The war on drugs and the United States criminal justice system Essay Example for Free

The war on drugs and the United States criminal justice system Essay Compiled by Drug Policy Alliance. August, 2001. Prohibition will work great injury to the cause of temperance. It is a species of intemperance within itself, for it goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a mans appetite by legislation, and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes. A Prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded. Abraham Lincoln The link between racial discrimination and the war on drugs exists not only in the United States but also throughout much of the world. In one country after another racial and ethnic minorities are targeted and persecuted in the name of the war on drugs. Criminal laws often focus on psychoactive drugs used by minority populations, while other more commonly used drugs are legal, and their abuse properly treated as problems for health care providers, not criminal justice systems. In most countries, racial and ethnic minorities are disproportionately targeted, arrested, prosecuted and punished for drug offenses. The reliance on incarceration as the principal means of punishment in the United States has escalated to the point that there are now more than 2 million Americans in the countrys state and federal prisons. The United States imprisons more of its citizens than any other nation in the world. Blacks, Latinos and Native Americans are over-represented throughout the U. S. prison system. However, nowhere in the criminal justice system is the disparity between the arrest, detention, conviction and sentencing of people of color and Whites more brutally obvious than in the case of the war on drugs. Racism Permeates Drug Law Enforcement. Unequal treatment of minority group members pervades every stage of the criminal justice system. Racial profiling, street sweeps, buy and bust operations and other police activities have targeted people in street level retail drug transactions in low-income communities of color. Blacks and Latinos are victimized by unfair treatment by police; by racially skewed charging and plea bargaining decisions by prosecutors; by discriminatory sentencing practices and by the failure of judges, elected officials and other criminal justice policy makers to redress the inequities that have come to permeate the system. The rate of drug admissions to state prison for black men are thirteen times greater than the rate for white men. A recent report by Human Rights Watch found that while drug use is consistent across all racial groups, Blacks and Latinos are far more likely to be arrested and prosecuted and given long sentences for drug offenses. Blacks constitute 13 percent of all drug users, but 35 percent of those arrested for drug possession, 55 percent of persons convicted, and 74 percent of people sent to prison. (1) Nationally, Latinos comprise almost half of those arrested for marijuana offenses(2) and Native Americans comprise almost 2/3 of those prosecuted for criminal offenses in federal courts. (3) The racial bias of the drug war is exemplified by the 100 to 1 disparity in prison sentences for crack versus powder cocaine. As scientists and courts alike have declared, there is no rational basis for distinguishing between crack cocaine and powder cocaine. Nonetheless, in 1994, 90 percent of persons convicted of federal crack cocaine offenses were Black, six percent Latino, and less than four percent White. Federal powder cocaine offenders were 30 percent Black, 43 percent Latino, and 26 percent White. (4) Domestically, U. S. drug policy is fueled by historical bias against racial minorities used to justify their disproportionate presence in the penal system. The impact these policies have had on social structures and political power in Black and Latino communities has been devastating. As a result of the war on drugs poor communities of color have been politically weakened by laws that disenfranchise voters for felony convictions and provide economic incentives for rural communities to embrace prisons as a form of economic development. The prevailing theory about prisons in many locales is If we build them, they will come. There is a self-perpetuating, cyclical quality to the treatment of Blacks and Latinos in the U. S. criminal justice system. Much of the discrimination visited upon these groups stems from the perceptions of criminal justice decision-makers that (1) most crimes are committed by minorities, and (2) most minorities commit crimes. Although empirically false, these perceptions cause a disproportionate share of law enforcement attention to be directed at minorities, which in turn leads to more arrests of Blacks and Latinos. Disproportionate arrests fuel prosecutorial and judicial decisions that disproportionately affect minorities and result in racial disparities in incarceration. The accumulated effect is to create a prison population in which Blacks and Latinos increasingly predominated, which in turn reinforces the misperceptions that justify racial profiling and punitive drug policies. Recommendations Affluent predominantly white suburban communities have long recognized that the drug war need not be fought only on the incarceration front. Alternatives such as drug treatment and education are mainstays of white, middle-class efforts to reduce drug abuse in their neighborhoods. A strategy centered on such demand reduction efforts makes sense: The Rand Corporation has estimated that investing an additional $1 million in drug treatment programs would reduce by fifteen times more serious crime than enacting more mandatory sentences for drug offenders. (5) But when it comes to the presence of drugs in poor communities of color, the response of policymakers is to build prisons rather than treatment facilities. If the government of the United States is truly committed to eliminating racial discrimination in the criminal justice system and fulfilling its responsibility as a party to CERD, there must be an end to racial profiling, mandatory minimum drug sentences, and civil disabilities for felony convictions. Police, prosecutors and other criminal justice decision-makers must be held accountable for their discretionary decisions. Moreover, there must be clear acknowledgement on the part of the U. S. government that the war on drugs is a failed policy that is doing more harm than good, particularly to people of color. Notes: 1. Human Rights Watch Report: Punishment and Prejudice: Racial Disparities in the Criminal Justice System, May 2000 Vol. 12, No. 2 (G). 2. John D. Couriel, Keep It Real: Recasting the drug debate in terms of accountability and opportunity.3. U. S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, American Indians are Violent Crime Victims at Double the Rate of the General Population, news release, Feb. 14, 1999 4. 1. 4 million black men or 13% of the black male adult population are disenfranchised, reflecting a rate of disenfranchisement that is seven times the national average. 5. Jonathan P. Caulkins, et al. , Mandatory Minimum Drug Sentences: Throwing Away the Key or the Taxpayers Money, Rand, Santa Monica, 1997, p. xxiv.

