The war by the United States of America on drugs has drawn much debate as to whether the result of the war is worth the effort. Many people are wondering whether America’s war on drugs is a failed initiative (Kenneth 2002, p. 381). The term “War on Drugs” was first used formally by one of the presidents of the United States of America, Richard Nixon, back in 1971 to define a new strategy to enforce the prohibition of drugs. This is an initiative that the United States has adopted with the help of other nations across the world to combat the illegitimate drug trading. In 1969, the then president, Nixon reiterated that the abuse of drugs is the number one public enemy of the United States of America. Just a short while later, the passing of the Controlled Substances Act in 1970 by the United States’ Congress came to effect. This law forms the foundation of the contemporary war on drugs by the United States of America. This research paper looks into the effect that can be realized by decriminalizing drugs instead of engaging the United States in the ‘War on Drugs’; programs of intervention; the impact that will come through the legalization of drugs and to what extent.
The legalization of drugs is thought to be a way through which the United States of America can handle the issue of drugs (Vidal 1970, par. 2-6). Many scholars and researchers believe that the legalization of drugs would put many drug dealers out of business. As a result, the drug dealers who prey on the teenagers and young adults by means of drug pushing in the streets of America and institutions of learning, and the number of the emerging addicts will most likely disappear. Many of crimes that are linked to drugs come from drug addicts who are in need of money to just get their fix, not from the drug effects. Indeed, the legalization of drugs is believed to make the addict pay less to produce products and, consequently, they would not have to engage in crime in search of money. There is an anticipated lessening of crimes that take place involving drug pushing. The fighting that is experienced in street corners or in certain territories would also be lessened, because the drug dealers will be greatly reduced. Current drug dealers would have an easy time, because they can easily get their drugs at a price that is reasonable and would possibly use more although they will no longer be killing, stealing and robbing to get their fix (Gabriel 2002, p. 253). This is an approach looming amongst researchers that is thought to be helpful.
The majority of teenagers diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) often indicate that cannabis is their drug of choice. Research has shown that people suffering from ADHD, which is a dysfunction showing a symptomatic alteration in levels of activity, could occasionally get benefits from treatment using cannabis (Strohbeck-Kuehner et al., 2008, pp. 1-3). This is essentially because it seems to regulate levels of activation to degrees which could be taken as optimum for normal performance. There is some evidence from studies that the use of cannabis has a positive effect on behavior, mind state and performance. The impact of cannabis on patients could be disparate from the healthy users. Well, there is still much communication needed that highlights the key inputs of cannabis to functioning abilities of ADHD patients.
All the same, there is a belief that stopping the use of cannabis for ADHD patients can make them have a better feeling other than if they continued using it. The cannabis users are deemed to function and feel good on making such kind of transition from cannabis use. The neuropsychological effects that come through the use of cannabis have overly produced negative reports on attention and memory functions as well as verbal learning. This is even evident with moderate users. The heavy cannabis users have shown greater effects and have persisted for longer period of time after the use of cannabis was discontinued. There is enough evidence to make us believe from both human and animal studies that the effects of cannabis are greater on these young adolescents with young developing minds than is the case with adults (Strohbeck-Kuehner et al., 2008, pp. 1-3). Clinging onto cannabis for ADHD treatment is a mere fantasy to the users. It only works for a short-term benefit and may not necessarily produce any significant long-term help to the user.
Based on the views represented in this paper, the War on Drugs is indeed a war of good intentions and is basically fought towards the welfare of people and the nation at large. There are many benefits that the United States can achieve by engaging in this war and by not legalizing drugs. Many other countries like Switzerland have done it and therefore America is not an exception. The strategies that have been highlighted so far can assist the United States in fixing the problem of drugs within its borders. There will never be a complete drug-free United States but in some way, it can be mitigated and lessened. Through teenage education at a very early age concerning drugs, they will experience fewer problems of drugs later on in their life. This will amount to the decreased number of Americans addicted to drugs in the future.
The options of drug treatment can be useful in treating many individuals. However, this can only happen if particular individuals are motivated and the suitable program is provided for them. Normally, these alternatives have been proven to be effective. The legalization approach would work very well, because the federal government of the United States could regulate the trade on drugs. There would be less crime related to drugs and fewer individuals would be apprehended for minor infractions of drugs. Generally, the combination of all these strategies by the United States would make the nation a safer place. The United States of America can possibly win over the War on Drugs. The most important thing, however, should be engaging in practices that can make these changes very successful.