01 Feb 2010

Sample Essay: Morality, Self- Control, And Crime

1.In the study entitled “Morality, Self-Control, and Crime,” the researchers aim to establish that the Self-Control Theory in association with morality is an effective predictor of criminal probability.  Previous studies in the past have established that self-control is a deterrence to deviant behavior.  Self-control is defined as the person’s capacity to avoid certain acts whose long-term implication could prove a disadvantage.  In some people, self-control is strong while others have weaker tendencies to avoid acts that go against the norms of society (Gottfredson, 2007).  The researchers want to affirm the universality of this assertion by applying the theory from a sample data from Lviv, Ukraine, a place in Europe that was previously under the rule of communist Soviet.  The researchers have chosen this place because of its economically evolving society.

Aside from studying the effect of self-control on people’s probable misconduct, the researchers have inserted another factor in the equation and to test whether this second factor has a stronger impact on crime compared to self-control.  They want to determine whether the morality of a person has any relation to his self-control as well as the indicators of crime.

Self-control theorists have placed it as the strongest factor keeping people from crime.  In recent years, moralists start to assert that morality is central to deterring crime. The researchers would want to know if there is an interrelation between these two factors.  They assume that people who lack moral principles have also low self control and are likely to commit criminal behavior, while those with strong moral convictions have also strong self control and are the least likely to commit deviant behavior.

2. The independent variables in this study are self-control and morality.  Self-control is an inherent attribute in some people while others have to consciously practice in order to acquire this characteristic.  In this study, self-control is an independent variable since it is one of the factors measured among the respondents that does not change (Cool-Science-Projects.com, n.d.).  Instead, the person’s responses to different situations vary depending on his self-control.  Morality is also an independent variable because like self-control, it will not change a person’s tendency to commit or not to commit crime or misconduct.  Both of these factors are used from a cognitive perspective.

The dependent variable in this study is crime because the performance of a deviant behavior will depend on the person’s morality and self-control (Cool-Science-Projects.com, n.d.).  Since crime covers a wide spectrum, the researchers limited this to seven force and fraud offenses and the participants’ likely performance of these identified crimes.  The changes in these variables are measured and correlated with the respondents’ morality and self-control.  In order to get a more meaningful result, the researchers have introduced five control variables.  These are gender, age, intactness of the family of origin during childhood, perceived family economic status during childhood, and childhood religiosity.  These control variable are necessary to avoid getting results from respondents coming from a widely varied personal background.

3.In order to obtain the data for analyzing the correlation among crime, self-control and morality, the researchers used a face-to-face interview method with 500 pre-qualified adults.  The adults in this study are chosen randomly using a specially designed selection process.  The design of this research calls for this kind of method in order to obtain the most accurate and relevant information (Trochim, 2006).  The selection of the respondents as well as the actual data collection were made by a professional survey organization that is based in Ukraine.

To find the eligible respondents for this survey, each must qualify in a two-stage sampling procedure.  The first requirement is for the person to live in first street routes in one of the six districts randomly chosen for the study.  Then, from among the households located on those identified districts, 70 percent from the number is used to draw 150 of the samples.  The rest of the 500 samples are chosen as random replacements.

After the face-to-face interview, each respondent is to answer a list of questions that are considered sensitive in nature, such as, past misconducts and moral feelings.

Although the respondents were not forced to join the study, they were given a monetary compensation for their participation.

4. The researchers’ review of prior literature is divided into two sub-sections.  The first one focuses on previous studies showing how self-control figures in people’s performance of crime. Reviewing literature related to self-control and crime at the start of the study is appropriate in order to establish how trends in recent years have made social scientists began to look for other factors in determining why people commit crime.  While it is generally accepted that crime is somehow caused by low self-control, this study’s review of literature has only drawn on some self-control studies and generalized their conclusions about its impact on criminality.  The researchers only mentioned those that are conducted in more recent years in order to make the data applicable to the present time.

The section discussing self-control studies is comparatively shorter compared to the section on morality.  The researchers have explained early on that one of the important goals of this study is to establish the role of morality in crime.  Since self-control has been widely studied, the researchers chose to focus more on morality.  In trying to probe how morality could impact the person’s actions, the researchers attempted to validate Wikstrom’s 2006 study that concludes morality is the basic factor in acts of crime.  Most of this section expounds on the different arguments that Wikstrom has presented to support his claim particularly on the validity of the Situational Action Theory, which makes weak morality, in opposition to self-control, as the most important factor in crimes.

