The War on Drugs

Abstract 

The war on drugs is significantly affecting everyone in various ways, for instance, increased taxation for military support, numerous criminal in the streets and the legalization of drugs. In the US, the war on drugs became official in the year early 1970 were when President Richard Nixon came out apparently to fight against drug abuse issues in America. Despite the increasing publicity aimed at decreasing drug use in America, it has been established that the drug on war has generally been a failure. One of the most controversial solutions proposed is legalizing drugs. Studies have pointed out that war on drugs was specifically set in motion to target and oppress the minorities in the US. There has been the illusion that the war on drugs has to be conducted in a criminal fashion and this has to a larger extent deceived the majority of people of the true nature of the deeply rooted socio-psychological problems and at the same time alienate the majority of the population through labeling them as criminals rather than extending the needed support and guidance. There is the need to recognize that these problems are simply health issues such as nicotine addiction and alcoholisms that need to death with accordingly. When we realize that prohibition is destroying the society more than benefiting it, and treat the minority with the higher level of dignitary and respect, then the country will be able to live up to the constitution. 

Introduction 

The war on drugs is considered a deeply rooted controversial public campaign of the prohibition of drug use and military aid and has attracted intensive debate for many years. Those concerned with the issue wonder whether drug abuse will ever come to an end and whether there exists a potential solution to the problem. According to Isacson (2005), the war on drugs will never come to an end and the most suitable strategy is to maintain a balance in the society through enforcing laws on drugs. The war on drugs is significantly affecting everyone in various ways, for instance, increased taxation for military support, numerous criminal in the streets and the legalization of drugs. For years, US have enabled this war through enforcing legalization of marijuana in specific states. However, it has been pointed out that winning this war seem to be an impossible task. However, it is worth noting that losing completely on this war will diminish overall global security and stability. Therefore, intensive application of the law to fight drugs will generally enhance drug awareness and enable people to avoid these losses improving the economy at large. To make the war a success, there is the need to focus on strategies to win the battle in the US before moving to the rest of the regions ( Lynch, 2012). 

The war on drugs that is currently being fought in the US focuses on overall dependency on drugs. Most of these drugs are highly demanded in various parts of the country for personal use and have been associated with strings of violent crimes (Isacson, 2005). To end this dependency level, the government has applied basic principles and steps aimed at prevention and abolish laws that promote drugs uses including illegalization of marijuana. According to Ewan Hoyle, he said that “Any drug policy should seek to minimize the number of entrants into the lifestyle of a dependent drug user.” When this is effectively prevented, then changes that might make goals easier to be tackled will be achieved. For instance, with less drug use, people and the overall economy will grow in a positive direction. The direct result of the effective drug policies will include less homelessness, reduction of the high level of dependency, reduced crimes, and jail sentencing. 

Historical facts about the origins of the war on drugs 

The war on drugs can be traced some years back to President Nixon’s term in office in 1971, when a huge number of the US young soldiers returned home after the Vietnam War highly addicted to heroin. Some policies were established to propel the war against drugs, and it formed a part of Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970. Studies have established that the primary notion behind the policy was to prohibit drug abuse throughout the US completely. The government headed by Nixon further introduced the overall federal demand reduction and drug treatment programs that had replaced 2-10 years of imprisonment established by the federal government. The law was applied to everyone in the US who would be found using or in possession of Marijuana. In the year 1982, the military engagement together with CIA was also pushed for with the aim of fighting drug use. There are a large number of individuals whose lives have been affected by the use of drugs. It has been argued that the global drug lords have become strong for the US government policies aimed at stopping drug use. Irrespective of the government efforts to counter drug use, this has been considered as a failed policy and to be successful, there might be the need for new policies to be established to curb this menace ( Lynch, 2012) . 

