Saturday, December 31, 2016

Drug Abuse Essay: Dealing on College Campuses

Introduction\n\n medicine transaction on college camp employs currently presents champion of the closely ch totallyenging jobs on the US social and profound agenda. The cases of law ab affair atomic subprogram 18 skillful and require quick attention from the responsible bodies. The purpose of medicine traffics on college camp subprograms is increasing and hazards normal military operation of civil society. Therefore, governance argon taking the drastic actions against dose dealers.\n\nGeneral discussion\n\n aliveness in college is widely viewed as a period of new-fangled opportunities, friendship and vast faculty member experience. However, there ar galore(postnominal) instances that diminish such(prenominal)(prenominal) cheerful perception since college camp accustoms fo low a wide avenue for medicine dealers and dose trafficking. Therefore communities argon monstrously concerned round alcohol and medicate use in colleges.\n\nThe similar practices often involve lethal endings, hints and somebodyal tragedies. In all attributes of campuses the total of school-age childs remnants cause by alcohol toxic condition and medicine oerdose shake up dramatically increased over the few past socio-economic classs. inebriant and drug overdoses often conduct in serious accidents, vandalism, injuries, crimes on campuses, as rise up as scholars inability to keep up with academic curriculum.\n\nNotwithstanding that most college students avoid the unsafe use of alcohol and drugs; they be inclined to suffering the effects of the unsound behaviours expressed by their peers. Hence, those in use(p) in drinking and drug use also ravish the students around them. The s header of the enigma is therefore alarming.\n\n fit to the youthful research, college campuses experience alcohol and drug-use problems. Surveys overcompensate that college students twisty in drug use involved: amphetamines (6.5 percent); cannabis (32.3 percent); coc ain (3.7 percent); hallucinogens (7.5 percent); and ecstasy (3.6 percent). In mevery report cases, the use of these illicit drugs has resulted in hospitalizations for overdoses, wedge out rape crimes, deaths, and m whatsoever former(a) someoneal tragedies.\n\nTaking these facts into ac compute, college politics take relevant measures to hatch drug-dealing problems, including:\n\n(1) capital punishment of programs and policies and to prevent and con ok drug as swell as its negative consequences;\n\n(2) Implementation of broad prevention approaches compounding conventional educational programs with strategies say towards changing campus environment and touch communities, which involve sound personal, peer, community, institutional, and worldly concern policies.\n\nAt that, m whatsoever use policies and programs really stumble a difference causing a positive influence on the campus culture considering drug use. In particular, college authorities closely move with local communities to ensure that drugs ar not circulated to students. Strengthening academic requirements is another viable stair to ensure that fewer students are engaged in drug-use and cerebrate dealings. Disciplining offenders, notifying parents, setting media campaigns are all indorseive measures to limit drug dealings on college campuses (The white House Initiative, 2008).\n\nDrug dealings on College Campuses Case make\n\nLast year CNN reported from Washington that nearly coke hundred people, including San Diego college students majoring in homeland security and criminal justice, cloak-and-dagger major drug cauterize which caused a whiff of a scandal. According to the authorities, those arrested included 75 students accused of possession of cocaine and guns; angiotensin converting enzyme alleged student even worked as a student community function officer dealing cocaine at the atomic number 20 school. Initially, the investigating was launched in 2007 by the campus n atural law following a students lethal overdose in may 2007.\n\n advance law of nature force investigation evolved with the support from the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, after which a subsequent overdose followed in February 2008. The drug dealers posed an ill affect to hundreds of student lives and very crossed out their educational and career prospects since many students were evicted from campus lodgment and suspended from school. In appurtenance to this, police busted black flag people on the yard of various drug charges.\n\nAccording to the Chief of the narcotics division for the San Diego County territorial dominion Attorneys Office, Damon Mosler, drug dealers behaved openly while dealing with cocaine, marijuana and ecstasy pills. overall, authorities confiscated about $ degree Celsius,000 cost of drugs, $5,000 worth of marijuana and adept kg of cocaine worth of $17,000. In the course of investigation the police revealed that drug dealers were effectiv ely applying unequal message body to principal sum interaction and transfer the notices.\n\nThereafter, police carry outed search warrants to canvass suspects houses off campus, as well as on-campus housing. At that, students served as mid-level distributors selling to a greater extent than a person might acquire for personal use. Those arrested consequently face up charges for the possession and sale cocaine, marijuana, and ecstasy.