Overall, the literature review is somewhat limited but nonetheless, they are adequate to provide a significant background why the present study is important.

5.Based on research findings, the researchers believed that there is greater evidence supporting weak morality as a determinant of criminality compared to self-control.  The research also confirmed that self-control is a factor that contributes to people committing deviant behavior.  However, the researchers also did not find a strong correlation between self-control and morality.  Each factor is independent of one another.  Because of this weak correlation, a contention now exists on what factor is stronger in pushing an individual towards an action that is considered wrong by society.

Self-control theorists have proven many times in the past that this factor is the underlying reason why criminality is rampant in the world.  For many years, this belief has been widely accepted until such time that new studies show the possibility of another factor being more powerful than self-control.  With the creation of the Situational Action Theory, social scientists would have to conduct further studies to determine which of the two could claim to be at the root of the problem.

6.This research cannot be generalized for several reasons.  Weak morality as the root of crime is a new concept that needs to be further validated by additional studies across all cultures in different parts of the world.  The researchers have explained that their focus is the city of Lviv because of the changing dynamics of a culture that has recently emerged from socialism to embrace capitalist ideas and ideals.  Being the case, it should be noted that the Lviv case is unique and does not represent many cultures around the world.  It could be applicable to other countries experiencing the same changes, like many countries in Eastern Europe.  But for other countries with a more stable environment, like those in the West, the results could changed significantly.  The same dynamics are not true for the more stable capitalist states whose populace’s morality and self-control are governed by other factors.  Thinking of generalizations at this point would be too premature.  Human nature is highly complex and could change depending on many external and internal factors surrounding him.

It will take more time, possibly years, and several studies of observing society before the implications of this research could solidify.  It may be true that morality has a stronger effect on individuals compared to self-control but it is also likely that both play equal roles in other cultures.  There are too many possibilities arising from this research that it is not probable at present to create generalizations that would speak for the entire world.  What other researchers should do is to expand the sample population to include other societies and other races.  The control variables should also be changed to see a more diverse result.

7.A research design should be created in such a manner that the most relevant information are obtained without prejudice.  The sampling method is rather restrictive considering that the participants are all above 18 years old.  It has to be remembered that many offenses in society today are perpetrated by minors.  It would have been more useful if the age range has been changed to include minors.

Adults are more likely to have an established set of moral views and higher self-control, except in cases when the person has psychological issues.  Adults generally can handle themselves better making the results inapplicable to a larger population.  Youth respondents in any culture are more interesting since they have the capacity to vary greatly in terms of thinking and perspectives.

The researchers, though, have not claimed that their intention for conducting the research is to make their hypotheses applicable to a bigger context.  They have stated that their expectations are only limited to a certain group of people.  Using a quantitative method to obtain a correlation is also appropriate (Hopkins, 2000).  In this regard, the research design is appropriate.  Others in the field are left with many possibilities for further exploration.

8.The data presentation and discussion are done in a manner that makes it easy for the ready to understand what the researchers have found out.  Discussion goes directly to the point, wherein results show that a stronger correlation exists between morality and crime.  The discussion avoids using technicalities that would confuse the non-expert.

The results are important since they provide a new perspective concerning factors that push people to commit crime.  It highlights important aspects concerning morality and its role in society.  This will make society realize and evaluate the current state morality among the people.  However, the researchers have pointed out several limitations in the study particularly on the sample population that could make the results less applicable to a bigger population.  With the existence of this significant limitations, the results’ substance is affected.

9.This study opens a lot of possibilities for further studies as a result of various questions arising from the present hypotheses.  These questions or hypotheses include:

is this applicable to all changing economies

is this applicable to the youths of those economies

is this applicable to capitalist states

are morality and self-control really independent of each other when Christian doctrine suggests that self-control is a product of morality (Knight, 2009)

Naturally, the next wave of researches would focus on the validity of finding morality as a stronger factor over self-control by using respondents from other cultures, age group, and by increasing the number of respondent.