The first ever act on Anti-drug law in America was established in the year 1875. The Act specifically outlawed opium smoking and was considered a San Francisco ordinance. As years went by, other Federal laws including drug trafficking were also made illegal for all the individuals of Chinese origin. The opium laws were directed to fight opium smoking, but it did not impact the drug importation since opium was considered the most common drugs. Later, cocaine was also outlawed and was for the fears that most of the blacks especially men would go for sexual rampage and rape the white women. Based on the newspaper of the 1900s newspaper, black men were referred to as "Negro Cocaine Fiends" (Isacson, 2005). The Harrison Act was later on established and acted as a licensing law requiring sellers of cocaine first to acquire a license for them to handle opium or cocaine. The advocates of Harrison Act and Marijuana Tax Act in 1937 believed that prohibition on substances that people put into their bodies is the highly unconstitutional infringement on their personal liberties. Later, marijuana was later on outlawed in the years 1973, and this was because it was believed that it had a violent effect particularly on the degenerate races. In addition to this, the American Medical Association came out clearly testifying their opposition to the law. 

Statistics 

Based on the Federal Government's Household Survey on Drug Abuse, it was established that approximately 12.7 million individuals had used various illegal drugs in the month before the study and that further, 30-40 million individuals had used illegal drugs in the preceding year alone (Isacson, 2005) . Further, amongst the 12.76 individuals believed to have used drugs in that last month, approximately 10 million could be considered casual drug users, whilst another 2.7 million are likely to have been drug addicts (Caulkins et al, 2005) . Additionally, It isreported that out of the entire population in prison, approximately 59.6 percent were arrested for drug offenses. In the US alone, there are approximately 12 to 40 million drug dealers and the US prisons hold far more than their planned capacities, implying a heavy burden on the prisons system and on tax revenues (Isacson, 2005) . 

Effectiveness of War on Drugs 

Gusts of Popular Feeling: February 2012 

The chart above shows the amount of drugs that were successfully seized in the year 2011 in the US alone. Despite the intensity and reinvigoration of public awareness campaigns against drug abuse, it has been established that the war on drugs, generally, has been a failure. According to Isacson (2005), n umerous campaigns have been carried, targeting young drug users, in view of dissuading them from any further drug use. These include the ‘Just say No’ and the D. A. R. E.’ campaigns. Also, numerous drug treatment programs have been developed, targeting drug users with the aim of treating their addiction and at the same time, stopping any future drug use on their part. However, studies point out that these programs have not made any significant difference with regards to the reduction of drug abuse throughout America. The number of drug-dealing cartels continues to grow rapidly in the US, and this has also been experienced in various parts of the world, including in Columbia, India, and Mexico. Focusing on the upsurge of cartels, the US government has attempted to draft, and to implement suitable anti-drug proliferation policies. It has been shown that the first goal in this war is to create a drug-free environment. The policies against drug use were established about forty years ago to eradicate drug use in the community, but up to date, this goal has not been attained. No single state in the US has been successful in attaining this goal, and consequently, none at all has been declared drug free. Based on this, it can be said that subsequent drug policies have failed to achieve the total elimination of drug use. 

According to Bagley (1988) , focusing on the effectiveness of drug awareness campaigns, established to further the war against the illegal use and abuse of drugs, it can be concluded that very little has been achieved. In a study, by The Office on the National Drug Control Policy, which focused on comparing attitudes, concerning drug use, from the years 1999 to 2000, about half of the respondents argued that community drug problems have remained unchanged. Further, one-third of the respondents believed that drug use conditions had worsened. Based on this study, it was concluded that despite the government’s efforts at fighting drug abuse through the funding of antidrug campaigns, little impact had been achieved, as the condition had remained largely unchanged. It has been established that the policies aimed at fighting drug abuse in the US failed because the government believes that an increase in the number of prisoners in the US is a greater success indicator on the war. It is reported that in the year 2011, 94,600 people were behind bars, serving sentences as drug offenders. Drug offenders placed on parole in 2011 were 33 percent, and these were under probation (Caulkins et al, 2005) . 

