Introduction
Drug use is a common practice in nationals all over the world. In the US, recreational drug use has occurred for centuries. Unlike with other consumer products, drugs can have adverse effects on the individual. For this reason, the government tries to regulate the use of drugs among its citizens. In the US, the negative impacts of drug use became evident in the society at the end of the 19th century, when it was observed that psychotropic drugs such as cocaine and morphine led to addiction.
The government therefore started imposing prohibitions on the use of and trade in these drugs. In 1914, the Harrison Administration passed the Harrison Narcotics Act, which imposed greater restrictions on psychotropic drug trade. However, the most significant government action in response to drug use occurred under the Nixon administration, when a war on drugs was declared.
History of the War on Drugs
The modern war on drugs in the US can trace its beginning to the Nixon administration. On June 17, 1971, President Richard Nixon declared that drug abuse was “a national emergency” and he proceeded to rank it “public enemy number one” (872). He declared a “war on drugs” and dedicated significant federal resources to this task. A number of notable events led to the start of this war. While drugs had always been a part of American popular culture, trends in drug use during the 1960s led to the need for a war on drugs.
During the 1960s, the US witnessed a spike in drug use among middle-class white youth (Benavie 34). The prevalent drug use among this class led to drugs losing some of their stigmatization and this increased drug consumption. The government came up with radical policies to solve the drug problems in the country. This commitment to fight drug abuse has remained strong in each US president since that time.
Key Points
In its history, which spans over four decades, the war on drugs has had a number of significant moments. The first major moment in the war was in 1973 when the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) was formed. This agency was tasked with reducing the availability of illegal drugs in the US.
It set out to accomplish this task by curtailing the supply of drugs, especially from the international market. Another key moment was in 1981 during the Reagan administration. The President called for touch actions against drug users since he saw this as a more effective method than trying to cut the supply of the drugs. During this period, the US adopted a “zero tolerance” policy against users of illegal drugs. This “tough on drugs” policy has continued to characterize the approach used by successive administrations.
Pros and Cons
A significant benefit of the war on drugs is that it led to a sharp decline in the production and distribution of illicit drugs. Due to the punitive penalties attached to dealing in illegal drugs, people were dissuaded from engaging in these activities. The overall quantity of illicit drugs available in the country therefore decreased.
The war increased awareness of the negative effects of drugs among Americans. The government earmarked millions of dollars for education programs that were meant to empower the community. These programs highlighted the destructive nature of drugs and urged Americans to stay away from drugs.
A major demerit of the war on drugs is that it prevented the government from engaging in action to address the causes of drug abuse among most US citizens. Niesen notes that by positioning drug abuse as a problem to be dealt with by individuals and families, successive US administrations have avoided resolving the possible root causes of drug abuse, such as poverty and unemployment (872). Another significant demerit of the war is that it contributed to the large systematic corruption in the criminal justice system. By criminalizing drugs, the government created a situation where many individuals were in violation of the law and eligible to criminal penalties (Nicholson 305). To avoid these penalties, many detained drug users bribe law enforcement officials or criminal justice personnel.
Effects on Media, Economic, Policy, and Public Opinion
The mass media was significantly affected by the war on drugs. To begin with, the Nixon administration made extensive use of mass media to advise the public on the dangers of drug use. Niesen documents that the media was advised to give regular reports on the rise in drug-related deaths and print research findings that would help deter drug experimentation (875). The media endorsed sensationalism as a strategy to provoke public interest on the topic of drug abuse.
Public opinion concerning recreational drug use was affected by the war on drugs. Before this war, moderate drug use was normative behavior among youths and many middle class Americans.
The “war on drugs” led to the public view that all drug users were addicts. When declaring drug abuse “public enemy number one”, the Nixon administration did not distinguish between drug addicts and social users. Nicholson et al. note that the “war on drugs” approach promoted the perception that any drug use is abuse where illicit drugs are concerned (305).