10.Some of the potential drawbacks of this research are: making society put pressure on people to adopt stricter moral principles; the Churches using this study to preach about morality; and the undermining of self-control as a deterrence factor in controlling crime.  Previous teachings about self-control should not be disregarded while everyone focuses on morality.  From a Christian perspective, this study could create confusion and divert people from what is essential.  Efforts at stopping crime should not change just because morality is emerging as a factor.  Instead, experts should design their programs to include both self-control and morality.

References

Gottfredson, M.R.  (2007).  Self-control theory.  Blackwell Reference Online. Retrieved April   23, 2009, from http://www.blackwellreference.com/public/tocnode?id=     g9781405124331_chunk_g978140512433125_ss1-70

Hopkins, W.G.  (2000).  Quantitative research design.  Sportscience, 4.  Retrieved April 23,        2009, from http://www.sportsci.org/jour/0001/wghdesign.html

Independent and dependent variables. Cool-Science-Projects.com. Retrieved April 23, 2009,   from http://www.cool-science-projects.com/independent-and-dependent-variables.html

Knight, K.  (2009).  Morality.  Catholic Encyclopedia. Retrieved April 23, 2009, from             http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10559a.htm

Trochim, W.M.K.  (2006, October 20).  Design.  Research Methods: Knowledge Base.    Retrieved April 23, 2009, from http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/design.php

Filed under: Sample essays — Tags: , , , — admin @ 4:35 am

15 Oct 2009

Sample Essay: The Joy of Violence

Why Children Need Fantasy, Superheroes and Make-Believe Violence, as well as a former scripter for DC and Marvel Comics, among others. He spoke at the 2006 Montreal International Games Summit, about suppressing aggression, and how video games can act as liberation for such an tagonism.

Cognitive ncoassociation theory says that venting could augment rather than reduce annoyancTopic: Violent video games and school shootings.

The theory of Catharsis says that expelling one’s fury will bring about an optimistic enhancement in one’s mental condition. To justify this statement the violence caused by video games can be studied. It is said that video games have an immense role to play in facilitating the learning process. They have invaded domains even outside the game. Good video games are intricate, exigent, and extensive.  Good games have to slot in good learning principles in virtue of which they get themselves well learned. Game designers build on each other’s successes. Gerard Jones, an American writer, is the sole creator of some marvel comics such as Batman, Spiderman, Pokémon and many more to name.Gerard Jones is the person behind Killing Monsterse and belligerent behaviors. In order to release or vent their anger, people punch pillows, or throw dishes or scream. Legendary comic-book author Gerard Jones argues that bloody videogames, gun-glorifying gangster rap and other forms of ‘creative violence’ facilitate far more children than they damage. He says that the violent video games act as a tool for the kids to master their temper. Video games have been so much under attack recently, that the author portrays his ideas pertaining to the realities that remain veiled behind the issues. Most people in this business are very amusing and non-confrontational and the fact that they are being despised as the root of crime, causes of brutality, is distressing.

Video games have a built in benefit in the conception of incentive for an extended engagement. Human beings feel that their bodies and minds extend, in a rather intimate way, to the area around them over which they have direct control, usually a fairly small area. The space closely around the human body seems to be associated to it in such a technique that one can feel that it is being “invaded” by others. When humans can manipulate something at a distance, for example controlling with a keyboard a far-away robot seen on a screen, they get an uncanny feeling that their minds and bodies have been vastly extended .

The author Jones says that he was put in a petite, experimental school. It seemed the school was not suited for him. He was too scared to associate with his friends in their arrogant hustle into   adolescence. He thus abandoned social life and lived in seclusion. Jones argues that kids triumph over the feelings of powerlessness.. The dual-identity concept at the heart of many superhero stories helps Kids resolve the disagreement between the inner self and the public self as they come off through socialization. Playing a video game could help keeping the mind alert, active and youthful. It leads to the feeling of   maneuvering a character from a distance in a very exploratory manner.. The minds and bodies seem to extend into the virtual world filled with characters. This process appears to permit players to recognize effectively with the virtual character. The player subjugates himself to this world of characters and is powerfully provoked to obligate himself. When students are learning a technical subject in school such as some area of science, this domain could be seen as a special world of its own.

Less people presently believe that enacting stricter gun control laws will tackle the main causes of increased school shooting cases. Previously, whenever a school shooting occurred it was followed by the public calling for tighter gun control laws. But, supporters for tighter gun control in the recent cases of school shootings have become less vocal after realizing that the problem is not just controlling guns. The problem is much more than that. This paper aims at examining if tighter gun laws could reduce cases of school shooting in America.

