Anda di halaman 1dari 3

What is the disadvantage and advantage on war on drugs?

Apart from wantonly killing alleged drug users, pushers, and drug lords who have yet to be proven
guilty, disregarding their family and friends and human rights including their right to be trialed. Nothing.

People who have been victims of EJK's (extra judicial killings) are already dead, guilty or not, you can't
bring the dead back to life, and objectively reducing the amount of people thinking of doing drugs (out
of fear).

It's not really moral to do so but what's done is done and hopefully it never happens anymore to
anyone.

Positive:

There are a lot more police officers seen roaming the streets especially at night. This would hopefully
give off a sense of security for the tourists who come to the country.
Negative:

Tourists will be more cautious in coming into the country especially with how the media is covering a lot
of the news of late and since there is always the possibility that tourists may unknowingly get involved.
I’m not sure of how big the impact of this is though since I still see a lot of tourists coming int o the
country.
Drug trafficking is a global problem, an illicit trade that involves the manufacture, cultivation,
distribution and sale of prohibited substances. While every nation in the world works hard to fight
against drugs, drug trade is still a booming business. The dynamics of drug trafficking is simply incredible
in the sense that consumption and distribution continues to rise even with continuous efforts to curb
drug-related crimes and offenses.

War On Drugs Overview


In a bid to reduce the illegal drug trade, a campaign of drug prohibition, military intervention, and
military aid was established. It includes effective drug policies that are designed to discourage
distribution, consumption, and production of psychoactive drugs that were made illegal by the UN and
participating governments.

While declaring war on drugs seems to be logical, opponents think it might be a waste of time and
resources. Some claim that criminal acts are a consequence of drugs being declared illegal. Because
people can’t acquire these substances through official channels, they will resort to illegal production,
distribution and consumption.

List of Pros of War on Drugs


1. Deter or lessen drug-related crimes.
When drug addicts will not have easy access to illegal substances, they will not experience the highs or
hallucinations that will drive them to commit crimes. They wouldn’t need to steal either so they can buy
drugs. Put simply, without the pushers there will be little to no users.

2. Culprits will be penalized


Included in the policies of war on drugs is the penalty that will be afforded to manufacturers,
distributors and users of illegal drugs. The level of punishment that will be imposed depends on the
gravity of the crime. Knowing that there are consequences to be paid will make people think twice
before embroiling in any stage of the illegal drug trade.

3. Helps create a place that is drug free


A drug-free area or community may seem impossible given the present situation, but it is achievable as
long as everyone does their share in the fight against drugs. War on drugs should not only involve the
government and local authorities, but also friends and family of drug users or sellers.

List of Cons of War on Drugs


1. Widespread corruption
Watch any drug-related movies and you’ll see that the people who introduced and imposed the war on
drugs are the same people who could be peddling the illegal substances. Political analyst also see a
projected increase in corruption within the government because of the funds that will be allocated to
control drug abuse. What are the odds that these funds will be used for personal gain?

2. Provides a smokescreen to hide the real problem behind drug abuse


A majority of the population that are easily lured into drug dealing are those within and below the
poverty line. People who have no hope of achieving very much because of their circumstances would
resort to drug dealing where knowledge and skills are not required in their resume. They also see it as a
way to make something of themselves, and to have the resources to fund their own drug habits. Would
it not be better when the billions allocated for anti-drug campaigns are used to help improve the lives of
these individual? For the last 40 years, an estimated $1 trillion was funneled to the war on drugs.
Taxpayers are paying big for a war that is showing no signs of being victorious any time soon. In fact, the
flow of drugs into the United States are increasing year after year.

Perhaps everyone would turn out to be good citizens if they are provided with all the basic necessities to
help them achieve their dreams. Viewed this way, the war on drugs is nothing more than a nasty and
vindictive smoke screen.

3. Increases risk on the lives of policeman and military


Missions against drug lords is no joke, considering that they too have their own army that has no care
about the lives that will be lost during a shootout or drug bust operation. What do policemen have
against assassins and mercenaries? Not to belittle the skills and capacity of law enforcement, but a
mission against drug pushers and manufacturers are increasingly worse. The safety risks on the lives of
many policemen are also very high. Friends and family of these brave men and women would be very
unhappy if something happened to them.

4. Increase racial tension


The soaring arrest because of the war on drugs disproportionately targeted African Americans,
according to the Human Rights Watch. From 1995 through 2000, the US Department of Justice reported
that’s arrest for drug offenses rose by 126%, which also “accounted for 27% of the total growth among
black inmates, 7% the total growth among Hispanic inmates, and 15% of the growth among white
inmates”. In 2008, the Washington Post also reported that one in five black Americans are behind bars
because of drug-related laws.

5. Disparity on sentencing
Opponents complain that sentencing in drug-related crimes have major flaws. There is a huge problem
in the sentencing between possessions or trafficking of powder cocaine and crack. For example, those
convicted for possession of 5 grams of crack and those in possession of 500 grams of powder cocaine
basically have the same punishment – minimum mandatory sentence of being incarcerated in a federal
prison for 5 years. Judging from the differences of the drugs in question, sentencing is definitely unfair.

Moreover, the ruling is perceived as discriminatory against minorities, because blacks, Hispanics and
other races are likely to use crack than cocaine. Does this mean that white people go free for as long as
they are not in possession of 500 grams of coke?

6. Never-ending chain reaction


One man incarcerated for drug abuse or drug-related crimes is likely to have children who are growing
up without a father. Statistics show how this can have a bad effect on the little ones. If they are in the
same situation as their father before them, they could end up drug users or sellers as well, whichever
comes first. So the cycle just goes on and on. It will be a never-ending ride of history repeating itself.