
UNODC 2017c, The drug problem and organized crime, illicit financial flows, corruption and terrorism. Web.
UNPOL n.d., Serious and organized crime. Web.
UNSW 2013, Australian government spending on drugs (drug budgets). Web.
The history of the United States Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) began in 1915 when the Bureau of Internal Revenue was established. The majority of responsibilities for the DEA remained the same over the years, with the only essential difference becoming the decision to separate general drug law enforcement into the Federal Bureau of Narcotics and the Bureau of Drug Abuse Control (Drug Enforcement Administration, n.d.). Therefore, the biggest challenges awaited the US on the way to normalizing drugs during 1960, right at the time when the nation began learning about all kinds of drugs, the existence of drug dealers, and numerous other issues that related exclusively to the new regulations. According to Jones et al. (2016), the willingness to establish the so-called drug-free zones turned out to be an insufficient strategy since countless individuals had to cope with the effects of drug trafficking and its adverse influence on the environment.
Overview of DEA, State and Federal Authorizes Roles in Pharmaceutical Regulations
Prior to the second half of the 20th century, the US did not turn to drug use as tolerable comportment. Yet, the next three decades became the hardest in the lives of the drug enforcement officials who could not stop or at least slow down the popularization and increased rate of abuse of drugs. The 1970s became a decade when the future DEA started looking for a much more encompassing response to drug use because it was no longer seen as a trivial issue (Drug Enforcement Administration, n.d.).
Establishment of the DEA
The modern DEA was created in 1973 in an attempt to battle the majority of drug trafficking syndicates from Mexico and Colombia that gained an exceptionally high pace in terms of drug supply. The greatest demands were covered by international providers, and the DEA had to expand its operations in order to be able to respond to the upcoming challenges. Heroin and cocaine were placed under the control of the DEA, but their efforts seemed to be ineffective due to the growing number of traffickers and the expanse of drugs.
About the Drug Enforcement Administration
History
The Drug Enforcement Administration was founded in 1973 as the body that was expected to regulate compliance with the substance laws established in the U.S. (Drug Enforcement Administration, n.d.). Thus, from its very conception, the DEA was linked to the criminal and justice system of the U.S. In the 1980s, the emergence and the following widespread use of crack cocaine led to a drop in prices and the increase in the accessibility of the drug (Drug Enforcement Administration, n.d.). As a result, the DEA had to expand to address the described issue promptly. Furthermore, the emergence of drug mafia aggravated the problem, making it more difficult for DEA to address drug peddling (Drug Enforcement Administration, n.d.). In 1995, the Mobile Enforcement Teams (MET) was introduced to assist DEA in performing its functions since, on the local level, the law enforcement resources were quite scarce (Drug Enforcement Administration, n.d.).
Law, Rules, and Regulations
The responsibility that the DEA and pharmaceutical organizations share relates to the regulations that cover the supply and demand of various drugs. This was one of the main reasons for the deployment of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) that was intended to outline the distribution, dispense, and manufacturing of drug provisions that could be utilized or altered for illicit purposes (Tayabali et al., 2018). One of the essential government bodies responsible for the CSA and its implementation was the National Association of Boards of Pharmacy that reinforced the role of medical personnel and advocated for efficient collaboration between every crucial stakeholder. With all the personal information of the patient (or an intended receiver of medical services and drugs), the DEA gets a chance to analyze schedules and monitor drug expiry dates (Jones et al., 2016). This step aids the agency in avoiding any mistakes in professional judgment and ensuring that shared responsibilities are fulfilled. The DEA is constantly connected to pharmacists across the country in order to gain access to the latest updates and follow relevant regulations.