Despite claims, on the part of the government, that it has upped law enforcement so as to more effectively fight psychoactive drugs, this is sharply contradicted by the situation surrounding the use of drugs in the US. Many people have been arrested and imprisoned, for having been found in possession of drugs, or for consuming, distributing or even producing them within the country. However, quite arguably, this does not provide a permanent solution to the drug use menace. It can be argued, based on the increasing quantity of marijuana that’s being traded in the country since the year 2011, that the American war on drugs has largely been ineffective (Caulkins et al, 2005) . The law has failed, nearly totally, to stop the importation of cannabis, mostly from Mexico. As such, there is a need for the sensible amendment of the laws, meant to stop the proliferation of drugs. This can be associated with the efforts being made by the government to enhance the war against drugs. US Drug Enforcement Agents, acting in collaboration with foreign agents and with their governments, however, in the past, are reported to have successfully seized an approximate one percent of globally grown cannabis within what should be considered as their best years ( Lynch, 2012) . The repeated seizures of marijuana in America can be considered as one of the government’s successes in the war on drugs. It is reported that in the year 2009, the US government seized a huge amount of marijuana than was seized by the Mexican government. However, this does not necessarily call for celebration, since there have been increases in the amounts of other illegal drugs being traded and used in America. 

Intended and Unintended Consequences of the War on Drugs 

Bureau of Justice Statistics Drugs and Crime Facts: Drug law 

The above chart shows the number of arrests in the US by drug type from 1982 to 2007. The increasing number of individuals, put behind bars for drug offenses, has an economic impact, particularly in relation to people who are incarcerated. The treatment of those victims of drugs was approximated to cost $ 20,000, which was less than the incarceration per individual annually. This implies that the government spends a huge amount of funds in incarceration, and this has been reported to impose a huge burden on the American taxpayers. Currently, it has been reported that there are approximately 1.5 million individuals within the federal prisons, and this is pushing many states, in an effort to cut back on their prison populations, to reconsider their drug laws. The prison population is believed to have been highly stable between 1926 and 1970 (Bagley, 1988) . However, with the introduction of the war on the drugs by President Nixon and with Reagan and Bush’s expansion of the same, there has been a rapid increase in the total numbers of prisoners. Maintaining a single prisoner would cost about $450,000 of the tax payer’s money, and this can be used to offer treatment or even to champion mass education for about 200 people. 

The fight on drug abuse will cause increased crime rates. Studies have pointed out that illegal drug businesses, for many years, have been very profitable, especially based on the fact that the cost of drugs rises when they are made illegal. For instance, it is estimated that drug trafficking, on an annual basis, rakes in total earnings in the region of 60 to 100 billion dollars. The illegality of the business will further mean that rival drug dealers will resort to various violence strategies, particularly to protect their items of trade and the business empires that may be associate to them. With an increase in the fight on drugs, there will be an increasing in the death toll from drug abuse, owing to the proliferation of poor quality drugs, as in the black market, very little regard will be given to drug quality assurances. In most instances, people have engaged in the production of harmful drugs as an alternative to the real products, and more often than not, this ends up in fatalities. The fight against drug abuse, whilst it might not necessarily save on lives, might occasion an increase in human casualties (Caulkins et al, 2005) . 

According to Judge Gray, the main method used by the US government to fight against drug is “trying to incarcerate ourselves out of the problem” (Isacson (2005). This has been argued to have led to increasing leniency, especially towards those criminals who are considerably violent. The swelling prison population further compromises the administration of justice in drug-related trials, as quite a good number of drug lords, in spite of their dangerousness, end up not serving their jail terms to completion. The early release of murderers, kidnappers, and even bank robbers is now commonplace. According to Isacson (2005), drug prohibition has been shown to destroy entire communities. This is because; the huge profits that are generated from drug dealing, more particularly with their prohibition, tend to make a clear mockery of the ethics of work. As such, most drug dealers, owing to their sheer opulence, have become role models within their community, and this has created cultural and moral value degradation. The kids in such like communities often grow into a lifestyle that lionizes drug abuse, as it is often associated with quick money. Family values are also degraded, especially where children use drugs money to maintain their parents and families. Illegal drugs find their way to schools, gradually affecting the performances of the student community. 