Slavery Today and How Can We End It :: essays research papers

-Children Dangerous working conditions and long hours is an everyday reality for 14 percent of children today. Using children for cheap labor is common in many countries. Some of these children have never attended school or dropped out after a few years. Believing that every child has the right to education and playtime, thousands of people from every corner of the world marched together to say no to child labor in 1998 under the banner of ?Global March Against Child Labor?. The international community responded by drafting the International Labor Organization Convection against the worst forms of child labor. From these efforts, the network of organizations under the umbrella of Global March Against Child Labor was born. Global March works worldwide to promote every child?s right to meaningful education and freedom from exploitation and dangerous labor. In my opinion I still think that if kids want a job and want an education then they should have a choice. Global March is now asking people to sign to the "Keep Your Promises" petition. This campaign reminds governments of their commitments to keep children out of dangerous labor environments, provide universal education. I believe children should make the most of their childhood and have fun with it! Children shouldn?t be trapped into slavery, the children shouldn?t be put to wars, children shouldn?t be the victims of the adult created sins and problems, children have to enjoy their childhood and that is the most important thing to me. -Women There are many similarities the way women today are treated and the slave institution which was the most devastating system in this country's history. First of all, slavery was a system of degradation that destroyed the self-esteem, self-worth, and the self-importance of the people considered slaves. This system enabled the white upper class to create a level of servitude and a mentality that still exists. The slaves were thought of as "free labor" that was placed on earth to serve the Europeans, particularly men. Well, women today are considered by society to be second-class citizens that are expected to serve men. So the servitude issue didn?t die. The slaves were considered to be property and were given the last name of their owners, so that people would know whom they belonged to when they encountered them. This was a way of claiming them as property. The same thing exists today. When women get married today, they take the last name of their husband.