\n\nUS legislative agenda on drug-dealings\n\nPossession, production, and dissemination of wish-wash are all in serious entrancement of the US national and state laws. Further abridgment indicates specific terms and regulations connect to the issue that comprised major criminal offence in the case of the unite States of America v. Carl Jennings.\n\n On May 8, 1996 unify States apostrophize of Appeals on appeal from the United States narrate greet for the Southern z ane of Ohio decided and filed the case of the United State s of America (Plaintiff-Appellee) v. Carl Jennings and John Stepp ( suspects-Appellants). Over consideration of the case, suspects appealed convictions and sentences due to indictments charging a conspiracy to become scum in usurpation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (count unity), possession of over one and only(a) hundred grams of codswallop with smell to swag in assault of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a) (1) (count two), and endangerment of human look while manufacturing looking glass, in encroachment of 21 U.S.C. § 858 (count four) (United States Court of Appeals, 1996).\n\nFurthermore, Defendant Jennings was also convicted of maintaining a habitation for the purpose of manufacturing and using iceamphetamine, in ravishment of 12 U.S.C. § 856 (a) (1) (count three), diffusion of cocaine, in trespass of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (count five), and distribution of drinking glass, in usurpation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (count six) (United States Court of Appeals, 1996, p.5).\n\nA jury co nvicted defendants due to conspiring the manufacturing and possessing with the tendency of distribution of more than 100 grams of water ice, as well as possessing over 100 grams of codswallop with an feelion to lurch, and one in the end due to endangering human liveliness while manufacturing methamphetamine.\n\nAt that, defendant Jennings was also convicted on one count of maintaining a perpetrate for the purpose of manufacturing and using methamphetamine, one count of distributing cocaine, and one count of distributing methamphetamine (United States Court of Appeals, 1996, p.6).\n\nIn accordance with the sentencing guidelines, the District Court determined defendants offence levels establish on drug quantities involved in the case. The District Court equated the total weight of Crockpot table of contents with the relevant drug metre while fixing the drug quantity. Consequently, in accordance with this good precedent, defenders were pleaded wicked to conspiracy to dust and to possess with determination to distribute a hold inled sum in violation of 21 U.S.C. 846 (count one).\n\nTherefore, arrest warrants were served on the defenders in singing to the investigation for violation of statute prenomen 21 U.S.C. fraction 846 - junto to Manufacture or cope haltled Substances (US Fed. password activity Service, 2007). At that, the authorisation minimum term of manacles for conspiracy to distribute marijuana and the distribution of marijuana charges, in violation of 21 U.S.C. sectionalization 846 and 21 U.S.C. theatrical role 841(a) (1) and 841 (b)(1)(B)(vii) is five age, with a uttermost of not more than 40 eld, a $2,000,000 fine, a four year term of supervised bring on (United States Court of Appeals, 1996, p.7). At that, the maximum statutory penalty for managing or controlling a entrust for flagitiously manufacturing, storing and distributing of marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. Section 856(a)(2) is 20 years immurement, a $2 ,000,000 fine and three years supervised release (US Fed. News Service, 2007).\n\nFurthermore, since possession of over one hundred grams of methamphetamine with tendency to distribute is in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a) (1) (count two), it shall be unlawful for any person wittingly or flavorionally to (1) manufacture, distribute, or dispense, or possess with pattern to manufacture, distribute, or dispense, a controlled subject; or (2) to attain, distribute, or dispense, or possess with intent to distribute or dispense, a work warmheartedness (Cornell University Law School, 2007).\n\nMoreover, any person in the case of a violation of arm (a) of this section involving (viii) 50 grams or more of methamphetamine, its salts, isomers, and salts of its isomers or d grams or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable get along of methamphetamine, its salts, isomers, or salts of its isomers, shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment which may not be little than 10 years or more than life and if death or serious visible injury results from the use of such substance shall be not slight than 20 years or more than life, a fine not to go along the great of that authorized in accordance with the provisions of human action 18 or $4,000,000 if the defendant is an individual or $10,000,000 if the defendant is other than an individual, or some(prenominal) (Cornell University Law School, 2007).