American’s condolences were poured to the families of Aminish country who lost five girls while five more were in critical condition in Pennsylvania hospitals. No words can express the grief and shock that American feel about this senseless killing. Sadly, this case is not rare in this country where guns can be possessed by anybody. Chapman (2006)  explains that, Charles Roberts aged 32 who shoot these little kids in a note left behind said that he had molesting young relatives since 12 years and felt an urge of doing it again.

After the killing in the Aminish country, all over the country the citizens and the media began to ask the why are guns left to kill children? There is no clear answer to these crimes however, one thing is clear. These crimes could possibly be avoided if it was not easy to obtain guns. Even though stricter gun control laws are likely not to stop a deranged person such as Roberts, who possessed legally purchased guns, this doe not imply that stricter laws would not help. Chapman (2006) argues that congress has a duty and powers to enact laws that can bring sanity to owning a gun. However, the political will required to enact such laws is the one missing. If such cases that happen in Amish country will not make American and the congress to embrace stricter gun control laws then what else needs to happen?

Jaana (p, 36) observes that, America has about 250 million firearms, nearly more than the number of people in the country. However, the laws that are regulating all these guns are slack beyond what one could belief. It is not only possible to obtain many guns it is also possible to get them whenever one wants. Dirk  (p, 10) adds that, it is apparent the slack gun laws in America contributes in a direct way the many incidents of school shooting that  have continued to  witnessed in America. But, these sentiments are not shared by many as it can be sated below.

When the American public was asked to state specific preventive measures for the school violence, majority of them responded by saying that more extra attention need to be given to those students who show anti-social behaviours. In deed, 60% of those who participated in the research believed that giving added attention and taking a close examination of such students will be a more effective manner of curbing school shootings occurrences, while only 6% stated that passing stricter gun rules will prevent school shootings Chapman (2006).

Stricter gun control would not essentially make American schools safer. However when you compare statistics of the number of school shooting cases and those of a country like Denmark or Japan where there is strict gun control laws, having tighter gun control in school appears to be answer. Chapman (2006) argues that culturally, a lot have American prefer to ignore the figures that indicate that tighter gun control laws in America would led in reduced cases of shooting in schools. In theory could possibly adopt a gun control like that in Japan where the only the only group allowed to posses guns are the police, the military and the hunters. However, such an outlaw would be entirely bizarre to Americans, who for more than 300 years have lived in the freer culture when it comes to possessing guns Chapman (2006).

A number of people have argued that the best way of reducing the number of shooting in schools is improving schools discipline and not making the laws stricter. However, disciplining students in schools have its challenges  kin deed some studies indicate that  harsh school disciple may result in the students resorting to guns to shoot teachers whom the students feel this they are punishing them unfairly. Thus what could be intended to reduce school shooting could instead increase the shooting.

However, in a study that was carried out by the journal of Quantitative Criminology revealed that there was no link between gun control regulations and violence crimes. Stricter gun controls have been found not to reduce violet crimes. This finding is also supported by a federal CDC committee that was established in 2003. Similarly another study carried out by the National Academy of Sciences also established the same results: gun control laws do not reduce crimes (Jaana, p, 35).

Glass and Feldhann (2007) explains that, as for the shooting that happened at the VA Tech were Seung-Hue Cho went on a rampage of shooting and killed students and injured others, the problem is was not the easiness of buying a gun but mental illness. And this seems to be the problem in many other cases that happens in many of the school shootings.

Regarding reducing the shooting in schools many parents and experts believe that parental involvement would greatly help. In a study carried out by Gallup poll, majority acknowledged that parental involvement in student’s affairs would help students to be more responsible. Many parents agreed that more guidance and counselling from parents is vital in instilling discipline and reducing shorting in schools.For instance, Glass and Feldhann (2007) quotes a psychologist Dr. Susan Lipkins a specialist on campus violence states that Cho showed obvious symptoms of schizophrenia, and was bound to do something terrible. The superseding issue here is that the mental health system needs to be fixed and not the law.

