What Impact Does the War On Drugs Have on the Criminal Justice System - Essay Example

Running Head What impact does the "war on drugs" have on the criminal justice system What impact does the "war on drugs" have on the criminal justice system Since the beginning of the 20th century, "the war on drugs" has been one of the main programs developed and introduced by the US government in order to prevent and reduce illegal drug trade and trafficking. The single most important service that intelligence can provide in the wars on drugs is a definitive picture of the drug trafficking threat. Threat definition is a traditional more often than not primary mission for national and military intelligence agencies. War on drugs has a great impact on criminal justice system and law enforcement agencies. Critics admit that "war on drugs" have both positive and genitive impact on criminal justice created certain stereotypes and putting pressure on the law enforcement agencies. On the one hand, the "war on drugs" helps criminal justice system to control illegal drug trade and reduce a number of drug addicts. The creation of the threat estimate is a logical and orderly examination of all the factors which when combined give shape to the threat. The circularity of effects should be dear. As American communities changed, fear of the unfamiliar and unknown, and consequently that of crime, rose (Miller, 2004). As a result, when people encounter illegal acts they are more likely to call the police, out of fear, whereas in the past, when the situation did not contain the element of unfamiliarity, the issue would be handled informally. So increasing fear is a cause of acceleration in reported crime when the actual incidence of crime has remained stable. In contrast to this view, "many critics claim that current drug control strategy is not only unnecessarily punitive but also largely ineffective" (Timberlake et al 2003, p. 71). The majority of survey respondents str not satisfied with the present situation, characterizing information/intelligence exchange as being "hit or miss," with actual "intelligence business" being conducted by personal contact and investigator meetings-in short, on a case by case basis. They cited limited connectivity between existing and planned networks and limited integration of federal efforts with those of state and local. Some investigators query systems but are reluctant to provide information to input. Fears of 'claim jumping' lucrative cases have prompted previously cooperative agencies to act much more cautiously." Additionally, "guarding drug intelligence and concealing major. "The current "prosecute-or-extradite" system functions through national prosecutions aided by ad hoc international cooperation. It leaves the enforcement of narcotics laws to individual nation-states, as nations may choose to assert jurisdiction and prosecute drug traffickers within their national justice systems, to extradite them to a requesting state, or to avoid taking any action" (Mcconville 2000, p. 75). In addition, "the war on drugs" becomes a real burden for criminal justice system and prisons. Crowding in penal institutions may produce the most volatile situation of all. Many prisoners do not have a chance to be put on parole, so the effects of crowding apply steady pressure on them. That pressure is exacerbated by the violence, racism, and sense of hopelessness found in prisons. Crowding affects prison life in two ways: control of the prison population is more difficult as individual disciplinary problems and major disturbances increase, and individual deterioration is fostered (Miller, 2004). Prisoners living in crowded facilities for sustained periods commit suicide, die, are murdered, create disturbances, become ill, and have interpersonal problems more often than inmates not living in crowded surroundings. Both the actual amount of living space available to each inmate and the total number of men or women incarcerated are related to the negative impacts of imprisonment. Large institutions produce more severe physical and psychological effects than smaller facilities (The War on Drugs 2001). The researchers concluded that the ideal prison setting would not only meet minimal cell-size requirements (fifty to sixty square feet per person) but would also have small populations (less than 1,000 and preferably around 500 inmates). Symbiotic relationships, unacceptable within the formal prison structure but invaluable to institutional control, developed between guards and inmate leaders. In exchange for assurances that no problems (activities that would get the attention of the administration) would occur on the cell block, guards allowed themselves to be corrupted by inmate leaders. In financial figures "the federal drug control budget has exploded over the past 2 decades, with expenditures increasing more than 600% in real terms (2000 dollars) from 1981 to 2000" (Timberlake et al 2003, p. 71). Crime associated with drugs is not increasing, but the sense of insecurity is. We must come to grips with this issue and not allow it to become an issue blown out of perspective. Given the events that have transpired, one might hope for a return to a way of life known in the past, but such stepping back into history is impossible. Social changes that have occurred--many of which are positively valued by most people-cannot and should not be undone. It is not the same old America, nor should it be. It is important that the present status not be evaluated with viewpoints that are no longer appropriate. As the most important, "the war on drugs" creates certain stereotypes such as prevalence of drug addicts and traffickers among black populations. This leads to the relationship of fear to incivility which is important implications for policymakers and law enforcers (The War on Drugs 2001). Ways of ameliorating fear, other than directly reducing crime, should be sought. Urban cleanup and renewal may actually be more viable methods of controlling the effects of crime than an actual reduction of incidence itself. Following Mcconville (2000): "The "double criminality" and "specialty" doctrines can also frustrate extradition and prosecution efforts. Double criminality requires that, for extradition to occur, the offense charged must be punishable as a serious crime in both the requesting and the requested states" (p. 71). Also, those aspects of the crime problem which influence the public's sense of safety may be the aspects that law enforcement agencies tend to ignore. Local codes concerning abandoned buildings, unsightly graffiti, and other forms of vandalism are often not strictly enforced. There is little effort put into discouraging teenagers from hanging out in the streets and disturbing other neighborhood residents, and there are few attempts to reduce visible drug and alcohol consumption. Think about it for a moment. As you drive through your own city, are you more likely to lock the doors of your car in a quiet suburban neighborhood or in one with various signs of disorder It just might be that the symptoms are the cause, rather than the indicators, of a worse situation (Miller, 2004). Many people believe that crime and violence threaten the American system and their way of life. Crime and violence are perceived to be increasing and becoming more vicious and irrational, but the crime problem is being blown out of proportion. To an extent, these fabrications can be blamed on sensationalism by the mass media and exaggeration by the law enforcement establishment. But changes in communities and lifestyles have also contributed to fear among the public. In addition, many criminal courts and law enouncement agencies is under pressure because of inadequate laws and legislations on drug usage and trafficking (Miller, 2004). Mcconville (2000) states: "Most states will not extradite accused persons to stand trial in another jurisdiction without an extradition treaty. Technical grounds thwart extradition when a state requires an extradition treaty where one does not exist" (p. 71). The criminal justice institutions stood in contrast to the typical jail of that day, where criminals, debtors, and even witnesses, male and female, the very young and innocent as well as the mature and hardened, were incarcerated together, where food, clothing, and bedding are often inadequate, where jailers are corrupt and violence is commonplace, and where excessive use of alcohol routinely occurred because the keepers operated bars within institutions. Increased budget and support from the government has not helped criminal justice system to eliminate drug trafficking and a number of drug addicts in the country. Professional law enorcement, procedural protections of individual liberties, and the U.S. court system are legacies from Europe, but "the war on drugs" is an American program, and one founded with the optimism that is so characteristic of American innovation. References 1. Mcconville, M. (2000). A Global War on Drugs: Why the United States Should Support the Prosecution of Drug Traffickers in the International Criminal Court. American Criminal Law Review, 37 (1), 75. 2. Miller, J. (2004). Bad Trip: How the War Against Drugs is Destroying America. Thomas Nelson. 3. The War on Drugs: Fighting Crime or Wasting Time (2001). American Criminal Law Review, 38 (4), 1537. 4. Timberlake, J. M., Lock, E. D., Rasinski, K. A. How Should We Wage the War on Drugs Determinants of Public Preferences for Drug Control Alternatives. Policy Studies Journal, 31 (2003), 71. Read More