Synthetic Drugs
Synthetic drugs represent a series of illicit substances that are produced in a laboratory, either commercially, for medical purposes, or illegally, in concealed workshops. This is a worldwide issue that has gained a lot of traction across the US due to the incredible strength of synthetic drugs and their difference from natural counterparts (Kemp et al., 2016). Even though the majority of synthetic illicit substances come from overseas, the US Customs and Border Protection agency suggests that internal development is also thriving (Yin, 2019). One of the first servings of synthetic drugs was shipped in 2008, when a sizable drug haul of spice was identified in Dayton, OH. The threat that synthetic drugs pose to human health cannot be replicated by most natural illicit substances. This ultimately shows that the government should exert additional efforts to control and limit the circumvention of drugs and protect civilians from the deriving effects (Kemp et al., 2016). The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) was involved in the process as well, creating opportunities for the DEA in terms of regulatory oversight and timely reports on drug abuse and production.
A Case on Synthetic Drugs: United States v. Requena, 980 F.3d 30
Issue
In Los Angeles, CA, two males Andrew Raymond and Brian Requena were sentenced to 25 and 20 years of prison, respectively. The case relates to conspiracy and further intended distribution of synthetic drugs followed by money laundering (Mulvey, 2018). Since their efforts were nationwide, the Special Agent in charge and the US Attorney were involved together with the DEA and the Internal Revenue Service-Criminal Investigation office.
Facts about the Case
The evidence stated that Raymond and Requena produced and distributed spice in order to take over New York and populate it with head shops where synthetic cannabinoids would be available to anyone (Mulvey, 2018). The federal drug laws were evaded by the prosecuted individuals, but a search warrant on the criminals warehouse allowed the DEA to restore the supply chain and prevent it from further expansion. Raymond and Requenas weekly profits were approximately $100,000, which also allowed them to maintain a relatively large pool of employees required to manufacture, sell, and ship the majority of the product.
Decision
After considering the evidence and the arguments both from the prosecutor and the defense, the jury affirmed the conviction of the defendants. Specifically, the possession and production of illegal substances was justifiably deemed as a punishable offence.
Controlled Substances
History
Creation of the CSA
The Controlled Substances Act as a part of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 was introduced in 1971 into teh U.S. justice sytem (Peterson, 2015). The ultimate decision to deploy the CSA was based on the idea that the government should prepare a team consisting of groups of experts from a variety of fields who would function together to prevent drug abuse and also battle the increasing number of drug traffickers (Peterson, 2015).
The Controlled Substances Act (CSA)
Challenges posed by controlled substances.
The core reason why controlled substances became monitored by the government was the rising level of federal offenses linked to drugs. It ultimately pushed the Nixon administration to deploy a policy project that was turned into the first prototype of the CSA in 1969 (Peterson, 2015). College and high-school students became the primary targets of the new wave of drug trafficking, endangering the future of the whole nation. Ultimately, controlled and decontrolled substances were included in the Act to help the government schedule its activities and pick the most efficient tactics depending on public interests, available agencies, drug manufacturer aspirations, and pharmacy association verdicts.
Furthermore, the introduction of the CSA allowed increasing control over pharmacies in regard to the purchase and selling of controlled substances. Thus, the threat of illegal transactions could be minimized.
A Case on Controlled Substances: MORA v. US, 94-CR-00729 (CPS)
Issue
A resident of California, David Mora, was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment for the distribution of substances that contained heroin.
Facts
In 1995, David Moora established what he would later refer to as the Mora brothers crack distribution gang. He also possessed and distributed more than one kilogram of a mixture that included fentanyl (US Department of Justice, 2021).
Decision
Even though no specific fines were imposed on Mora, he was ordered to pay an assessment fee of $100 upon release and then serve five more years of supervised release. The court records showed that Mora was a trafficker looking to expand his reach and sell illegal narcotics in other areas, including New Orleans, Louisiana (US Department of Justice, 2021). The offender was captured by an undercover agent who had successfully tracked down the delivery completed by Mora that contained fentanyl (1400 grams) and heroin (959 grams).