Lipkins explains that, parents think that schools or universities have got a structure or mechanism to monitor their children (Glass and Feldhann, 2007). However, schools are less funded and have no any integrated ways of flagging distressed students. Teachers were there who attempted to assist Cho; some girls were in fact being stalked By Cho. Yet, no body was there to monitor his increase of alarming behaviors.

Enacting laws to ban guns in any way will be going against the 2nd Amendment since it state that, American people have their right to own firearms and that right should not be infringed upon  (Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution).

To own a gun in the U.S the federal law stipulates that:

A person has to be aged 18 or over in order to buy a shotgun or rifle from a dealer who is licensed by the federal government in any state.

A person has to be 21 years or over to obtain a handgun from a seller who has a license to sell arms in a person’s state of residence.

A federal licensed dealer has to document all the information of about the buyer, and all the information of the firearm sold to the buyer, this information includes the serial number of the firearm, the model and date of purchase. The dealer is also required to notify the Federal Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms, in case an individual purchases more than one fire arm within a period of five day.

Supposing the dealer fails to adhere to any of the above laid down requirements, the he is punishable ( Korwin and Attorney, p, 65)

In summing up, stricter gun control laws are not an effective way of reducing shooting in schools. Any gun control law has shown that they do nothing is curbing crimes or saving lives, or making schools safer. People and students who have in the past been involved in schools shooting are normally mental stable and there is little in law that can be done to stop them from doing the heinous acts they did. What needs to be stressed is the social aspect, to try and create give attention to children who seem disturbed and more important to getter a better relationship between the students their parents, the school and the society as whole. However, one can not total dismiss the impact of stricter law on reducing school shooting, probably it can assist but, its impact will be so little. As a criminal was reported to have said “Laws is for the law-abiding, and we aren’t, so they don’t apply to us.”

A video game of their choice would let them to take on distinctiveness as scientists of a certain sort, to see and think about themselves and their taken-for-granted everyday world in new ways. However, many of these principles are much better replicated in good quality video games than they are in today’s schools. The younger mass has to learn complex and challenging things in their academics. With the existing system in our schools to skill-and-drill and curricula driven by standardized tests, good learning principles have, more and more, been left on the cognitive scientist’s laboratory bench and, it is through good video games.

Video game systems are the source for much debate and argumentation in today’s society. They have permitted children to spend time in an interactive way to run off from this world and cross the threshold of their imagination. The creators of the games have only laid the guiding principle. Children, fancy themselves as characters with amazing potential and capacity to do many things.

Critics, nevertheless, agonize that children are not physically capable of accepting that games are not a reality, and, consequently, cannot comprehend, in the real world, one cannot commit the performance they do while playing video games. Violence, for instance, is found in more than half of all video games. Parents just as the author’s parents did, worry that children who continuously view violence in this way will be trained to see violence as a good action.

Numerous chief openings remain in the violent video game literature. One in particular is the lack of studies pertaining to the link between routine violent video game revelation and belligerence. The author says that the adults imbibe into their children, through a countless number of ways that their desire for violence is wrong. Little do the children understand this? Imaginary gun battles and symbolic killings mesmerize them.

At length, it is concluded that video game violence has been a passionately debated topic since the beginnings of the industry. The topic grew from the debate on media violence or violence in print media. Video games, because of their addictive temperament, are said to have more brunt on children. The proponents and opponents of video game expurgation do not actually plunge into customary political limitations.

Reference:

Jones, Gerard. “Violent Video Games are Good.” Mother Jones (2000).

Chapman, Steve: Gun Control Laws Will Not Stop School Shootings: School Shootings. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2006, available at: http://find.galegroup.com/ovrc/infomark.do?&

Dirk Johnson: A Bloody Day on the Rez: – A Columbine Copycat Shatters the Calm in Minnesota: Newsweek, April 4, 2005. p, 10

Glass, Diane and Feldhann, Shaunti (2007): Would stricter gun control laws prevent tragedies like the one at VA. Tech? Available online at: www.ajc.com/opinion

Jaana Juvenon: Myths and Facts About Bullying in Schools: – Effective Interventions Depend upon Debunking Long-Held Misconceptions: Behavioral Health Management, 2005.p, 34-37

Korwin, Alan and Attorney Michael (2006): Gun Laws of America (5th, Ed.) Bloomfield Press (Phoenix), p, 65-67

