The Pros and Cons of Legalizing Heroin and Cocaine in the UK - Coursework Example

The pros and cons of legalizing heroin and cocaine in the UK Name Course Institution Date The pros and cons of legalizing heroin and cocaine in the UK Introduction Organized crimes are groups of people who engage themselves in criminal or illegal activity for the sole purpose of getting profits from these activities. These groups are also known as mafia and are highly influential in the area where you can find them. It is known that these groups have a crucial influence in political activities. Organized crime flourishes when the government in place is not strong, and its influence is not felt among the citizens (BBC News, 2011). Today organized crime groups are now collaborating and working together. In fact, organized crimes are no longer remaining local but are going global, therefore, making these groups stronger than before. Organized crimes range from activities like fraud, human trafficking, arms and weapons to drugs retail. Most of these groups are usually involved in more than one of the above activities. The numbers of people that get involved in organized crime are extremely high. In the UK, an estimate of thirty eight thousand people is involved in these crimes of drugs. The high demand of the goods and services that these organized crimes is involved in, making this business attractive for these groups (Bean, 2009). The immense profits obtained from these crimes also make the risk worth taking. It is estimated that organized crimes have at least $330 billions in assets. The scale of money laundering that is involved within these groups is tremendous, making it the third largest business in the world after foreign exchange and oil. It is clearly evident that organized crimes involve an enormous amount of money. However, most economies are not able to tap this money because it is disguised. What would happen if these crimes were legalized? Discussion Drug sale is one of the activities that organized crimes are deeply involved in conducting. The use of drugs especially among the youth is large. Drugs are more largely found in the streets now than it was years ago. In the UK, there is fear of the increase on drug use and in organized crime. An estimate of eleven million people in the UK has used an illicit drug in their life (Serious organized crimes agency, 2011). This numbers continue to increase at an alarming rate even with the drugs being illegal. The illegal trade market is a market to watch. In the UK, the trade is estimated to reach an amount of € 6.6 billion a year. Worldwide the market is worth $USD400 billion (United Nations, 2009). This amount makes the trade of illegal drugs an extremely attractive market venture into, because of the amount of profits enjoyed. Most countries, though have laws against drug use and its sale, the activities are still taking place in the black market. The trading of drugs is also associated with so many crimes that are directly or indirectly involved with drugs. These crimes include murder, assault and even robbery. There are different arguments that favour and those that are against the legalization of drugs, especially those that belong to class A, namely heroine and cocaine (Ogden, 2001). The arguments against its legalization argue that the use of these drugs will undoubtedly rise, and more people will become users. This is true, because with its legalization users will not fear getting caught by the law forces, since it is no longer illegal. Second, in legalizing drugs, we will be endangering the health of the citizens. If the use, of cocaine and heroin were legalized, more people would use the drug openly, and they would end up harming their health. Some of the disease that involves drugs is heart diseases and anxiety. The proponents of this argument against drug legalization also argue that drug use would cause harmful incidents caused by those under the influence of this drugs. Third, there is fear of the corporations that will be involved in the drug sales and distribution might gain power. For instance, look at the way the alcohol and tobacco companies usually have tremendous influence on issues and how powerful they can be. These corporations are known not to fall even when they are being sued. There is also fear that these industries may have control over the small corporation if drug use were legalized. On the other hand, the proponents of legalizing drug use have their reasons. The first argument is that the government will be able to control its use and manufacture similarly to the way alcohol and tobacco is regulated by the government. This is done by controlling its manufacture, meaning the conditions and the content level. The government can also limit the age of people who consume the drug. Additionally, legalizing drug use will reduce the amount of money that governments use to fight the trade of drug use. The amounts going into enforcing the laws on illegal drug use are so much and there is a lack of improvement in cubing the use of drugs. An argument has been raised that it would be better treating drug user than criminalize them (Eamonn et al, 2008). It would also cause much less to direct funds into their treatment and rehabilitation were the use of the drugs legal. Legalizing drugs would also reduce the power that the organized crime groups have. This is because