Regarding decriminalization of illicit drug use it must be understood that there is a difference between decriminalization and legalization. Should such a law be enacted, it would simply eliminate the criminal element of possessing a controlled substance for personal use. If an individual is found to be in possession of an amount of substance consistent with personal use, the possession would not be considered a crime. On the other hand, were they in possession of an amount consistent with the intent to distribute or sell, it could still constitute criminal activity. The only way to decriminalize distribution, would be to legitimize. That would be possible by sanctioning distributorships which are either licensed or controlled by the state (such as liquor stores in the state of Utah).
One example of legalization is the state of Colorado, which has legalized the personal possession and use of recreational marijuana. It is legal to buy the marijuana from a licensed distributor, and is subject to sales tax. Street distribution remains illegal. The age of an individual absolutely matters. If a state is going to limit the age at which an individual can purchase or possess alcohol or tobacco, it should limit the age of one possessing a controlled substance.
A knee-jerk reaction would probably result in the idea that decriminalization would indeed increase the number of users. The opinions vary. Many proponents of decriminalization point to the results in Portugal which decriminalized personal drug use in 2001. “In fact, by two out of three measures, adult drug use is now lower than it was in 2001” (Murkin n.p.). However, according to Doremus & Canet, “History shows that availability creates demand, which creates more use.” (10). Edmund Hartnett (n.p.) observes that opponents to decriminalization believe that it would increase drug use and lead to further use by juveniles. It would seem on the surface, that decriminalization would result, at least initially, in the rise of possible abusers, and would increase habitual usage. For these reasons, decriminalization is most likely not in the best interests of the public.
The burden on courts and prisons would be reduced, since prosecution and prison sentences would no longer apply to what was once considered a crime. The United Nations Office on Drug and Crime (n.p.) states “a disproportionate share of those incarcerated is from the most marginalized groups such as people who are poor, and racial or ethnic minorities.” This in turn, leads to a cycle of continued drug use and crime among such groups.
Of course decriminalizing any crime would reduce the burden on the courts and the justice system. One cannot justify, however decriminalizing any offense because it would lessen the taxpayers’ onus. Hartnett (n.p.), adds that supporters of legalization believe that certain crimes such as burglary, auto theft, and shoplifting may be reduced. There are opinions, but no proof, that decriminalization would make illicit drugs less costly to obtain. But if the cost to the user (especially a habitual user or addict) remains prohibitive, they will most likely find a way to obtain the money needed to procure the substance.
Most Americans probably do not want to be exposed to those using illicit drugs when coming in contact with them in public. The majority of the public would not want to walk through a park, or a downtown shopping area where users are “enjoying” their legality. One must also consider the possible consequences of a user’s operation of a motor vehicle while the person is under the influence of any substance, be it alcohol, marijuana, or other drug. The decriminalization or legalization of illicit drugs does not necessarily reduce the risk to the public safety and well-being.
Decriminalization would not assist the state in money saved, per se, other than the savings to the judicial system as addressed above. Actual legalization could result in revenue which might be used to fund programs for addressing addiction. Doremus & Canet observe that if drug use was legitimate, “once legalized, it will be able to be taxed by the State” (5). This could result in revenue received which might be used to increase education, deterrence, and treatment. (5).
Decriminalization, should it prove to increase the number of users, would most likely result in a rise of insurance costs. Insurance rates are based on the amount of risk perceived by the underwriters. Increased insurance rates would not only affect health insurance, but motor vehicle and life insurance rates. Drug use increases the risk of overdose, and other health related problems. Drug use increases the risk of a user driving while impaired, possibly resulting in personal injury and property damage. Drug use increases the risk of pre-mature death.
The stigma associated with drug use may be a factor in why users do not seek treatment. Ahern, Stuber and Galea (189), suggest the discrimination and the stigma of drug use precludes users from seeking treatment. But there are many other factors that affect the seeking of treatment, such as cost of treatment and availability. (National Survey on Drug Use and Health n.p.) Accordingly, there is no guarantee that an individual will seek treatment simply because the personal use of their drug of choice has been decriminalized.
Decriminalization is not the solution to the problem of drug abuse in the Utah or any other state. It would just add fuel to the fire. There are too many variables to consider. Race, ethnicity, poverty, criminology theories, the availability of treatment, education, and a stronger, more assertive policy regarding importation of illicit drugs into the U.S., must all play a part in the decrease of illicit drug use.
Works Cited
Ahern, Jennifer, Jennifer Stuber, and Sandro Galeo. “Stigma, Discrimination and the Health of Illicit Drug Users” Drug and Alcohol Dependence 88 (2007): 188–196. Web. 13 March 2016.
Doremus, Teo, and Antoine Canet. “Drug Legalization & Prohibition pros and cons.” Academia 2016. Web 11 Mar. 2016.
Hartnett, Edmund. “Drug Legalization: Why It Wouldn't Work in the United States.” Police Chief Magazine. Mar. 2016. Web. 11 Mar. 2016.
Murkin, George. “Getting Drugs Under Control. The success of Portugal’s Decriminalisation Policy – In Seven Charts.” Transform. 14 July, 2014. Web. 10 Mar. 2016.
National Survey on Drug Use and Health. “Substance Use and Mental Health Estimates from the 2013 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Overview of Findings” 4 Sept. 2014. Web 13 Mar. 2016.
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime Briefing Paper. “Decriminalisation of Drug Use and Possession for Personal Consumption.” 2015. Web. 10 Mar. 2016.