Thomas Schmoll: Masculinity and School Shootings-Gender Public Advocacy Coalition Says Common Thread Is Overlooked in Media Coverage; America’s Intelligence Wire, March 22, 2005, p, 12-13

Bushman Brad, “Does Venting Feed or Extinguish the flame? Carthis, Rumination, Distraction, Anger, and Aggressive Responding “Personality and Psychology Bulletin

Filed under: Sample essays — Tags: , , , , , — admin @ 10:46 am

17 Jul 2009

Sample Essay: The Legalisation Of Drugs

Should drugs be legalized? Conformist wisdom tells us “drugs” are accountable for escalating crime and that consequently the “war on drugs” should be stepped up even more to decrease it. However, unfortunately, the causation at work is just the contradictory. Majority of “drug related” crime is not related to the use of drugs but rather it is related to the treacherous underground economy created by the warfare on drugs. The fight against drug itself aggravates property crime since the war inflates drug prices. For instance, the selling price of $100.00 worth of cocaine “on the street” has only a real commodity value of $1.00″ (Geers 1995 p.1). According to Drugs and Crime Facts (1991), “more than half of the State prisoners who ever used a major drug e.g. heroin, methadone, cocaine, PCP or LSD reported that they had not done so until after their first arrest. Nearly 60% of those who had used a major drug regularly said such use began after their first arrest” (Geers 1995 p.1). Confronted with these scenarios is it but a necessity to delve deeply on whether drugs or certain kind of drugs should be decriminalized.

Tentative Thesis

Legalizing drugs would parent the collecting of billions in taxes from the existing occasional users, the savings of billions of dollars presently being squandered on prison construction, law enforcement, and cost of imprisonment for drug offenders; would boost the efficacy of the government’s anti-drug beliefs; and  would give a fundamental civil liberty back to U.S. citizens, by granting them control over their own bodies.  Perhaps, the present war on drugs has not and will not produce a significant victory. With this in mind, the researcher advocates a new approach to this essential social dilemma. It is with utmost importance that we have to mull over the likelihood that a free market in drugs is not only imaginable in principle, but, given the indispensable personal motivation of a people, is just as beneficial and practical as is a free market in other goods. Accordingly, supporting a free market in drugs at this moment, particularly in the United States is a practical policy (Szasz 1992 p. xvii). Equally important, legalizing drugs would permit us to focus and support the small percentage of people who are indisputably drug abusers by offering them both spiritual and medical treatment and education.

Introduction

Why do we yearn for drugs? In essence, for the same reasons we like other goods. We want drugs to cure our diseases, relieve our pains, put us to sleep, change our moods, enhance our endurance, or simply make us feel better–just as we want cars and bicycles, tractors and trucks, chain saws and ladders, hang gliders and skis, to make our lives  more pleasant and more productive. Every year, tens of thousands of people are killed and injured as a consequence of accidents connected with the use of such paraphernalia. But why do we not speak of “chain saw problem” or a “ski abuse”? Simple because we expect people who utilize such equipment to acquaint themselves with their use, and shun from injuring others or themselves. If they harm themselves, we presume they did so unintentionally and we struggle to heal their injuries.

“Drug legalization could at one extreme involve a return to open access to all drugs for all persons, as was seen at the end of the 19th century” (DuPont & Voth 1995 p. 461). Imagine these settings, drug dealers will be a thing of the past. Drug-related shootings will be unheard of. Vicious theft and crimes will be greatly reduced. Communities will pull themselves together. The streets of America will commence to “clean up.” Casualties due to infected intravenous needles and poisonous street drugs will be eliminated. Adults and youths once involved in crime rings will be forced to look for legitimate work. “Taxpayers are no longer forced to pay $10,000,000,000 to fund drug-related law enforcement. The $80,000,000,000 claimed by organized crime and drug rings will now go to honest workers (Cussen & Block 2000 pp. 525-526; Ostrowski 1993 pp. 203-205). What policy change will bring about such excellent circumstances? The legalization of drugs! Both philosophically and practically speaking, certain forms of addictive drugs should be legalized.