with drugs legalized, the commodity will become more available to users. This surplus will then yield into the price of the drugs going down (Coomber, 1994). If the price goes down the profits that will be gained from this trade, will reduce, therefore, reducing the power that this groups has. The rate of crime will also decrease as the risk involved with drug use, and sale is low. It is argued that the illegality of drugs has caused more harm than good. This occurs especially to the drug users who have the tendency of sharing drugs, therefore, exposing them to health risk. The spread of HIV has increased due to the shared needles by users. In addition to HIV, Hepatitis B and C have also increased. The policy in place against drugs has placed the users at a difficult position to seek medical help when they are in need, because of their fear of being reprimanded from their drug use. It is also ironical how the states with the toughest rules against drug use have the largest numbers of users and addicts. The change of the current policies prohibits drug use to those policies that will allow its use; from an economist point of view, this will have an impact. The first impact will be to save costs for the government. The first costs that are saved are crime costs. In the UK, it is believed that most crimes especially those that involve property relate to drug use (Steve, 2010). Most drug users are involved in crime so that they can be able to fund their drug consumption. The use of heroin and cocaine to an addict is extremely expensive, and he or she may not have the money to fund their daily intake. This results to most of them turning to crime because they need the money to buy drugs. The other costs are health costs. The prices are estimated to remain almost the same or slightly increase. The other costs that would be saved are those that relate to drug related accidents like accidents on the road. Additionally, the costs people will have to endure as a result of crimes like wounds from fights will be substantially reduced thus saving the government and the victims on health costs (Seddon, 2010). This is because the government is now able to control the business leading to the safety of the business. Other costs include prosecution costs used to prosecute the drug users. These costs involve those that are paid to lawyers who are defending those that are involved in drug use and possession. The costs may also include those paid to the jurors in their service to the states during the hearings of these drug cases. We are also able to save on taxpayers' money that is directed towards the correctional system of the country. An economist views this as costs that can be saved and benefits enjoyed or directed towards another part of the economy (Thornton, 2009). Social costs can also be saved most people who are involved in the solicitation and sex workers do it because of their need to purchase drugs, and they are estimated at around 90% in the UK (Inciardi, 1991). These costs would reduce tremendously if drug use were legalized, because the price of these drugs would reduce. Therefore, the drugs would be affordable for the sex workers. Some of the sex workers would also be freed from this practice. It is argued that if the use of heroin and cocaine were legalized, the price would reduce highly. This reduction in price would make the drugs affordable just as alcohol is affordable to those who consume it (Mendez, Beddow & Thibodeaux, 2010). The addicts will now not be engaged in crimes thus crime rates would reduce with about 75%. This would curb the crime rates and save the treasury money allocated to curbing crime. This money could be used to make an improvement to the economy by using it in another sector. The amounts that could be saved are estimated at about £150 million per year, which could be put into use by being directed into infrastructure and administration. The current costs that the UK government is incurring with the prohibition of this class A drugs is estimated to be around £17 billion. These costs are way too high as compared to the costs if the drugs were to be regulated by the government. It is argued that even with a likely increase in the number of drug users when the drug use is made legal (Kersey, 1994). The government will end up saving more than it is currently spending on fighting crimes related to drug use. Research has shown that even with 100% increase in drug consumption the government will save an amount of £4.6 billion. Apart from saving of cost, legalizing of drugs would result into government tapping into a source for tax. The amounts of tax that the government would collect from the production sell and distribution of the drugs would be enormous. It is estimated that an amount of $22.5 billions would be collected in tax amounts from drugs. With the policies in place today the government continues to lose this money to the organized crimes groups and in turn making them stronger. It is said that drug money might have contributed to the rise of some banks during the recession. If drug use were to be legalized, the government would make sure it highly taxed the drugs so as to discourage the consumption of these drugs. Due to the inelastic nature of these goods the demand would still remain the same even if the price was to rise. The behavior would be similar to that of cigarettes and alcohol. The