Activity 8: Our War on Drugs

Prior to the 1900s in this country, policies and laws concerning drug use were established by state and local levels, which were aimed to target specific groups. With the influx of immigrants into the country, the attitudes towards these new people were reflected in the laws created by those who were here “first”. The Irish, for example, were commonly negatively depicted as monkeys who were completely consumed with the use of alcohol, and who had no self-control to act properly and respectively.

By the 20^th century, a greater federal response towards drug use and policies came about, specifically with the 1906 Food and Drug Act. This act focused on patent medicines and established the Food and Drug Administration, which called for companies to be required to put the ingredients in their product on the label for customers to see. At the time of the 1920s, following this new federal response, societal attitudes towards drugs, those addicted to drugs, and use patterns, began to change. The view of an addict now was that he or she was a criminal, and the connotation that comes along with a “criminal” is that they should be punished. Nixon and his administration followed suit with his declaration for a war on drugs, and the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 was created that still heavily influences drug policy today. This piece of legislation stated that drugs were now under federal jurisdiction, created 5 schedules of substances, established the Drug Enforcement Administration, and allowed for the government to control drugs directly, rather than through taxes. This propelled the anti-drug movement that developed in our country and helped maintain the approach we have today, in which drug use and addiction is looked at as the government’s responsibility to not only handle, but also enforce the laws established around them.

The whole goal behind waging the war on drugs was to eliminate, or at least lessen, drug use by punishing those who are illegally using drugs. I honestly feel like we have lost on this war on drugs with the approach our government has taken towards this issue. Instead of trying to rehabilitate those who are addicted to drugs, our government takes on the notion of arrest and put in prison, which does nothing to help the individual overcome the addiction that put them in that position in the first place. One cost, as already sort of mentioned, is the fact that individuals who are being sent to prison for a drug problem are not getting the rehabilitation they need, and therefore the system is not working to help better them by trying to overcome their addiction. A second cost is the fact that our prisons are becoming overpopulated with individuals who have drug offenses, and instead of using these already limited spaces in our prisons for those who commit offenses like robbery or rape, a person who is in possession of marijuana with a first time offense is found behind a cell.  The third and probably most obvious cost of losing this drug war is the financial loss, and how much money our government puts into officials to enforce these drug laws, which do not always seem to fairly coincide with the specific drug involved.

As with anything in life, there is always room for improvement and I believe to effectively “win” or at least provide a worthy fight in this war on drugs, the approach our government is taking to tackle the issue now, has to change.  

Activity 7: UF Law Panel Review

            We have seen so far throughout our course how attitudes about many types of drugs have changed over time and how use of these certain drugs have changed as well. Marijuana, currently, is one of these drugs that has received much attention as arguments for both the legalization or continued criminalization for the drug have come forth in efforts to affect public policy.

            Arguments against the idea of making medical and recreational marijuana legal to use stand on the idea that the drug is labeled a scheduled 1 drug, and according to the Controlled Substances Act in the category of the most dangerous types of drugs out there. Being in this category, the federal government states that there is no accepted medical use for the drug and it has a high potential level of abuse. Just by listening to that alone, one would think maybe marijuana should stay as a schedule 1 drug, yet even research into how this drug can possibly be helpful cannot even be done because the drug is illegal. Progress with research in this drug is also an issue both parties talk about. People against marijuana use also claim that the drug is a gateway drug, meaning an individual who uses it will more likely begin to try other drugs such as cocaine and heroine. This too, they argue, is another strong point for marijuana to stay illegal especially because it is popular among the youth of our country and therefore they are the ones who could experience the most harm from it.

            On the other side, advocates for the legalization of marijuana first claim opponents of the drug are typically just against the drug because of the negative social stigma it holds, not necessarily because they have taken a good look at the facts. They argue, in regards to public policy, marijuana can really help on the healthcare issue. Even though those against the drug say there isn’t any medical use for marijuana, advocates not only claim that there is, but also claim that there are more harmful drugs out there with worse side effects that are currently being used in the medical field. An example of this would be something like prescription drugs, which even though legal, have an extremely high rate for abuse in this country, especially in the state of Florida according to the video we watched in class. Advocates also claim there could be financial benefits for the government if they decide to make marijuana legal and then create a tax on it, just as they do with cigarettes. If marijuana became legal, there would be less focus on making arrests regarding it, and instead of filling up our prisons with “drug offenders”, we can look to more serious issues or those individuals who are involved with more serious drugs.