Relationship between Drug Use and Crime - Essay Example

Title: Explain the relationship between drug use and crime. Would legalizing illicit drugs reduce criminal behavior? Use relevant research to support your argument. Name Unit Introduction Drug use and crime have been positively related. The drug trafficking cartels have been associated with heinous crimes such as killing, abduction, extortion and black mailing (Limoncelli, 2009). Countries such as Mexico have been under crime rise due to drug lords who have enriched themselves from the trade. The drug users are also involved in petty crimes to finance their urge for the drugs. Most of the crime units deal with hard drugs to finance their activities (McAloon, 2007). This essay will explain the relationship between drug use and crime. This will be done by establishing whether legalizing drug use will reduce criminal behavior or not. The debate on relationship between the drugs and crime has been there for a long time. For many, legalizing the drugs is something unthinkable. This is due to fact that most believe that legalizing drugs will lead to addiction and the drug dealers will still retain their market. Those who believe in legalizing the drugs argue that it will reduce organized crime and save a lot of cash that is used in policing (Ogden, 2001). In most countries, drug users have increased at a very fast rate. There are fewer known users of legal drugs as compared to the illegal drugs. For example, the number of heroin users in the United Kingdom had increased to more than 300 000 in 2007 as compared to a few thousands in the 1970s. The increase occurred after the misuse of drugs act came into effect. There have been observed that drug use have not been related to the policies set. Legalization of harmful drugs will lead to disaster. The case of legalizing the drugs has been based on the claim that the set laws on drugs prohibition have failed (McAloon, 2007). Those supporting legalization argues that the illegal drugs are found in most of the towns worldwide despite the prohibition. In most countries, the number of adult users of drugs such as cocaine and heroin has been minimal. The harmful drugs are only used by a little percentage of the population worldwide (Single, Christie & Ali, 2000). The argument is also based on the belief that by legalizing, the government would take drug control from the criminals and also benefit from the tax paid. From the current regulation on drug tobacco and alcohol, it is evident that government regulation cannot be effective. Tobacco and alcohol have been misused by minors and young people despite the government control (Blaine, 2014). If the government was to allow the use of heroine and other hard drugs to be regulated instead of prohibited, more cases of abuse will occur. The drugs will also be readily available to the population which will help in escalating crimes (MacDonald, 2004). It is also hard to eliminate the illegal dealers on drugs. This is due to the fact that if tax is introduced on heroin and cocaine to inflate their prices will lead to illegal drug supplies selling their product at a cheaper price to outdo the government. This in turn will increase drug use and rise of crime. The returns the illegal drug traffickers will be gaining can also be used in financing criminal activities. Furthermore, those who will not afford the inflated crime may result to petty crime in order to finance their urge. According to a research, legalization of drug use would lead to a hundred percent increase in the drug use from the current levels. This shows a much wider drug use which would mean that the heroine and cocaine use would double. The increase would mean more extreme and an addicted population. Though the argument on legalization suggests that consumption cannot increase, it have been proved as history shows during the Chinese opium wars. The argument on legislation claims that those who want to use cocaine have already doing it. The fact is that the use would increase as those who are deterred by prosecution would start using it (Kayser, Mauron & Miah, 2005). Hard drugs are more addictive than tobacco or alcohol. This means that there would be an increase in the users of the hard drugs. The crime rates that are associated with drug use would in fact increase. Most of the users who are unable to finance will end up committing petty crime (George, 2007). The illegal trade will still persist so as to satisfy the increased market leading to more organized crime. Drug prohibition is not an intrusion into the personal freedom. The prohibition is a means of protecting the individuals from the vices associated with hard drugs (Pryce, 2006). Children become victims of addicted parents who are now protected by law through legalization. This means more children will be brought up by addicted parents (Hočevar, 2007). Drug addicted parents means that they will bring up their children irresponsibly. This may later lead to increase in crime due to bad parenting (Fortney, 2001). The laws on prohibition of drugs though not perfect, are the best measures to ensure that drug use is limited. They need to be revised and made stronger but not scraped off. The laws are a mirror of what the society wants in order to reduce crime and live peacefully. Hard drug use cause harm to those who use them as well as the society. The harms that are caused by the hard drugs are not due to fact that they are illegal but are associated with their toxicity and