A Case on Opioid Abuse: U.S. v. Figueroa, CR No. 08-042-ML
Issue
Hector Figueroa from Providence was accused of the trafficking of opioid addiction medicine (specifically, Cocaine and Suboxone) (US Department of Justice, 2017).
Facts
The search of Figueroas residence allowed the police to discover an additional $17,000 in cash, drug packaging equipment, and 300 grams of cocaine (US Department of Justice, 2017). As soon as the postal inspectors investigated the video surveillance evidence, the law enforcement agency in association with the DEA was able to validate Figueroas association with the packages containing drugs.
Decision
Figueroa was sentenced to 45 months in prison after an attempted acquisition of opioid addition medications, possession of cocaine (300 grams), and purchase of 50 doses of Suboxone. According to the US Department of Justice (2017), additional three years of the federal supervised sentence were advised by the US District Court Judge W. Smith. The criminal pleaded guilty after the law enforcement officers executed a search warrant and identified a suspicious package that contained 50 Suboxone strips.
Federal vs. State Enforcement
Federal DEA Enforcement
The federal elements of the DEA enforcement are quite similar because the majority of primary responsibilities in both cases coincide for the respective agents. For instance, the DEA enforcement requires the federal and state staff to prepare the prosecution of violators of all the respective laws and reach out to the international level if necessary (Yin, 2019). Also, the DEA is in the full right to prevent violence perpetration across American communities since intimidation is one of the core strategies utilized by drug criminals.
State DEA Enforcement
Similarly, the state enforcement is focused on data collection and further dissemination of drug intelligence among responsible agencies in an attempt to prevent the further spread of smuggling activities (Jones et al., 2016). All kinds of assets are tracked down by the DEA in order to fulfill the provisions of the CSA and highlight the most efficient strategies intended to facilitate investigations and remove limitations associated with jurisdictions. Both federal and state enforcement measures are usually deployed in a manner that would allow for international cooperation and the eradication of large trafficking supply chains.
Drug Arrests and Prosecution
The process of arrest and prosecution is not rather challenging when it comes to the DEA because there are numerous legislations and governmental bodies that cope with the required investigation and substance tracking. The determination of the DEA officials allows them to consider numerous alternatives quickly and see how their actions could prevent other wrongdoers from engaging in more drug trafficking (Kemp et al., 2016). This is why extra research and development resources are invested in laboratory analysis and forensic chemistry capabilities, allowing drug experts to predict market trends, supply chain disruptions, and numerous other factors that could speed up the arrest of a drug criminal. The prosecution, on the other hand, depends on the chemical structure of the substance and the schedule of controlled substances (Peterson, 2015). Accordingly, the existence of separate analyses for every case involving drugs allows the DEA to paint a bigger picture and only address the most devastating problems first. The threshold for the issues related to drugs is established on the basis of prior wrongdoings in the area.
International Enforcement
One of the main reasons why the DEA was extended outside the US was the origin of synthetic drugs that forced the government to contact other countries and ensure that mutually beneficial drug trafficking laws were enforced. Accordingly, the rate of back and forth travels had to be monitored, allowing the DEA to track suspicious activities and point out the most evident illicit behaviors (Tayabali et al., 2018). With the international drug trade being heavily regulated from all sides, the US had to address that issue with the help of partnering with the European Union and other countries across the globe. The most vivid section that requires additional attention from the international DEA enforcement is the supply of cocaine and opium (Jones et al., 2016). The existing anti-drug laws prove that the DEA has reached a rather high level of protection that can be seen forcing quite a few smaller smugglers to cease their operations. The DEA tends to reach outside the US to send certain drug criminals back to the country and overcome the unwanted benefits of territorial sovereignty that can be achieved with certain nation-states.
