Table of contentsInternational policy framework and debateThe social cost of the drug debateYouth in drug control policiesConclusionOne of the countries that assumes a high responsibility in Concerned about drug control in the world is the United States of America. The country has invested heavily in the fight against drug abuse and trafficking, in addition to establishing an international network to control its influence. In June 1970, President Nixon formalized the fight against drugs by classifying illicit drugs and non-illicit drugs, while calling the former “public enemy number one” (US Constitution, 2015). Say no to plagiarism. Get a custom essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”?Get the original essayTherefore, Congress passed the Controlled Substances Act which forms the foundation of modern practices throughout the fight against drugs and other illicit substances. In contrast, various schools of thought have emerged with the implementation of drug policies that are widely seen as having links to the United States' recommendations. While supporters, led by the US government, have called for the adoption of a set of prohibitionist policies across the world, opponents have called for a review of them. Their argument is that creating stigma and emphasizing criminalization is not effective. From this perspective, prohibitionist drug policies are not effective in preventing the spread of this vice among the young population. The international drug trade presents multidimensional challenges that have direct implications regarding the national interests of the United States, as well as the international community (Mineta, 2016). Some of the most common drugs trafficked globally include cocaine, methamphetamine, and heroin. According to the country's intelligence services, drug addiction has the effect of destabilizing regional and political stability. Second, they can strengthen the capabilities and roles of criminal organizations of a transnational nature during trade. Some of the main areas of concern in this document include Afghanistan and Latin America, which are considered lucrative trafficking focal points in America. the efforts necessary to combat the manufacturing and transport processes of cocaine and heroin. Thus, drug use and the resulting dependence have a negative impact on the construction of the social fabric. Other impacts include the destruction of economic and development assets and also represent an economic burden on public health infrastructure. International Policy Framework and Debate International efforts to combat drug abuse and trafficking represent a robust, long-term set of multilateral commitments. , in which the American government actively participates. Their involvement is based on the philosophy that helping other jurisdictions control the problem goes a long way toward reducing the availability and use of drugs in America. On this basis, the Trump administration systematically pursues the goal of eliminating and reducing the illegal flow of drugs through international channels. This means that when there is a high degree of international cooperation, trade is disrupted. Contributions also help with interdiction efforts and demand reduction. Despite international collaboration and commitment to combat drug transitillicit drugs, tensions are inevitable, particularly between U.S. foreign drug policy and the international community (Merrigan, 2016). In recent years, the number of global advocates, such as former and sitting presidents, has increased (Merrigan, 2016). Likewise, they strongly supported the reevaluation of current prohibitionist policies. Some possible alternatives to current regimesMeasures focused on international drug control include the decriminalization or legalization of certain types of drugs. The focus of debates could also shift the focus of resources and priorities between various counter-narcotics approaches, such as demand and supply reduction, distribution of international and domestic funding for drug control and the balance of repressive, civil and military roles. when it comes to anti-drug initiatives (Merrigan, 2016). There is a raw material called industrial hemp, which is used by manufacturers in making textiles, paper, and other commercial products. The United States government prohibits its use in the country because it is associated with marijuana. This explains why proponents of legalization have taken the issue of industrial hemp to the point of wearing T-shirts woven from industrial hemp. They strongly believe that this is a fringe issue that may soon gain support from moderates (US Constitution, 2015). Latin America is currently emerging at the center of discussions on efforts to promote drug policy reform. Since time immemorial, Latin American governments have been obsessed with drug programs and policies recommended by Washington. These included prohibitionist political movements and models created by the United States government. Consequently, growing frustrations have led to a review of policies, models, movements and others, in order to challenge the underlying premises contained in the majority of global drug control paradigms. The result was a call for debate, which triggered a series of global ripples. The Social Cost of the Drug Debate When people are deprived of their liberty for drug-related offenses, then it is necessary to embrace the social cost of drugs. politics (Mineta, 2016). According to the views and findings of the Drug and Law Research Consortium, there is an increase in the mass incarceration of non-violent drug offenders in Latin America (Merrigan, 2016). This is despite wide-ranging debates about the need to revise current drug policies and programs. The organization conducted thematic research to assess the nature of the gap between reality and discourse. Other areas highlighted include alternatives to incarceration, the criminalization of drug use, the issue of female offenders imprisoned for drug-related offenses and the involvement of Latin American youth in drug use. A survey in Latin America found that one in five prisoners has been incarcerated for drug offenses. Additionally, this population category has experienced sharp increases compared to the general prison population (Merrigan, 2016). It is imperative that this type of organized confinement has no impact on drug trafficking because there are few people detained in penitentiary establishments. traffickers at the national level, people who suffer from vulnerable situations and those who are easily replaced in thecommercial networks (Merrigan, 2016). In Colombia, the number of people incarcerated for drug offenses has quadrupled over the past 15 years, from 