American foreign policy Essay

Foreign policy refers to the strategies that governments employ to guide their actions towards other countries. The U. S. foreign policy is founded on the principles of democracy and tenets liberalization (Goldstein, 2003). The U. S. foreign policy takes into account issues of human rights, economic growth and development, terrorism and environmental degradation and addresses them as challenges that can best be addressed through democracy in countries and institutions throughout the world (Goldstein, 2003). The U. S. foreign policy has undergone significant transitions that match different historical periods in the world that include the World War I, the World War II, the Cold War, the post Cold War period and the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. The United Nations and the United States are arguably the most influential players in the international system as well as in the global political economics as a whole. Having been formed with the main objective of promoting and achieving sustainable peace in the world, the United Nations remains the most dominant and most influential International Governmental Organization in the world (Roberts & Kingsbury 1994). In theoretical terms, the fundamental significance of the United Nations as well as the operational challenges faced by the institution are illustrated in the theory of realism which states that â€Å"there is no world government, or political authority above the state, a situation that ultimately reduces the international system to absolute anarchy with the absence of any overarching political body with the capacity to enforce law and order among its members or nation states† (Roberts & Kingsbury 1994). The realism theory stresses on the centrality of the state, or nation state as the ultimate political authority in the politics of the international system. As such, the overriding motive of all states is self-preservation through maximization of power, a characteristic that effectively transforms the international system of a war of all against all (Goldstein, 2003). The realism theory further argues that stability is best achieved in the balance of power which can be achieved through increased interactions among states, with the most powerful country playing the role of a balancer (Goldstein, 2003). Today, the U. S. is the most powerful country in the world and has effectively assumed the role of a balancer in the international system, with the United Nations serving as the overarching political body with capacity to enforce law and order among its member states. Domestic Public Attitudes toward Foreign Policy in the United States At the domestic level, the U. S. foreign policy enjoys a lot of support among the citizenry. According to a report by World Public Opinion. org, a strong majority of U. S. citizens support of the U. S. involvement in the world. However, the number of U. S. citizens who feel disgruntled by the country’ foreign policies is growing steadily. The World Public Opinion. org has established that Americans overwhelmingly support the continued leadership role that the U. S. plays in the world. These findings were based on a 2006 GMF poll which indicated that 84 percent of those polled saying it was desirable for the U. S to exert strong leadership affairs, with 43 percent having been quoted as expressing a US global influence as being very desirable, and only 14 percent expressing their concerns about the U. S. global influence. However, the overwhelming support of the U. S foreign policy by its citizenry does support the role of the U. S. in global affairs as a hegemony, but rather supports the idea of shared leadership roles with other players in the international system. A significant segment of the U. S population believes that the U. S security has been threatened by the way the U. S. has been using the threats of military force as leverage in the international system. In a poll conducted by the World Public Opinion. org, 63 percent of the respondents were of the view that the U. S. military threats prompt other countries to be protective by developing and acquiring weapons of mass destruction. In another survey that was carried out in 2003 by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, majority of the U. S. citizens faulted the war in Iraq, with 66 percent of the respondents believing that the war has had negative effects on the relations between the U. S. and the Muslim world. According to the survey, 64 percent of the respondents expressed concerns that the war will not promote democracy in the Middle East while a further 61percent expressed fears that the war will not reduce the threat of terrorism. International Public Attitudes toward Foreign Policy in the United States There has been a growing disdain for the U. S. foreign policy in many countries throughout the world. The September 11 terrorist attacks and the subsequent U. S. war on terror are seen as having particularly caused dramatic shifts in U. S. foreign policy (Grant, 2004). The military operations in Afghanistan that have been ongoing since October 2001 to date and the U. S. invasion of Iraq have taken toll on the image of the United States with people from around the world and those in the Muslim countries in particular showing the lowest ratings for the U. S foreign policy. According to the Pew Global Attitudes Project that is run by the Washington DC based Pew Research Centre, America’s image relative to the country’s foreign policy has dropped immensely over the years. According to the report of the project, the United States is trailing many countries in favorability ratings. Countries such as France, Germany, China and Japan are more popular than the U. S in the European Union countries and Muslim countries. The study showed that while the ratings of the U. S were highest in Asian countries such as India, the favorability ratings of the country dropped by 15 percent in India between 2005 and 2006. The study further indicated that levels of negative attitudes that the populations of Western Europe have towards America are even higher than they were in 2002 before the Iraq invasion. The Pew Global Attitudes Project report also showed low ratings for President George Bush both domestically and internationally, with the confidence in bush to make the right decisions in international affairs having dropped in seven of the eleven countries in 2005 as provided by the data that tracked the trends. The report further indicates a steady slump of rating for George Bush in European countries and among predominantly Muslim populations. George Bush registered the largest slump of ratings in the U. S. from 62 percent in 2005 to 50 percent in 2006. In regard to the War on Terror, the Pew Global Attitudes Project reported an overwhelming decrease in international public support for the U. S led war on terrorism. With Muslim countries having obviously registered the highest levels of criticisms against the war on terror, Spain and Japan also registered almost virtual collapse of support for the counter-terrorism war. As of 2006, the support for war on terror in Spain had reduced to 19 percent from 63 percent in 2003 while Japan registered public support of 26 percent from 61 percent in 2002, according to information provided by the Pew Global Attitudes Project.

Compare And Contrast The Ways In Which The American Dream...

Compare and contrast the ways in which the American Dream is presented through Walter Younger in Lorraine Hansberry’s ‘ A Raisin in the Sun’ and Willy Lehman in Arthur Miller’s ‘Death of the Salesman’ The American Dream is something many Americans desire. The desire to the mind – set or belief that anyone can be successful if they worked hard for what they’ve been yearning. It is considered to be a ‘perfect life’; it can be full of money, contentedness or even love. There are many divergent opinions given by people. Walter Younger from Lorraine Hansberry’s ‘A Raisin in the Sun’ and Willy Loman from Arthur Miller’s ‘Death of the Salesman’ both have their own views on the American Dream and how it can be achieved. Walter Lee Younger, a†¦show more content†¦Walter presumes that ‘it’s always money’ and how Mama can’t use it in the right way. Walter later responds that ‘money is life,’ explaining to Mama that success is now defined by how much money one has. This conversation takes place early in the play and reveals Mama’s and Walters economic struggles. However w e see a turn of events when Walter plans to accept Mr. Lindner’s offer. Walter is not concerned with the degrading implications of the business deal; it is simply a way to recover some of the lot money. However, Hansberry challenges Walter’s crude interpretation of the American Dream by forcing him to actually carry out the transaction in front of his son. Walter’s inability to deal with Mr. Linder marks a significant revision of his interpretation of the American Dream. Walter comes to a realisation that money is not everything and how family is so much more valuable. During the late 1950’s money was defined as one of the main characteristics of a man, and who that man will become. Walters dream is to obtain enough money to provide enough for his family, this dream of his suggests how his American Dream is also vanished, as money was an immense part of this dream of his. Wily Loman is the complete opposite; he fails to understand that there is so much mo re to becoming successful than being rich. The failure to understand this concept brought him to a sudden death. Willy is like every