Conclusion
Summary
The creation of the Drug Enforcement Administration in 1973 was an important step for the United States that altered the countrys approach to tracking drugs and their use among citizens. Knowing that the rates of abuse were alarming, the government has done everything it could to limit the spread of illicit substances and apprehend the most aggressive drug offenders. As one of the largest and the most successful anti-drug bodies in the world, the DEA remains a crucial force in the discussion on the topics of controlling drug trafficking and international drug capture. The cases reviewed within the framework of the current paper prove that the DEA was deployed at the right time and the right place since it paved the way for quite a few legal acts that mediated substance use and drug prescription. The majority of established partnerships create room for the DEA to resort to the deployment of large educational programs and aid the government in sharing responsibilities with pharmaceutic agents as well.
References
Drug Enforcement Administration. (n.d.). What we do. DEA. Web.
Drug Enforcement Administration. (n.d.). Our history. Web.
Kemp, A. M., Clark, M. S., Dobbs, T., Galli, R., Sherman, J., & Cox, R. (2016). Top 10 facts you need to know about synthetic cannabinoids: Not so nice spice. The American Journal of Medicine, 129(3), 240-244. Web.
Mulvey, E. (2018). Los Angeles men sentenced to 20 & 25 years in prison for running nationwide synthetic drug trafficking ring. DEA. Web.
Tayabali, K., Bolzon, C., Foster, P., Patel, J., & Kalim, M. O. (2018). Kratom: A dangerous player in the opioid crisis.Journal of Community Hospital Internal Medicine Perspectives, 8(3), 107-110. Web.
US Department of Justice. (2017). Providence man sentenced for trafficking opioid addiction medication suboxone and cocaine. Justice.gov. Web.
US Department of Justice. (2021). California man sentenced for violating the federal Controlled Substances Act. Justice.gov. Web.
The war against drugs has taken different shapes over the past century. Governments and jurisdictions rely on emerging ideas and criminal issues to implement superior policies that are intended to protect the lives and experiences of citizens. The possession, use, and trafficking of drugs are some of the practices that are linked to reduced security and increased criminal activities. However, the criminal justice systems and procedures put in place reveal that there is a need for drug decriminalization. This essay examines the nature of this issue from an affirmative point of view.
Drug Decriminalization
The idea of drug decriminalization is an evidence-based approach aimed at addressing the challenges of illicit substances. Different states in the United States have introduced new policies aimed at legalizing the possession, use, and transport of small quantities of various substances, such as bhang. A good example of such efforts is the Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion (LEAD) whose aim is to guide and support drug users through personalized treatment (Brennan, 2017). This model ensures that the individuals are to be booked or arrested for specific drug offenses. Some of them include low-level marketing and possession of certain substances.
From this analysis, it is evident that drug decriminalization is an initiative intended to eliminate the penalties for minor crimes associated with various substances. Some of these offenses include drug possession, abuse, and marketing (Virani & Haines-Saah, 2020). Another malpractice the relevant agencies address using the established legal systems includes the possession of various equipment individuals use to inject drugs into their blood systems, such as syringes and needles. In the United States, the government is proposing several measures to take the war on illicit drugs to the next level. A good example is the targeted Drug Policy Reform Act that has remained controversial. Many stakeholders have, therefore, been focusing on new approaches to help abusers instead of victimizing them.
Supporting Drug Decriminalization
Drug decriminalization has emerged as an evidence-based strategy that is capable of delivering various benefits. First, the model is capable of the federal funds or costs incurred in the countrys prison system. For instance, Virani and Haines-Saah (2020) revealed that around 1.6 million citizens were arrested in 2018 for drug-related offenses. Around 86 percent of such individuals were guilty of possessing, distributing, or selling small quantities of various drugs. These numbers overwhelmed the established criminal justice system. The consideration of the proposed initiative will address these challenges and make it possible for the targeted individuals to transform their lives.
Second, the government will be in a position to free up most of the available resources and systems. This achievement means that the relevant stakeholders will use such opportunities to address the needs recorded in other fields, such as healthcare, transportation, and homeland security (Gallagher, 2015). The decriminalization of such drugs will present additional opportunities for other participants to remain involved and identify better ways to achieve their maximum potential.
