Arguments agains Legalization of Drugs

Proponents of legalization maintain that drug use is endemic in society, so attempts at prohibition are fruitless. Worse, the war on drugs causes more harm than good. Such harm includes the thousands of addicts who are imprisoned rather than treated, billions of dollars spent to deter drug traffickers that could be better spent elsewhere, the corruption of government officials (both in the U.S. and abroad), and the countless deaths that could be prevented (Soros, 1997, p. C1).

Instead of trying to arrest and prosecute drug users, the so-called "harm reduction" movement says we should channel our energies to limiting the harm done by those who cannot or will not stop using drugs (Wren, 2000, p. 1). Legalizing or decriminalizing drug use would allows us to redirect much of the multibillion budget for drug interdiction to treatment. Moreover, the police could focus their attention on dangerous criminals rather than wasting their time apprehending drug addicts. "Harm reduction means first that

. . .
nd score" (Gray, 1999, p. 32-36). Such stories provide fuel for both sides in the legalization debate. Proponents argue that legalization and more treatment options would help those kids more than jail, which many faced after this story broke. (Several of the addicts profiled by Gray had received treatment, with a poor success rate.) Opponents counter that the last thing we need is more people experimenting with such a potent drug. Both stances are relevant to the next step, which is to apply the models utilized by American policymakers. For example, the legalization movement flies in the face of incrementalism, which has been slowly pulling U.S. drug policy in the opposite direction for two decades. Do the proponents of legalization make a strong enough case to justify ending the drug war and the incremental approach? Is such a complete reversal warranted? Incrementalism describes a situation where government modifies policies rather than abandoning them completely. Each step is a logical extension of the current approach. Over time, the piece-by-piece changes can amount to a new policy, or a strengthening of the original strategy. Political leaders often enter office with grand plans of remaking government, and t
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Justice Statistics, Tampa Florida, C1 Instead, Bill Clinton, Drug-Free America, , Meckler Heroin's, Boz Scaggs, Department Justice, Colombia Mexico, war drugs, drug war, department justice, justice 2000, drug users, department justice 2000, drugs heroin, drug addicts, wren 2000 1, heroin chic, addictive heroin, bureau justice statistics, public perception, partnership drug-free america, drug-free america 2000,
Approximate Word count = 2775
Approximate Pages = 11 (250 words per page)