Between 1618-1648 war raged in Europe. And since the period of the war was thirty years it was so named. Crazy, of course but not as crazy as The Hundred-Years War that went on from 1337-1453. In fact that war actually went on longer than one hundred years. But to call a war the 106-Years war is being picky when it has raged for so long. We are amused when we read that countries could fight for so long, and we tend to believe that we live in a very different period where such behavior couldn't go on, particularly in the modern western world. But in fact if we look at the "War of Drugs" we see things have changed remarkably little; in fact, they have merely changed in form but not in essence.
American technology writer and columnist Dan Gillmore believes that the war on drugs is pointless, costly and has done more harm than good (2009). His comments are interesting and relevant and can be seen to be true, if we look at history again. In England in 1955 "The Times" a reputable newspaper in England made "The Case for Heroin." This commentary revealed that there were fewer drug addicts in England, where they could get the drug legally, than in America where the substance had been banned since 1925. However, in 1964 the methods of legally procuring drugs in England underwent a change. Instead of going to the regular family doctor, which had been the system, specific doctors working from specific clinics were established and these were the only legal outlet. In 1968 further regulations were added and in 1971 the system was disbanded entirely. And this was when the number of addicts and the social problems that accompany them started to become more serious.
From the moment drug addicts were treated as criminals rather than as addicts with a medical/psychological problem, a whole new segment of criminals came into being. As long as there were clinics in England and addicts had access to doctors then the problem was medical and not only was it possible to do something for the addicts but it meant there was no place for the pushers. Declaring drugs illegal in a sweeping wholesale manner left a hole that was filled with a black market. This in turn created a new industry that led to formidable drug cartels that are rich enough to have a say in the running of some countries in South America. And thus the illegal "corporate" bosses have ended up with more power than they could ever have dreamed of. People tend to think that crime and punishment go together, in fact laws and crime go together and creating laws against drugs created more problems than they solved. The two papers: "The Times" in 1955 and "The Economist" in 2011, have publicly presented a good case
for legalizing drugs. What a pity it was only the journalists who could foresee the disaster of criminalizing addicts and continuing to marginalize them rather than aid them, and not government representatives.
In 2011, Mark A.R. Kleiman, Jonathan P. Caulkins and Angela Hawken wrote a book entitled: "Drugs and Drug Policy: What Everyone Needs to Know" which considers various issues relating to the "War on Drugs." They also challenge the assumption that it is OK for any form of tobacco or alcoholic beverages to be sold legally even when they are known to do as much, if not more, damage. Give a bit of weed to those fervent football fans instead of beer and football hooliganism may be a thing of the past. The authors also discuss the crime issues that go hand in hand with any illegal substance. The book makes a serious academic argument about these two issues being connected, as does the National Center for the Victims for Crime. In 2007, the Center gives the frightening statistics that over 50 percent of the people in America who are arrested have illegal substances of some sort in their system. The Centre also claims that crime, in particular robbery, is one of the results of drug addicts being treated as criminals. Addiction is also a contributing factor to all forms of violence in the homes.
Unfortunately so much of the economy in western countries is built up around the drug trade. The police, the lawyers, the judges, the courts, the prisons, the prison guards, the social workers, the probation officers, to mention but a few. The list is long, and while many of these people aren't well paid, or are over-worked, the fact is the illegality of the product provides as much legal employment as it does illegal employment. Moreover, as was mentioned, many of the illegal organizations have so much affluence and influence they would certainly never allow legalization. And what politician, would dare reduce the numbers employed directly and indirectly, or admit the waste of government money that has gone into this war. And so unfortunately since there are so many powerful people and organizations with vested interests in continuing this campaign it looks like we are in for another hundred years war under another name: The War on Drugs.
Copyright: Academic -Reading
American technology writer and columnist Dan Gillmore believes that the war on drugs is pointless, costly and has done more harm than good (2009). His comments are interesting and relevant and can be seen to be true, if we look at history again. In England in 1955 "The Times" a reputable newspaper in England made "The Case for Heroin." This commentary revealed that there were fewer drug addicts in England, where they could get the drug legally, than in America where the substance had been banned since 1925. However, in 1964 the methods of legally procuring drugs in England underwent a change. Instead of going to the regular family doctor, which had been the system, specific doctors working from specific clinics were established and these were the only legal outlet. In 1968 further regulations were added and in 1971 the system was disbanded entirely. And this was when the number of addicts and the social problems that accompany them started to become more serious.
From the moment drug addicts were treated as criminals rather than as addicts with a medical/psychological problem, a whole new segment of criminals came into being. As long as there were clinics in England and addicts had access to doctors then the problem was medical and not only was it possible to do something for the addicts but it meant there was no place for the pushers. Declaring drugs illegal in a sweeping wholesale manner left a hole that was filled with a black market. This in turn created a new industry that led to formidable drug cartels that are rich enough to have a say in the running of some countries in South America. And thus the illegal "corporate" bosses have ended up with more power than they could ever have dreamed of. People tend to think that crime and punishment go together, in fact laws and crime go together and creating laws against drugs created more problems than they solved. The two papers: "The Times" in 1955 and "The Economist" in 2011, have publicly presented a good case
for legalizing drugs. What a pity it was only the journalists who could foresee the disaster of criminalizing addicts and continuing to marginalize them rather than aid them, and not government representatives.
In 2011, Mark A.R. Kleiman, Jonathan P. Caulkins and Angela Hawken wrote a book entitled: "Drugs and Drug Policy: What Everyone Needs to Know" which considers various issues relating to the "War on Drugs." They also challenge the assumption that it is OK for any form of tobacco or alcoholic beverages to be sold legally even when they are known to do as much, if not more, damage. Give a bit of weed to those fervent football fans instead of beer and football hooliganism may be a thing of the past. The authors also discuss the crime issues that go hand in hand with any illegal substance. The book makes a serious academic argument about these two issues being connected, as does the National Center for the Victims for Crime. In 2007, the Center gives the frightening statistics that over 50 percent of the people in America who are arrested have illegal substances of some sort in their system. The Centre also claims that crime, in particular robbery, is one of the results of drug addicts being treated as criminals. Addiction is also a contributing factor to all forms of violence in the homes.
Unfortunately so much of the economy in western countries is built up around the drug trade. The police, the lawyers, the judges, the courts, the prisons, the prison guards, the social workers, the probation officers, to mention but a few. The list is long, and while many of these people aren't well paid, or are over-worked, the fact is the illegality of the product provides as much legal employment as it does illegal employment. Moreover, as was mentioned, many of the illegal organizations have so much affluence and influence they would certainly never allow legalization. And what politician, would dare reduce the numbers employed directly and indirectly, or admit the waste of government money that has gone into this war. And so unfortunately since there are so many powerful people and organizations with vested interests in continuing this campaign it looks like we are in for another hundred years war under another name: The War on Drugs.
Copyright: Academic -Reading
About the Author:
Want to find out more about reading academic English reading comprehension #1, then visit www.academic-reading.com and learn how to read like a pro strategies and skills #2 to make English easy.