Third, the whole idea of drug decriminalization is capable of presenting additional strategies for focusing on the safety and health demands of the citizens. This initiative will guide the relevant agencies to be involved and empower these victims to lead better lives. They will acquire additional ideas for learning more about their medical problems and seek relevant support (Gallagher, 2015). This effort will transform their experiences and encourage them to sensitize their colleagues and partners. Such malpractice has the potential to deliver positive and sustainable outcomes.
Fourth, the established criminal justice model allows traffickers and users of drugs to be incarcerated. The move to decriminalize such substances will guide the relevant authorities to find and guide offenders accordingly. Such an initiative is capable of reducing the current problem of stigmatization (Brennan, 2017). The members of the society will be keen to support such individuals and guide them to identify better opportunities for transforming their experiences. The new model will become a new opportunity for most of the abusers to seek the relevant treatment and join support groups.
Finally, the process of decriminalizing drugs is recommendable since it might set the stage for other practices that are designed to reduce harm. For instance, the government has heroin-assisted support and treatment, drug checking, and medical marijuana programs that remain critical to meet the demands of the greatest majority (Virani & Haines-Saah, 2020). The decriminalization model will minimize some of these misdemeanors and encourage more people to be involved in strategies that can result in better life experiences. These efforts are capable of delivering notable results and transforming the experiences of more citizens in the country.
Conclusion
The above discussion has identified the concept of drug decriminalization as evidence-based and capable of delivering numerous advantages. The government needs to address some of the existing loopholes and identify additional ways to support the idea. Such an initiative will encourage more citizens to be part of the current harm reduction projects and free up the available resources to support the countrys homeland security, transport, and healthcare goals.
Gallagher, L. (2015). Should the United States move towards Portugals decriminalization of drugs? University of Miami International and Comparative Law Review, 22(2), 207-231. Web.
Any criminal activity should be handled with the urgency that it deserves to create a conducive environment for a better stay. This paper seeks to investigate the reason why juvenile delinquency is on the rise and how drugs influence the criminal activities in the juvenile.
Why the juvenile delinquency system has failed
Despite the efforts to exercise juvenile justice in the past century through rehabilitation and courts involvement in America, it has been of low significance due to the failure to acknowledge that most of the juvenile cases are a result of other factors, for example, peer influence, low self-control, and failure of carrying out a mental check (Weakley, 2010). Additionally, parents are the ones who know the strengths and weaknesses of the children since they spend most of their time together, their suggestions and views towards the crime committed should be handled with a lot of concern to help in determining the best cause of action to restore the convicted criminal to normalcy. Otherwise, the juvenile will try as much as possible just to realize that the same problem reappears despite the corrective measures put in place (Wolcott, 2003 ). The adults stay with the children most of the time and can monitor them well, however, the children in America being aware of the laws that protect them from harassment and punishment from parents enables them to deliberately indulge in all sorts of things including drug abuse of which affects their way of life now and in future. Referencing from the bible Exodus 20:12, it is written that children should obey their parents, how comes a youth/ child can take the parent to court instead of discussing the problem to find a solution. Above all the corrective measures that youth should face, the determinant is either the parents or the guardian who have much of the history and the traits that would help shape or restore the ethical behavior of the child (Whitehead et al., 2010).
Suitable punishment for violent offenders
Most of the time the juvenile offenders are heavily punished for petty offenses which are a result of emotional reactions due to low self-control, while the adults who commit terrible and brutal offenses are lightly punished. However, the parents failure to punish the children during their upbringing would lead to then corporal punishment. Before the juvenile offenders are punished, it would be better that they undergo medical tests to confirm their mental status, this would help to determine if the crime may have been a result of a mental disorder (Weakley, 2010).). The juvenile offenders in most cases are not responsible for the offenses they commit, under such cases it would be needless to administer corporal punishment, and instead the cause of the offense should be resolved. Through organizing for social counseling groups, the juvenile offenders who are not frequent frequently in and out of jail should be counseled and allowed to resume their daily chores with close administration from the selected counselors to ascertain the total character change.