6,300 in 2000 to 25,200 according to results in 2014 (Mineta, 2016). Brazil saw a 320% increase between 2004 and 2013, a stark contrast to the general population, which stood at 51%. According to the results of new research, between November 2006 and November 2014, the number of people detained in Mexican prisons due to incarceration for drug crimes increased by 1,200 (Mineta, 2016). Additionally, nearly 60% of inmates incarcerated in correctional centers in ten Mexican states are incarcerated for cannabis-related offenses. The reports were adopted by the Drug Policy Program of the Center for Research and Teaching of Economics, in collaboration with the House of Representatives of Mexico in a conference entitled Persons deprived of liberty due to drugs in Latin America: the social costs of drug policy (Merrigan, 2016). Overall, the data reflects issues such as criminalization, the feminization of drug crimes, and the use of embodiment to control the drug problem. These reports are also a way of highlighting the worrying increase in the number of women incarcerated for drug offenses (Merrigan, 2016). According to the results of the study, approximately 65% ​​of female prisoners are incarcerated for drug-related offenses. The figures stand at 75% and 77% in Peru and Costa Rica, respectively, where the majority of society members are single mothers, low-income youth, and people from minority groups (Mineta, 2016). The report's finding appears to suggest that the prison population of offenders accused of drug crimes has increased at a faster rate than the general population of other convicts. Furthermore, unjust and long sentences have a negative impact on female offenders whose imprisonment rate is steadily increasing. Their confinement means an increase in the conditions of vulnerability of their children. Another school of thought, on the decriminalization debate, maintains that such an approach (decriminalization) would lead to an increase in consumption, social and economic costs of drugs (Merrigan, 2016). ). This is based on the principle that decriminalization is not entirely sufficient when it comes to making significant progress in the war on drugs (Merrigan, 2016). As such, the debate that legalizing or decriminalizing drug abuse and trade would lead to a better budget (resolving the fiscal crisis), cripple drug cartels, and reduce prison overcrowding, has not no evidence to support it (Mineta, 2016). ).Moreover, the benefits of ensuring that marijuana and other harmful drugs are illegal clearly outweigh the predictable and negative consequences of legitimizing them (Merrigan, 2016). With this in mind, various academic distinctions exist between legalization and decriminalization. Based on U.S. experience, arguments for decriminalization are generally considered typical policy rhetoric and tools. Advocates typically use them extensively in an effort to open the door to decriminalization. This means that our position is simple and evidence-based, meaning that decriminalization and legalization of these illicit substances would lead to an increase in their consumption, as well as the associated social and health costs (Merrigan, 2016). Both arguments seem self-refuting, unlessProponents of legalization or outright decriminalization can agree that the increased supply and consumption of drugs constitutes a net value for society. The Barack Obama administration made significant changes in the drug policy of the United States government, but they reflect the realities of experience and science (Mineta, 2016). They show what has been effective in the past, as well as what needs to be improved. This approach is based on the awareness that drug addiction is a major disease that requires immediate eradication through evidence-based intervention, comprehensive treatment, and preventive approaches (Merrigan, 2016). The criminal sanctions established against drugs are not a simple tool. for punishment. Thus, the existence of the threat of sanctions often incentivizes individuals struggling with substance abuse or dependence, with the goal of allowing them to obtain treatment that they might never be motivated to receive or seek. by themselves (Merrigan, 2016). Additionally, nearly a third of all referral treatments in the United States emanate from the criminal justice system (Merrigan, 2016). Support received from drug courts, the criminal justice system, and drug market initiatives includes innovations that rely on moderate and rapid sanctions. Therefore, it reflects the multifaceted and invaluable role that the criminal justice system plays in combating drug use and its consequences. Drug policy recommendsThe United States government appears to address both the public safety and health aspects of drug use through expanded support focused on treatment and prevention (Merrigan, 2016). So far, he has already reduced minimum sentences when it comes to the disparity between cocaine and crack. This is a historic first reduction in mandatory minimum sentences that was enacted by the Obama administration. She is very supportive of the millions of Americans who are in recovery mode. These present themselves as policies guided by what people know, because they make more sense than changes when it comes to decriminalization and questionable proposals (Mineta, 2016). As a result, they believe that these are the best measures to eliminate the multiple problems that emanate from drug abuse. The United States' long experience with two legal substances, including tobacco and alcohol, is a good demonstration of how legalization increases the chances of availability, acceptance, associated costs and use of a Company. This is despite the fact that alcohol and tobacco cause more than a hundred deaths per year than all illegal drugs combined. This is explained by the fact that their consumption is very widespread. According to the latest statistics, tobacco and alcohol consumption currently stands at 52% and 27% respectively among the elderly population (Merrigan, 2016). On the other hand, marijuana is considered the most common illicit drug among young people. Its use hovers around 7%. Proponents suggest that this drug is more popular among the younger population than alcohol or tobacco due to its illegal nature. Another factor that appears to discourage widespread use of illegal drugs is the fact that they are relatively expensive. Various economic analyzes seem to suggest that current prohibitions on marijuana increase the cost of production by more than 400% (Merrigan, 2016). The resulting higher prices are responsible for controlling utilization rates. Patterns of marijuana, alcohol and tobacco consumption are always sensitive to price variations, in.