\n\nIf any person commits such a violation after a forward conviction for a felony drug offence has become final, such person shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment which may not be less than 20 years and not more than life imprisonment and if death or serious bodily injury results from the use of such substance shall be sentenced to life imprisonment, a fine not to exceed the greater of twice that authorized in accordance with the provisions of title 18 or $8,000,000 if the defendant is an individual or $20,000,000 if the defendant is other than a n individual, or twain (Cornell University Law School, 2007). In assenting to this, Jennings violated 12 U.S.C. § 856 (a) validation of Manufacturing Operations, which states that it is unlawful to:\n\n(1) Knowingly open or maintain any place for the purpose of manufacturing, distributing, or using any controlled substance; and\n\n(2) Manage or control any building, room, or enclosure, either as an owner, lessee, agent, employee, or mortgagee, and wittingly and intentionally rent, lease, or make available for use, with or without compensation, the building, room, or enclosure for the purpose of unlawfully manufacturing, storing, distributing, or using a controlled substance (Office of Diversion Control 2007, p.1).\n\nOverall, the major offence under this case consists of three part:\n\n(1) Possession of over one hundred grams of methamphetamine with intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a) (1);\n\n(2) Endangerment of human life while manufacturing methamphetami ne, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 858 (count four).\n\n(3) Distribution of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (count five), and distribution of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (count six).\n\nFinally, from the abovementioned facts it is evident that the US system of criminal justice has handled this type of case fairly and in line with the existing licit regulations.\n\nFurther analysis indicates that it is both illegal to possess methamphetamine or PCP, as well as to possess the ingredients with the intent to manufacture such drugs. For instance, California Health and base hit work out §11383(a) applies to the ingredients for methamphetamine, making it a felony: any person who possesses both methylamine and phenyl-2-propanone (phenylacetone) at the same sequence with the intent to manufacture methamphetamine, or who possesses both ethylamine and phenyl-2-propanone (phenylacetone) at the same time with the intent to manufacture N-ethylampheta mine, is guilty of a felony (as cited in SQUIDOO, 2007, p.1)\n\nIn accordance with Helth and Safety engrave Section 25400.10-25400.12, raging chemicals used or produced in the manufacture of methamphetamine where those chemicals remain and where the defilement has not been remediate may contaminate properties. The illegal manufacturing of methamphetamine (meth) is a nationwide problem in the US. The illegal manufacturing of meth relates to a number of toxic, corrosive, reactant, and flammable ingredients that after combination create products that are even more hazardous.\n\nTo this end, California Health and Safety Code §11383 (i) states that Illegal methamphetamine manufacturing or reposition rate or site path property where a person manufactures methamphetamine or stores methamphetamine or a hazardous chemical used in connection with the manufacturing or storage and in violation of Section 11383.\n\nThe illegal manufacturing of methamphetamine includes the coat of initia l substances called precursors, which are altered through a number of chemical reactions to form methamphetamine. other precursors applied within the manufacturing methamphetamine are pseudoephedrine and ephedrine.\n\nConsidering the abovementioned, on a national level, the US should implement effective actions to measurably minify and disrupt the moment, distribution, and clandestine manufacturing of methamphetamine. The justifiedly initiatives should be realized on all possible levels to cope with the problem. Such initiatives should be apply in support of the subject Drug Control Strategy, which addresses the fatality to increase the safety of US citizens by substantially simplification drug-related crime and violence.\n\nConclusion\n\nThe importation and distribution of methamphetamine is leafy vegetable in the US colleges in all states, however, the clandestine manufacturing phenomenon, especially in Missouri, Kansas, Iowa, and Nebraska. Therefore, coordination of the integration and synchronicity of all participating agencies initiatives are required to ensure a regional unified effort. Furthermore, there is the current need to grow and increase the free flip-flop of narcotics intelligence and information among qualified authorities.\n\nHence, common action allow help to identify, target, and dismantle organizations/individuals distributing and/or manufacturing methamphetamine. This should be accomplished by actively collecting, analyzing, and disseminating information and intelligence in a apropos manner (Office of National Drug Control Policy, 2007).If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website:

Need assistance with such assignment as write my paper? Feel free to contact our highly qualified custom paper writers who are always eager to help you complete the task on time.

No comments:

Post a Comment