The U.S. War on Drugs: A War For and Against its People
...ively targeted those he despised under a moral premise and as we all know, marijuana is still illegal today. However, more and more people in higher social classes are beginning to put pressure on the marijuana debate, and now the government is beginning to listen to their voice. This sheds light on the legalization debate. One group of Americans wants to focus on a policy of harm reduction, wherein the U.S. acknowledges that drugs exist and that people will use them, so at least make it as harmless as possible. This does not necessarily imply that they believe drugs should be legalized, but that more negative effects including crime, corruption, and disease come out of their illegality than do good ones. By providing users with sterile syringes through needle exchange programs, they hope to curb another social problem—the rise of diseases such as HIV/AIDS. This group also recognizes the negative costs of keeping marijuana illegal. Though recognized by the Drug Enforcement Administration as “one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man” (Nadelmann 305), marijuana charges are responsible for a large number of people in jail, costing taxpayers a ridiculous amount of money for something that can easily be considered legal, should it be defined so by society. Yet others in society are on a moral crusade, a war, against drugs. They oppose harm reduction and are undoubtedly against legalization of drugs. By supporting harm reduction, they feel as if they are contradicting everything that has been taught as the “right” choice. They claim that by softening drug policies, society will see an increase in problems such as homelessness, decreased productivity and poor job performance, and many drug-related crimes. They claim that without primary prevention, drug use will skyrocket. These are the people that support spending $40 billion dollars on a war against drugs. Drugs do cause problems, it cannot be denied. However, the majority of drug-related crime is not violence, but mere possession or use. Prohibition as an example of how making something illegal creates more problems than it solves. Unlike those who support the war on drugs suggest, the prohibition of alcohol created more crime than did the reinstitution of alcohol by far. So what exactly does this highly publicized war on drugs entail aside from helping someone’s political campaign? There are two components of the war: stopping the flow of drugs into the United States as well as stopping use of the drugs within the United States through the criminal justice system. Interdiction involves guarding our borders to prevent drugs from entering. It also accounts for the foreign operations that attempt to end production or manufacturing of drugs in other countries. This can be effective in keeping some drugs out of the U.S., but it is virtually impossible to regulate everything so that absolutely no drugs come in. As it is stated over and over, as long as there is lucrative demand, there will always be supply. The second front of the war on drugs works to curb the demand but placing punishments on those who use it. The government has imposed laws against possession of drugs, including mandatory minimum sentences that can ultimately ruin a life (spending 15 years in jail for as selling as little as 2 ounces of cocaine). This may be an effective scare tactic for some, but obviously it has not been all too effective given the number of those in prison for similar charges. And out of those in jail for drug-related crimes, what groups are disproportionately represented? It would obviously not be those in positions of power, seeing as they can control the legality of their actions. Yet again the U.S. system puts the minorities at the disadvantage. It all seems to work as somewhat of a vicious cycle. Though there are multiple factors influencing drug use, it is highly associated with those living inner-city conditions, facing poverty and hardship daily. The system oppresses those born in the inner city, providing them with less than adequate educations and few opportunities, if any, for advancement. Many in these situations turn to drugs as either a profitable way to better themselves by becoming dealers, or they use drugs to escape the grim reality of their situation. The system that creates these problems, in turn punishes them for trying to escape them. Instead of preventing crime, the war on drugs creates a black market for drug supply. It increases crime as well as corruption within those “fighting” against drugs themselves (i.e. policemen). So then is this war on drugs effective? It depends on whose perspective you are taking. It is effective at oppressing minorities, as the United States has historically proven they are highly successful at. According to Eitzen and Baca Zinn, studies show that Whites are much more likely to use illegal drugs, but that African Americans are four times more likely to be imprisoned for the same offenses. Minorities are targeted much more often than are Whites to b...