consumers still almost remain the same even with an increase in price every time there is a budget revision. The government will also make sure that excellent substance is sold to consumers. They would also tap on excise taxation with the companies involved in the manufacture of these drugs. The states would also regulate the advertising of these drugs to the public, while also limiting the age of this drug consumption (Moffitt, Malouf & Thompson, 1998). The money from these taxes can be used to raise awareness against these drugs while also providing treatment for the addicts. The money obtained from taxation of these drugs may not be as high as expected. This is because with the drugs being illegal, the price of drugs is high and the demand for it is high. As for the supply, it is low with the prohibition laws in place, therefore, making the price of the drugs high. If we legalized drugs though, the price of these drugs would drastically fall, and the amounts of tax that can be obtained then would be lower (Thornton, 2009). Legalizing of drugs would also create employment. If drugs were to be regulated by the government, it would mean that these drugs will now be produced and manufactured under the supervision of the government. This will result in the construction of factories of corporations that will be involved in the production and distribution of these drugs. These corporations in turn, will create jobs for the citizens and this has a direct impact on the economic growth of the country. Legalizing drugs such as cocaine and heroin would reduce the power that the organized crimes have because of the money they obtain from drugs. Drug trade is usually attractive to the organized crime groups because of its massive profits the drugs bring (Kennally, 1996). The money collected from the sale of drugs then empowers these groups to stretch into other crimes that usually cost a lot when tying to fight them. The fall of these organized crimes would in turn reduce corruption revolving around the activities of these groups. It is also argued that the legalization of drugs will bring safety to our neighborhoods. It is common for the streets where the drugs are traded to be highly insecure. In fact, these streets always have police patrol because of the likelihood that a crime will occur anytime. These streets are hard to maintain business unless you belong to the gang. Business people are known to pay money to a certain gang for protection against vandalism and theft. It this safety issues, were reduced people would be able to conduct their business without fear, and this would make GDP (The Economist newspaper ltd, 2011) go up, and in the economic development of that region. The legalization of drugs has its negative side and its opponents. The reasons for these opponents from an economist point of view are that savings will be minimal yet the spending is huge (Institute of economics affair (Great Britain, 2009). This assumes that most people will now use drugs due to their legality. This will cost the government money as it caters for the health of these users; therefore, the money that may be collected from the tax may end up being used to save their health making it not beneficial at all. It is also argued that legalization of drugs may create a new group of users, namely the children. For instance the way the youth are struggling with alcoholism today because of its legalization, and the notion that they grew up having about its legalization. This will be the same case with the hard drugs, like heroin and cocaine years to come if it is legalized today. The children will grow wanting to use the drugs as they see their elders do. This may cause harm to the economy in the future, when the government will be creating awareness on the harmfulness of the drugs. Legalizing of these drugs may cause poor relations between countries. In most countries, the use of heroin and cocaine is prohibited. If the UK for instance decided to legalize its use, it would cause friction with its foreign relations. This in turn, would affect the business conducted between the two countries and it may bring harm to the economy of the country (Serious organized crimes agency, 2011). Poor relations may also arise if legalization of these drugs brought dishonest business to the organized crime groups that control a country. The two countries may then end up in conflict. Different economists all have their own views on the legalization of drugs and their effects on the economy. Most economists though tend to favour the legalization of drugs whether full or the decriminalization of drug use. Walter Block says that there is no black and white evidence that the legalization of drugs would be advantageous or its prohibition is failing. He believes that a free market of these drugs will lead to economic welfare (Mark 8). Murray N Rothbard strongly agrees that the illegality of drugs cause crime, because the individuals are pushed to commit crimes. This is so as to obtain funds to purchase the highly priced drugs. He argues that with the legalization of drugs supply would increase and prices would fall. This in turn, would reduce the crime rates. On the other hand, there are economists who do not agree with legalizing of drugs. Paul Taubman is one of these economists (Mark 16) He argues that the elasticity of the price on drugs would not be zero as many presume