War on Drugs

Paper Summary:

This paper presents and disputes rhetoric against the war on drugs such as the assertion that it doesn't work, that it costs too much money and that the legal system is a poor way to deal with drug users. Findings reveal that the war on drugs has reduced drug use, that the social costs of drugs far outweigh the cost of fighting them and that the legal system is necessary to deter crime and to cope with the violence associated with drug use. The paper concludes with a general assessment that the war on drugs is working and should be continued.

From the Paper:

"Anti-war on drug advocates make generalizations backed by poor research to spread the belief that the war on drugs isn't working. One of their most unsupported claims is that drug use in the United States is on the rise. A variety of shoddy techniques are used to make drug use increases look larger than they actually are. For example, articles will make comparisons based on time frames that are too short to be completely relevant or make fluffy statements that are not based on any factual drug use data such as "The majority of Americans do not see the nation's illegal drug problem getting any better after years of increases in national spending," Or, articles will throw out the number of Americans that use drugs, 15.9 million in 2001 to gain credibility, and then make unsupported statements that drug use is on the rise."

More papers on War on Drugs:

• Essay # 72050 : "Pablo Escobar and the War on Drugs"
• Persuasive Essay # 121186 : "Porn on the Internet and War on Drugs"
• Comparison Essay # 6627 : "The War on Terrorism and the War on Drugs"
• Argumentative Essay # 916 : "War on Drugs: Futile or Misdirected?"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: