NYPD Surveillance of Muslims Compatibility with the Fourth Amendment

US Politics and Government

NYPD Surveillance of Muslims Compatibility with the Fourth Amendment

Once the planes struck towers one and two on September 11, 2001 a person and group of people would be persecuted and held responsible whether it was blatant or underhanded. “… local law enforcement official worked feverishly to investigate those responsible for the reprehensible crime on American Soil and to no assess our state of vulnerability to further acts of terrorism. As part of those efforts, conclusions about the ethnicity and national origin of the prime suspects were inescapable. This crime was committed by a group of foreign nationals of Middle Eastern decent.” McCarthyism is the practice of accusations of disloyalty, subversion, or treason without proper regard for evidence. It is a term that was developed in the forties and fifties yet a term that is juxtaposed with the term Islamophobia which is a more modern term applicable to Muslim communities throughout the United States. Islamophobia is defined as prejudice against, hatred or irrational fear of Islam and/or Muslims. These issues shed light on the rights to the heavily debated fourth amendment. The fourth amendment was implemented into the Bill of Rights to grant citizens the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and affects against, unreasonable search and seizure shall not be violated. Cleary with regards to modern-day McCarthyism and Islamophobia fourth amendment rights are being violated. However, in hindsight, America has always kept a close eye on a group of people they were engaged in combat with overseas and domestic which may be or may not be necessary at the time.

Aside from the communist era that brought McCarthyism, the attack on Pearl Harbor shows us distinct instances of where Japanese Citizens fourth amendment rights were violated. From the concentration camps and the Alien Land Law, Japanese citizens were excluded from the fourth amendment on many instances. According to Peter Siggins, in his article, Racial Profiling in an Age of Terrorism, “Following the attack on Pearl Harbor, the interest in preserving the safety and security of the nation was put in direct conflict with the American democratic ideal of racial equality.” Very similar, if not identical statements have been made recently in regards to Muslims in America.  Eleven years ago in 2001, “Attorney General Ashcroft condemned racial profiling as an unconstitutional deprivation of equal protection under our Constitution.” (Siggins 1-7)

Terry v. Ohio 1968 was the gateway case to condone racial profiling. Detaining and searching people based upon a police officer’s opinion and belief to deem someone as a dangerous threat doesn’t present itself as an appropriate responsible. The rationale behind the Supreme Court decision circle around the understanding that, the exclusionary rule has is limited. The meaning of the rule is to protect persons from unreasonable searches and seizures aimed at gathering evidence, not searches and seizures for other purposes. The Patriot Act of 2001 exacerbates that right on many different levels such as being detained without an explanation, wiretaps on phones also without explanation or notification either.  There is much controversy surrounding the Patriot Act’s violation of fourth amendment rights.

The Huffington Post article; 4 Myths That Led to the NYPD Attack on Muslim Civil Liberties; outlines “myths” that have caused the Muslim’s civil liberties to be violated. These stereotypical generalizations such as, extremist Muslims have permeated New York Muslim communities, Muslim’s level of religiosity is a sign of radicalization and support for terrorism, profiling Muslims is possible and necessary and Muslim community leaders and citizens do not need to be consulted in counterterrorism efforts, show the division and steps taken to secure other people outside the Muslim community.

Misnomers are a very common mistake that take place in New York City and the rest of the United States. Because the “brown” man is displayed on television and commonly associated with in media, many people assume it is only them that can be the terrorist. There are many other ethnic groups that have a large Muslim population, such as those from the Chez Republic, as well as Turkey, Russia, Yugoslavia amongst many other countries.  There are Caucasian, Hispanic and African American Muslims in the United States in addition to Middle Eastern Muslims. How does law enforcement surveillance these group of people? Do the same generalizations and stereotypes apply? Separating groups of people only causes and elevates tension between people.  However some positivity can come out of it such as “…the fight against bigotry and misunderstanding of their faith will result in a greater level of integration into the American experience in the long term.”  (Tutt 1-7)