We should try to adapt to–rather than solve–the tribulations presented by potentially hazardous devices in our surrounding. However, after generations of living under medical protection that provides us with security, although illusory, against unsafe drugs, we have failed to nurture the self-discipline and self reliance we ought to possess as capable adults surrounded by the fruits of our technological-pharmacological era. The drug quandary is a multifaceted set of interconnected phenomena that are the products of personal choice, responsibility, and temptation, combined with a set of social policies and laws generated by our lack of enthusiasm to face this fact in a forthright approach.  If that is untrue and far from reality, then nearly all the related literature I have used in this research is false. But if it is true, then nearly everything the American law, American government, the American media, American medicine, and the preponderance of the American people now think and do about drugs is a costly and colossal mistake, detrimental to innocent foreigners and Americans and disparaging to the nation itself.

Methodology

The type of design used in this research is qualitative. Basically it is subjective focused on the why and what questions. The data collection is gathered using in-depth interviews and focus groups. Considerable amount of time is spent in directly interviewing and observing the participants. Making adjustments in the instruments like reformulating or adding questions based from the earlier responses of the participants are employed. The results are cited and quoted directly from the participants responses. And conclusion made is generally limited to participants who were directly studied.

Review of Literature

The literature review addresses the benefits and advantages of legalizing or decriminalizing certain kinds of drugs. Seven scholarly sources were used in this research study to examine the validity of the question on hand.

Justification

My position is that if citizens use these drugs and do not harm others, it is no business of the state. If in case they become addicted to these drugs, then they warrant help–not just from their families but also from the state-and should not be first placed in prison. However, if they use these drugs and injure others, whether they are under the influence of these substances at the time or not, they must be penalized. “People who directly hurt others should not be giving up their jail cells to people who engage in crimes of vice” (Nadelmann 1991 pp. 39-40).

Since drug legalization is neither a simple nor singular public policy proposal, this paper aims to probe deeply on the positive aspects of decriminalizing drugs for the benefit of all Americans and other races. Reading this paper will possibly enlighten us on what lies on the other side of the coin.  “Legalization would not be a step in to the unknown. In fact, drugs were legal before 1914 and the United States had fewer addicts per capita and none of the crime problems it has today” (Geers 1995 p.1). The government should center its enforcement endeavors on protecting minors, while restricting only adult drug use that straightforwardly imperils other people.

It is a terrible blunder to perceive certain drugs as a “dangerous adversary” we ought to attack and eradicate, instead of accepting them as harmful as well as potentially helpful substances, and learning to cope with them ably (Szasz 1992 p. xv). And maybe, the most depressing aspect of drug prohibition is that it has immensely contributed and helped multiply rather than impede and hinder the use of drugs by young people. United States needs to treat drug use and addiction as primarily a social and health problem, rather than a transgression.

Works Cited

Cussen, Meaghan, and Walter Block. “Legalize Drugs Now!: An Analysis of the Benefits of Legalized Drugs.” American Journal of Economics and Sociology 59.3. (Jul., 2000): 525-526.

DuPont, Robert L. and Eric A. Voth. “Drug Legalization, Harm Reduction, and Drug Policy.”

Annals of Internal Medicine 123.6 (Sept. 1995): 461.

Geers, Thomas R. “Legalize Drugs and Stop the War on People.” Education 116.2 (1995): 235.

Nadelmann, Ethan A. “America’s Drug Problem: Alternative Perspectives, Alternative Futures.” Bulletin of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 45.3 (Dec., 1991): 39-40.

Ostrowski, James.  “Has the Time Come to Legalize Drugs?” USA Today Magazine 19 July 1990): 1.

Reed, Fred. “Legalization of Some Drugs Is Worth a Try.” The Washington Times 29 Apr. 1996: 2.

Szasz, Thomas. Our Right to Drugs: The Case for a Free Market. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 1992.

Place Your Order Now
Academic Writing Services:

Business / Professional Writing Services:

Free Essay Tips / Writing Guides:
Tags:
100% Satisfaction Guarantee

We will revise your paper until you are completely satisfied. Moreover, you are free to request a different writer to rewrite your paper entirely, should you be unhappy with the writing style, level of research, communication, etc.

100% Authentic Research & Writing Guarantee

We guarantee that you will receive a fully authentic, 100% non-plagiarized work. Otherwise, we will just give you your money back.

100% Confidentiality & Privacy Guarantee

No one will ever find out that you have used our service. We guarantee that your personal information as well as any other data related to your order(s) will remain confidential to the extent allowed by law. It will not be shared with any third party unless you provide a written consent.