Impact of War on Drugs on Organizational Management 

Evidently, the war on drugs has been argued to have had a serious impact on organizational management. This is the case because the government related drug war efforts sometimes are circumvented by drug cartels in protection of their businesses, and this has led to the massive corruption of state agencies. To which end, there has been a massive violation of laws at the expense of the state ( Lynch, 2012) . This corruption is most prevalent within law enforcement and legal judicial circles. For instance, when law enforcers arrest drug lords, they sometimes are heavily bribed, accruing huge sums of money in the process, money which they otherwise couldn’t have earned from their active employment. As such, in protection of their own selfish interests, some law enforcers actively facilitate the movements of drug lords and of their drugs. 

Recommendation 

The war on drugs can be successful, but only if the government adopts and implements effective policies and strategies, which must be result-oriented. The government has tried to establish policies, most of which have continued to be focused on fighting and stopping drug production in other countries. Secondly, the government has attempted to focus its efforts on the prevention of the smuggling of drugs at the border points and lastly, the government has tried to stop the trade and exchange of drugs, locally in the US. Evidently, the eradication of drug use has proven itself to be incompatible to the greater global fight against drug abuse. All of these strategies have proven ineffective and as such, there is a need to develop more effective and efficient policies for the complete fight against drug abuse. 

One of the most controversial of all proposed solutions concerns the legalization of drugs. This is believably an effective solution for drug use. A sound majority of US citizens believe that the legalization of drug use in the US will lessen drug-related crimes, deterring future criminal acts. The legalization of drugs has been argued further to have the potential of fighting drug abuse and of decreasing the contraction of illnesses such as Aids. A good example is a law legalizing alcohol. It is evident that with the legalization of alcohol, alcoholism has not increased, therefore; the legalization of drug use will not increase substance abuse. However, caution must be taken since the legalization of drugs would make them cheaper and easily accessible to all people, especially those who had not tried them because of their high price or even, due to the high legal risk associated to their consumption. Drug abuse might also skyrocket, as for instance, the renewed accessibility of drugs may encourage reformed addicts to relapse into drug abuse (Bagley, 1988) . 

Conclusion 

For many years, the US has continued to wage a war against drug abuse. In the US, the war on drugs was officially sanctioned in the year early 1970 by President Richard Nixon. Ever since its establishment, it has continued to be argued that a huge amount of money is spent in the fight of drug abuse. Most of these funds are spent to finance educational awareness campaigns with regards to drug abuse. This funding is also meant to decrease illegal drug trafficking and further, to enhance drug enforcement and conviction. Research has pointed out that although billions of dollars have been invested in the fight against drugs; considerably, the management of these funds should be tailored more professionally in order to achieve better results. Further, and to large extents, drug rehabilitation continues to increasingly cost the taxpayer. The drug problem continues to be experienced, and this has further led to an increase in drug-related social problems. It is worth noting that drug abuse compromises safety, both at personal and at national levels, and thus, should be eliminated at all costs. Addition may be inherited but just as well, may be nurtured over time. With the intensification of the war against drugs, the prisons have become full, and the government has experienced an increasing burden to sustain and maintain these prisons. 

References 

Bagley, B. M. (1988). The new hundred years war? US National security and the war on drugs in Latin America. Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs , 30 (1), 161-182. 

Caulkins, J. P., Reuter, P. H., Iguchi, M. Y., & Chiesa, J. (2005). How Goes the “War on Drugs”?. 

Isacson, A. (2005). The US military in the war on drugs. Drugs and Democracy in Latin America, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner , 45. Lynch, M. (2012). Theorizing the role of the ‘war on drugs’ in US punishment. Theoretical Criminology , 16 (2), 175-199.