consequences. The crime rise in most countries have also been related to drug use. The government cannot participate in trading a substance that is capable of causing harm to the society. Tobacco and alcohol have less harm to the society as compared to the hard drugs such as heroin and cocaine. If legalization of the drugs were carried out, there would be rise in crimes and dependency (Griffith, 2000). This will lead to reduced workforce and poverty. There is a positive correlation between poverty and criminal activities. It have been claimed by supporters that policy based drug control have established a drug market worth more than 320 billion dollars a year. This is according to the UN office on Drugs and Crime. This has established that the drug market is the second largest crime market (Coning & Stølsvik, 2013). The prohibition has caused an effect where the drug trade has become more mobile worldwide. The drug users have faced discrimination and stigmatization. According to research, drug prohibition has led to rapid spread of HIV and Hepatitis C in the world. Drug use has been driven by the fact that there have been low societal well being and regulation cannot reduce it. Countries with tough legislation on drugs have not recorded low drug use than the countries with liberal policies. This proves that legislation cannot help in reducing the drug use (Mishan, 2001). According to supporters of the legalization of drugs, prohibition of drug use should be replaced by control where the drugs will be legalized and controlled by governments. There would be tighter controls on the toxic drugs and lighter controls on the less toxic drugs. The strict controls should involve the prescription and pharmacy use. Drug control has a potential to change the pattern of use on drugs but the overall harm will reduce (Hall, 2008). The crime that is associated with drugs will be reduced. This involves reduction in drug trafficking that have enriched the crime gangs (Coning & Stølsvik, 2013). The move from prohibition of drugs to strict control has gained support in some countries. In the United Kingdom, one in every three people supports the move on strict control of heroine. In conclusion, legalization of drug trade and use will not reduce crime but will enhance it. This is supported by the arguments in the essay that establishes a positive connection between drug use and criminal activities. Legalization of the drugs will lead to a disaster for the countries. If the governments were to control the use by use of the taxes, this will lead to illegal dealers selling the drugs cheaper to evade tax. The governments should not be involved in trade that will be harming the population. Those arguing for legislation are blind to fact that the drugs are illegal because they are harmful. The drugs do not become harmful due to fact that they are illegal. There is need to understand the implications that legalization would lead to the security of the country. Despite the argument for legalization of the drugs, this will lead to more crimes and increase in the number of drug users. I do not support legalization of drugs based on the evidence provided as it will lead to more crimes. References Blaine, S. (2014). Drug policy: a going-over down-under?. Drugs and Alcohol Today, 14(1), 31- 41. Coning, E. ., & Stølsvik, G. (2013). United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime: Combating organised crime at sea: what role for the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime?. The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, 28 (1), 445-447. Fortney, S. (2001). A jurisprudential analysis of govrnment intervention and prenatal drug abuse. Dignitas, 1, 44-70. George, P. G. (2007). Business, risk and organized crime. Journal of Financial Crime, 14(2), 101-112. Griffith, I. L. (2000). Drugs and crime: Policy perspectives. Caribbean Public Policy : Regional, Cultural, and Socioeconomic Issues for the 21st Century, 1(2)133-144. Hall, W. D. (2008). The contribution of research to the development of a national cannabis policy in Australia. Addiction, 103(5), 712-720. Hočevar, A. (2007). Content analysis of slovenian drug use and abuse prevention policy involving parents implications and tendencies of development of this policy to practice. New Paradigms and Methods in Educational and Social Research, 1, 239-256. Kayser, B., Mauron, A., & Miah, A. (2005). Viewpoint: Legalisation of performance-enhancing drugs. Lancet, 1(3), 366. Limoncelli, S. A. (2009). Human Trafficking: Globalization, Exploitation, and Transnational Sociology. Sociology Compass, 3(1), 72-91 MacDonald, Z. (2004). What Price Drug Use? The Contribution of Economics to an Evidence Based Drugs Policy. Journal of Economic Surveys, 18(2), 113-152. McAloon, C. (2007). Should drugs be decriminalised? Look beyond legalisation. Britich Medical journal (clinical Research Ed.), 335(1), 7629. Mishan, E. J. (2001). The staggering costs of drug criminalisation. Economic Affairs, 21(1), 37- 42. Ogden, G. (2001). Personal view Before the legalisation of drugs is considered, the Government's National Drugs Strategy should be given a chance. Police Review, 3(1), 20-22. Pryce, S. (2006). The State of the Discipline: Politics and Drugs. The British Journal of Politics & International Relations, 8(4), 602-610. Single, E., Christie, P., & Ali, R. (2000). The impact of cannabis decriminalisation in Australia and the United States. Journal of Public Health Policy, 21(2), 157-86. Read More