Economically, the war on drugs led to an increase in government expenditure. The prohibition of drug use increased government spending on drug prevention. From the onset, the government dedicated significant resources to wage the war.
Specifically, law enforcement and criminal justice resources were used to deter illegal drug use and punish individuals who violated the law. On the other hand, the “war on drugs” greatly benefited drug dealers. Nicholson confirms that the “war on drugs” approach has contributed to the sustenance of a profitable black market in drugs for decades (305).
Results of the War on Drugs
The US has been involved in an intensive “war against drugs” for over four decades. The war has led to an increase in the number of inmates in American prisons. Drug offenders make up a significant portion of the prisoners in US penitentiaries (Jones 492). The Bureau of Justice Statistics reveals that over 50% of federal convicts are imprisoned on drug related charges (Sledge par. 4). Most of these drug offenders are social users who do not have criminal records.
The War led to the emergence of a huge black market that deals in illicit drugs. Williams reveals that criminalization of drugs destroys the legal economy and an underground economy emerges to satisfy the demand (326). As such, the “war on drugs” has led to the growth of a powerful black market that dealt in the illicit drugs. This black market enjoyed great profits since it could inflate the price of the drugs and obtain a large profit margin.
The war on drugs has failed to mitigate drug use among Americans. Millions of Americans continue to use illicit drugs in spite of the aggressive government efforts to stop illegal drug use. As of 2000, the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse reported that an estimated 11 million Americans were regular users of illicit drugs (Block and Obioha 108).
Recent Trends
In reaction to the fact that the traditional war on drugs has been hugely ineffective, there have been notable shifts in how the government and the community view the problem of drug use. Some policy makers have recognized that recreational drug use is an integral part of the American culture.
Promoting a drug-free life is therefore unrealistic. They have therefore called for the decriminalization of some drugs. Marijuana is one drug that has been legalized in some states in an attempt to deal with the drug problem. Block and Obioha note that legalization does not imply that the government is advocating the use of addictive drugs such as heroin and cocaine (108). Legalization means that it is not a criminal act to use, sell, or buy drugs.
Another trend has been in the emergence of preventive programmes that aim at harm reduction without preaching and propaganda. Such programs acknowledge that drug taking is a fact of life and aim to prevent drug abuse, which causes detrimental outcomes.
In addition to this, there has been a move towards viewing drug abusers as individuals in need of medical assistance instead of viewing them as criminals. Research shows that regardless of how successful criminal penalties are in reducing drug use among people, treatment is more effective.
Conclusion
Drugs remain to be an important issue affecting the American community. This war costs the government billions of dollars per year and the lives of many people are disrupted as they are subjected to criminal penalties for using or dealing in drugs.
In spite of these significant economic and social costs, the war on drugs has proved largely ineffective. There is no possibility that it will lead to the eradication of the drug problem faced by the country entirely. The US government should therefore consider alternative approaches to deal with the drug problems faced by its citizens.
Works Cited
Benavie, Arthur. Drugs: America’s Holy War. NY: Routledge, 2012. Print.
Block, Walter and Violet Obioha. “War on Black Men: Arguments for the Legalization of Drug.” Criminal Justice Ethics 31.2 (2012): 106-120. Web.
Jones, Michael. “Prison overcrowding: the sentencing judge as social worker”. Widener Law Journal 18.1 (2009): 491-498. Web. Web.
Nicholson, Thomas, David Duncan, John White and Cecilia Watkins. “Focusing on abuse, not use: A proposed new direction for US drug policy.” Drugs: Education, Prevention & Policy 19.4 (2012): 303-308. Print.
Niesen, Molly. “Public Enemy Number One: The US Advertising Council’s First Drug Abuse Prevention Campaign.” Substance Use & Misuse 46.7 (2011): 872-881. Print.
Sledge, Matt. “The Drug War and Mass Incarceration by the Numbers.” The Huffington Post. 2013. Web.
Williams, Daniel. “The war on drugs.” Contemporary Review 294.17(2012): 324-329. Web.