Additionally, they should be allowed to join anti-drug campaign groups to model their character and perception towards drug use. The development argument at present rejects punishment administered to the children being that the children have the right to report abuse and punishment in America, the situation is seemingly worsening due to the fear of parents to exercise their duty in the child upbringing (Whitehead et al., 2010). It is the parents who know the characters of their children and are likewise able to correct them where they are wrong. The potion of illegalizing punishment administered to the youths and the children due to the development is not in order.
Police officers role as street social workers
Due to the latest technology, criminal activities have also advanced in a way that criminals can influence the youths with drugs to allow them to commit a crime. However, the police force had to undergo along with term specialization and professionalism to shape the approach and interaction with the youths and children. This was enhanced through the recruitment of more and better-educated police officers and the introduction of police refresher training to update and create more specialization areas (Watley, 2010). This was sought in the quest to shift the police function to encourage greater centralization in the provision of social services compared to the social workers who are mostly not available within the central business district, this is in favor of further proficient crime control.
The police officer just like the parents does understand that some of the behaviors that lead to delinquency are a result of peer influence, and the youths being of low self-esteem are prone to influence (Mackrow, 2008). The only way is to understand the cause of the drug use. Taking for
example in a home setup, when a parent realizes that one of the daughters or sons is under influence of drugs, it would be difficult to correct the wrong habit at the same time unless the affected is sober (Lype, 2009). In the past, the police have helped the youths a great deal, for example; the lost, bobbed and the stranded youths in the streets taking them to the recreation centers, safeguarding them from the traffic due to the complexity of road network systems in the US and at times referring them to the social agencies. These situations lead to professionalism in the line of duty and personal attributes hitherto, the police in the US are perceived to be guiding, assisting, and working together with the citizens to make America a better place to belong hence the police officer must play the role of the street social workers (Holier, 2010).
Impact of drugs on juvenile delinquency
The research carried out in America shows that the recent trend in the use of drugs by the youth is on the decline. However, the number of youths under influence of drugs remains high. Abuse of drugs does not only lead to delinquent behavior, it can also lead to anti-social attitudes and health-related problems which do not only affect the individual and the family, also the community and society respectively (Frontline, 1999). Youths under influence of drugs are a threat to the society, having limited sources of obtaining funds to sustain the vise often leads to the urge to obtain financial support through other dubious means for example; robbery, stealing from the parents and any other person, mismanaging the properties and business finance for selfish gain or dropping from college and other academic institutions as a result of frustrations and poor performance.
Anxiety and luck of self esteem among the addicts at times would lower the ability to exercise self control leading to frequent petty offences that would have been controlled if it were not for the drugs (Brian Brown, 2010).).
The use of hard drugs like cocaine, marijuana and other nicotinic drugs by the youths would lead to sexual activeness hitherto having a positive feeling towards the opposite sex, most of the youths especially boys and young men find involve themselves in rape cases leading to delinquency. Some of the offences that the youths commit under influence of drugs are petty hence require minor corrections (Chuck, 2010).). However, having been under influence of drugs, they get difficulties in admitting the offence leading necessitating their longer stay in the delinquency. Unlike the adults, who may flash back on the pending projects due to the drug use, the youths are un able to understand the problems that may arise due to the frequent delinquency cases being that they entirely depends on the support from the parents, it then only few of them have responsibilities that awaits (Whitehead et al., 2010). Therefore it is with content to affirm that dugs create an impact on juvenile delinquency.
Conclusion
Juvenile delinquency can be controlled through the parental involvement in the issues regarding their children; this will also lower the chances of the children being involved in the use of drugs at tender age. However, authorizing the children to convict their parents in a court of law however much they are offended should not be the case in America; this will lead to more cases of criminal activities as the children will not obey the instructions from the parents anymore.