it would be, if the drugs were legalized. To him, it may end up bringing in more users in the picture. He fears that the drugs may reach children who are at a high risk of exposure to these drugs if they were made legal. He is not alone in his worry of what the legalization of drugs might do. Parents are also worried that their children may become more actively involved in drugs if they were to legalize drugs. It is clear that these economists do not clearly agree, but liberalization of the drug policy is undoubtedly a clear way. This involves the relaxation of some of the straining laws on drugs (Husak, & Marneffe, 2005). This mostly involves those laws that involve the drug users. They propose the use of policy where we are to treat users as patients instead of criminals. The trafficking of drugs and its sale though should be seen as a crime. This liberalization also supports the legalization of use of drugs if it's for health purposes. In the UK, the debate to legalize drugs has had priority in the late years (Great Britain Parliament House of Lords, 2005). This is so especially during this recession times where the government is trying to reduce the cost it's incurring. A total of £800 billion drug costs a year are being incurred by the government and with the legalization of drugs they would reduce drastically. The problem though is that the issue of legalizing drugs is not only upon the government it involves a large group of people. Every person has their own opinions on the issue, and many may not agree on the legalization of drugs due to the impact they fear that it may cause. The only solution to this problem may be if the two proponents and opponents met half way. This means that the complete legalization of this class A drugs cannot fully pass without resistance from the people. The costs that are going into drug control and in curbing crimes that result from drugs are too much, and there is the need to reduce these costs. It needs to be regulated and saved. It may be useful in another part of the economy. A comprise must, therefore, be reached where costs are reduced, and laws are not entirely abolished. Conclusion Organized crimes are large in the world and with the high increase in their illegal activities they continue to become more powerful than they were before. Their trade and assets have been increasing, and the industry is worth billions. They are continually involved in money laundering, and this money can be tapped in the form of taxes and put into the economy. There is also the increase in drug use, and drugs are now more available in streets that they were years ago. It is evident that drug use is increasing at a high rate. The question then is should we legalize the use of drugs? I personally do not agree with legalization of drug use but I will support the liberalization of the laws to at least relax the laws on drug use. The most noteworthy is not to victimize the drug user, who must be treated as patients and not as criminals so that they can obtain help. The state must also come up with better laws to govern the drug use so that they can reduce the costs that they are spending in crimes. If legalization were to pass, then the government must embark into a campaign of awareness about what harm these drugs can cause and that they are addictive and harmful. Reference Bean, P., 2009, Legalizing drugs: debate and dilemmas. London: The policy press. BBC News, 2011, life of crime, BBC UK, viewed on 1st august, 2011. Coomber, R., 1994, Drugs and drug use in society: a critical reader. London: Greenwich University Press. Mendez, D., Beddow, S., & Thibodeaux, J., 2010, Gangrillas: The Unspoken Pros and Cons of Legalizing Drugs. North Carolina: Trafford Publishing. Eamonn, C., Maggy, L., Pam, C., Nigel, S., & Ken, P., 2008, Criminology: A Sociological Introduction. New York: Taylor and Francis. Great Britain Parliament House of Lords, 2005, the parliamentary debates (Hansard): official report, Volume 679, London: H.M.S.O.. Husak, D. N., & De Marneffe, P., 2005, The legalization of drugs. London: Cambridge University Press. Inciardi, A. J., 1991, the drug legalization debate. California: Sage publications. Institute of economics affair (Great Britain), 2009, economic affairs, Longman in association with the Institute of Economic Affairs, London. Kennally, G., 1996, Regulating the trade in recreational drugs: legal restrictions as barriers to entry. New York: Cengage Learning Kersey, J., 1994, High society: the legislation of illicit drugs. Sydney: Hampden Press. Moffitt, A., Malouf, J., & Thompson, C., 1998, Drug precipice: illicit drugs, organised crime, fallacies of legalisation, worsening problems, solutions. Sydney: UNSW Press. 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. 20-22. Steve, E., 2010, all drugs should be legalized, says the former UK drug c-zars, Village Voice Media Holdings, viewed on 1st August, 2011. Seddon, T., 2010, Regulating markets in vice. Criminal Justice Matters. 80, 6-7. Serious organized crimes agency, 2011, organized crimes and drug war, SOCA, Viewed on 1st august 2011. Thornton, M., 2009, the Economics of Prohibition, Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah, pp7- 17. The Economist newspaper ltd, 2011, The economist. Charlottesville: University of Virginia. United Nations, 2009, World drug report, United Nations publications, New York. Read More