This debate depends on how you perceive threats. Some people believe it is outrageous to spy on a group of people without a specific probable cause. It is ignorant and incorrect to say all Muslims are terrorists or can be influenced to become terrorists. However, some precautions have to be taken in order to guarantee safety for others such as some counterterrorism efforts that have been made by the NYPD. The amount of money spent on homeland security and other law enforcement agencies in the United States has to be put use in one way or the other. The Handschu guidelines described in the Wall Street Journal, article is interesting, but it doesn’t seem to apply to the fourth amendment but the first amendment instead. Though, the Handschu guidelines can and should be applicable to the fourth amendment in a sense that it would help the problem with racial profiling. There are good and bad people in every nation. Some people are absolutely offended to the most extent. Many people’s opinions in the opposition of this are displayed in the Daily News article; Ray Kelly defends spying on students, scalling it an essential safety strategy for city. There is a major problem with racial profiling because it is underhanded and/or unconscious and/or blatant racism. Acting upon that profiling, causing disparate impact on someone’s life due to race is racism. Racism describes a set of behaviors that have negative impact on the lives of people based on race. Bigoted or prejudiced mindsets, without action, which may include speech, do nothing to disparately affect others. The NYPD exceeding efforts and activities of the FBI seems a little overbearing. Is it really necessary for the NYPD to exceed law enforcement agencies that have a hierarchy over them?  New York City is such an essential and critical city in the states, and overall United States that it may seem slightly necessary. New York City is the origin of the 9/11 attack and with one of the most advanced local law enforcement agencies in the entire country, it seems like enough variables for Commissioner Ray Kelly to justify his excessive surveillance on Muslims.

The Bill of Rights shouldn’t have exceptions, but it does. Due to bills such as the Patriot Act, those exceptions to the rights grow larger and are a lot easier to take away. It is interesting that this war on terror has supporters and adversaries on both political party sides. In another Huffington Post article; Rep Peter King Condemns Chris Christie’s NYPD Criticism, Bloomberg Defends Surveillance, it shows the clear disagreement between republican governor Chris Christie and republican chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee Peter King. However in politics there is always a strategy and agenda behind the positions taken on certain issues. Chris Christie is a very popular republican politician right now with prospects of moving up the political latter in the future. Therefore, Christie may want to secure the support of the New Jersey citizens by attacking Ray Kelly’s efforts to surveillance Muslims beyond his turf.  In the article Peter King is said to have accused Christie of being driven by ego and was overreacting.  In another Huffington Post article, NYPD Monitored Muslim Students All Over Northeast shows us how vigorous and thoroughly Muslim groups are being watched. As a student who attends one of the schools that was monitored and knows of people who attend other schools that were in the article outside of New York City, it is daunting to say the least, but reassuring in a sense that the NYPD are going way beyond their job description to implement safety.  “The mission of responsible law enforcement officials in combating domestic terrorism is to take what they know to be true about the ethnic identity of the September 11^th assailants, and combine it with other factors developed through investigation and analysis to focus investigative efforts and avoid casting a net too wide.” (Siggins 1-7) I can’t really say the NYPD has or hasn’t done that intentionally or unconsciously.

-CP

Bibliography

Caruso, David. “Rep Peter King Condemn Chris Christie’s NYPD Criticism, Bloomberg Defends Surveillance.” Huffington Post . (2012): 1-7. Web. 31 Mar. 2012. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/03/rep-peter-king-condemns-c_n_1318278

Tutt, Daniel. “4 Myths That Led to the NYPD Attack on Muslim Civil Liberties.” Huffington Post . (2012): 1-7. Web. 31 Mar. 2012. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-tutt/myths-about-islam-and-nypd-civil-liberties-violations_b_1289259.html?view=print&comm_ref=false

“NYPD Cheif Defends Monitoring of Muslims Students.” Wall Street Journal. (2012): 1-2. Web. 31 Mar. 2012. http://online.wsj.com/article/APfe4ec2c60f47455c96ccc6bfd15eeb4e.html

Moore, Tina, and Jonathan Lemire. “Ray Kelly Defends Spying on Students, Calling it an Essential Safety Strategy for City .” Daily News.com Crime. (2012): 1-3. Web. 31 Mar. 2012. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/raymond-kelly-defends-spying-calling-essential-safety-strategy-city-article-1.1032607

Siggins, Peter. “Racial Profiling in an Age of Terrorism.” Markkula Center for Applied Ethics. Santa Clara. Keynote.

Hawley, Chris. “NYPD Monitored Students All Over Northeast.” Associated Press. (2012): 1-9. Web. 31 Mar. 2012. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/18/nypd-monitored-muslim-stu_0_1286647.html?view=print&comm_ref=false

Political Interest Groups Influences and Motives in the United States

Intro to Politics & Government

April 27 2012

Political Interest Groups Influences and Motives in the United States

Interest groups are individuals who organize themselves to be influential on governmental programs and policies. In America there are many interest groups and lobby organizations that operate throughout the country. Some interest groups are more powerful than others and they clearly display the extent and power of the first amendment and the freedom to enjoy the right to organize and express views. Currently in today’s political climate the United States are clearly in favor of pluralism. The Supreme Court ruling on Citizens United v Fec 2010 displays the theory that all interests are and should be free to compete for influence in the government without many restrictions or limitations. Some of the significances in interest groups are their motives and ability to radicalize and/or revolutionize an issue.  Interest groups specifically concern themselves with policies and laws of the government which we’ve seen some instances throughout American history to be world changing. Government programs are also a big concern for interest groups because they want to know if they would be affected or not.  Some interest groups have been extremely influential on all branches of government and some groups have protected and advocated rights that are important in American culture. The effects interest groups have on society can be negative or positive and can directly or indirectly affect society as a whole as well as individuals.

