Argumentative Essay On War On Drugs

2492 Words 10 Pages
The terms “War on drugs” was coined by U.S President Richard Nixon on June 18, 1971 to refer to the campaign for the prohibition of drugs, military intervention and military aid all aimed at not only defining but also reducing the trade of illegal drugs. The initiative has for decades included setting drug policies intended to discourage the production, he distribution as well as the consumption of drugs of what the United Nations and participating government’s term as psychoactive drugs. The United States is estimated to spend up to $51 billion on the war against drugs every year. The illegal drug trade is a back market that is dedicated to the manufacture the cultivation, distribution and the sale of drugs subject to prohibition laws. Despite …show more content…
By making drugs illegal, governments put control of drugs in the hands of the drug dealer. In a bid to control the ins and outs and the use of drugs within its borders, governments should perhaps consider legalizing some drugs for example marijuana. ((Inciardi 1999). By doing so, they can regulate consumption of said drugs and also tax them. Most harm is not caused by the drug but by the way people use them. By leaving control of the drugs to the drug dealer, governments are leaving drug users in the hands of criminals. Drug dealers will take advantage of the insatiable demand which will end up harming drug users and law enforcement will be helpless. (Stevenson et al. 2004). The war on drugs can only be won if governments have control of drugs. This is because they cannot control demand and have, since the beginning of the longest and the deadliest war in the history of the U.S, been unable to control or stop supply. To win the war against drugs therefore, or at least have a fighting chance, governments and the United Nations should re-think their whole strategy and try fight drugs from a different perspective. (Carrier et al. …show more content…
There are many a believer who believe that the battle may have been lost, but the war can still be won. Proposers or optimists of the fact that the war can be won believe that it can be won if individual countries were to protect their own boarders. They believe that the battle has only be lost because those fighting drugs are losing the resolve to continue fighting. There is a lot of room for improvement in terms of locking down boarders and making them impenetrable to drag traffickers. Currently border security is not at its peak. Just over a decade after the biggest terrorist attack in the history of the United States, reports of underqualified federal agents dealing with boarder security are rampant. The department of Homeland Security has been reported to fail in tracking the proficiency if said officers. This not only leaves the country in a dangerous position vis-à-vis terrorism, but also nullifies all other efforts of fighting drugs. Drugs continue to find their way into the United States even with a $10 billion budget of training federal agents as well as a more than generous work force of about 20,000 federal agents. Those that insist that the war can be won, simply put, cite incompetence as the reason the high demand of drugs in the U.S is still being met. With heightened boarder security, the supply or drugs in the U.S can be reduced substantially. (Thompson

Related Documents