Drugs have become prevailingly problematic in our society. It is estimated that there have been 200 million illicit drug users worldwide, with this number only expected to grow in future years. A variety of drug policies are put in place by states for the purpose of moderating the number of users while preventing continued drug use. If we look at the traditional drug prohibition method in America and the UK, the state policy guarantees security through incarcerating those who may cause self-harm or harm to others. On the other end of the spectrum, we have the legalization of drugs, which is essentially uplifting the ban on all consumption, possession and sale of both hard and soft drugs. I argue that these drug policies do not meet their
…show more content…
The first aspect I disagree with is Sher’s argument that prohibition is beneficial because it prevents drug users from inflicting social and self-harm, while deteriorating their quality of life. In reality, his claim is unjustifiable as incarceration has proven to deliver very little to absolutely no benefit to drug users with addiction problems. Imprisonment does not improve overall drug usage within a state, nor does it compare to the benefits that many other high quality education programs provide. These education programs have been proven to assist in delaying the instigation of drug use, while programs such as opiate substitution therapy have also reduced crimes, overdose deaths and the spread of HIV infection. If we look into decriminalization, it encourages the use of these effective programs. Evidence shows that the number of those seeking help ranging from rehabilitative to social programs nearly doubled in Portugal within five years of implementing their decriminalization policy. If a variety of options that actually produce benefits exist in the market today, governments should focus on interweaving these into their drug state policies to maximize results, similarly to what Portugal has done in the past. Another key point that I would like to address is the fact that …show more content…
Primarily, it can be argued that facilities in other countries may not be able to sustain the high volume drug problems that exist today. I do not believe this is the case, as the cost of incarceration as addressed before exceeds the cost of rehabilitation measures. Another hypothetical argument is that decriminalization removes legal enforcement, encouraging people to experiment on drugs due to the decreased risk. I also have brought up objective evidence stating that this isn’t the case, with the declining rates of drug tourism, decreased youth usage rate as well as the rate of . In summary, the benefits of decriminalization significantly outweighs the
The first aspect I disagree with is Sher’s argument that prohibition is beneficial because it prevents drug users from inflicting social and self-harm, while deteriorating their quality of life. In reality, his claim is unjustifiable as incarceration has proven to deliver very little to absolutely no benefit to drug users with addiction problems. Imprisonment does not improve overall drug usage within a state, nor does it compare to the benefits that many other high quality education programs provide. These education programs have been proven to assist in delaying the instigation of drug use, while programs such as opiate substitution therapy have also reduced crimes, overdose deaths and the spread of HIV infection. If we look into decriminalization, it encourages the use of these effective programs. Evidence shows that the number of those seeking help ranging from rehabilitative to social programs nearly doubled in Portugal within five years of implementing their decriminalization policy. If a variety of options that actually produce benefits exist in the market today, governments should focus on interweaving these into their drug state policies to maximize results, similarly to what Portugal has done in the past. Another key point that I would like to address is the fact that …show more content…
Primarily, it can be argued that facilities in other countries may not be able to sustain the high volume drug problems that exist today. I do not believe this is the case, as the cost of incarceration as addressed before exceeds the cost of rehabilitation measures. Another hypothetical argument is that decriminalization removes legal enforcement, encouraging people to experiment on drugs due to the decreased risk. I also have brought up objective evidence stating that this isn’t the case, with the declining rates of drug tourism, decreased youth usage rate as well as the rate of . In summary, the benefits of decriminalization significantly outweighs the