Specific interest groups have helped shaped American culture into what it is today. Dealing with racial issues, such groups like the Pennsylvania Abolish society dates back to the 1700’s who was in favor of abolishing slavery. The Suffragettes was a political interest group that was pro women’s voting rights in the United Kingdom which spread onto many nations thereafter. The Civil Rights Movement was composed of many interest groups that aimed to get equal rights for African Americans and end all segregation and Jim Crow laws.  Also, described in “We the People”, the NAACP has been an influential interest group specifically because they used the courts dating back to Brown v. Board of Ed. Without these interest groups radical movements would not have taken place which inevitably benefited all citizens and races in the United States. Today America has its first African-American president, women are more powerful and dominant than they’ve ever been and apparently we are living in a “post-racial” America. Interest groups and lobby organizations can’t solely take full responsibility for making all of those things happen but they have helped influence many of those movements.

Extremism can be an issue in interest groups. Specifically the National Rifle Association has been in favor of some extreme laws in favor of the second amendment as they are non-profit 501 (c) lobby group that promotes firearm ownership, marksmanship, and the protection of hunting and self defense. “The NRA has systematically manipulated Congress and many State Legislatures into adopting dangerous gun policies, allowing virtually unrestricted and undetectable access to powerful firearms by criminals including gang members, convicted felons, and terrorists.” (Rosenthal, 2) The NRA is indisputably one of the most powerful lobbying groups in America, surrounded by much support and controversy.  It was formed in 1871 and had member in high profiles, including some presidents of the United States. They have influenced a number of cases such as NRA v. Mayor Ray Nagin, NRA v. Chicago, McDonald v. City of Chicago, among others which has basically kept guns on the streets and in the homes of civilians with as little restriction as possible.

Recently notable cases showing the effects of the extremely lacked gun laws are former representative Gabby Giffords and slain victim Trayvon Martin. These are people who were directly affected by the troubling gun laws in America.  “NRA opposed a federal ban on military style assault weapons and high capacity ammunition clips used to shoot Rep. Gabby Giffords and those used at most school shootings … even opposed a ban on .50 caliber sniper rifles capable of disabling an armored vehicle, an airplane or a helicopter at distances of over a mile.” (Rosenthal 2) Not many people can understand the rationale behind why a civilian would need such a weapon for sport or defense. The Trayvon Martin case has sparked new interest groups and charities that focus on opposing the NRA and gun laws that allowed this unfortunate young boy to be shot and killed while en route to his family members’ house because a self appointed neighborhood watchman felt suspicious, falling under the Stand Your Ground law in the state of Florida. There have been equal interest groups and growing support for the NRA as a result to this case.

NORML is a non-profit organization group that stands for National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana laws. This interest group has been established since 1970 and currently operates out of Washington. They too are surrounded with support and controversy. NORML’s primary focus is on legalization and decriminalization of marijuana on a federal and local level. Most recently they’ve sent a petition to President Barack Obama requesting that a “Drug Czar” be appointed who will treat drug abuse as a health issue rather than a criminal issue and will move end a “War on Drugs”. NORML’s goal for this petition is 100,000 signatures. NORML does receive benefits and incentives as most interest and lobbying groups do, one being, tax exemption. Most of the group’s efforts go into research and educational activities. NORML’s opponents are very strong though and have a lot more motive and incentive to oppose the marijuana legalization movement. Police Unions are on the opposition because they would lose money. Many police unions have become dependent on war on drug grants and they would lose out in a major way. Also the private prison corporations would lose money because they have a large monetary interest in the incarceration of drug crime related offenders. The alcohol and tobacco companies are opposed to any marijuana legalization laws in fear of competition with their own products. The lobbying and interest groups who represent the opposition to NORML spends lots of money advocating for harsher sentences and electing politicians who are pro-war on drugs. (Wikipedia Contributors)

The NRA is a distinct organization in American political culture because nothing outside the U.S. exists like it. The statistics that are directly and indirectly affected by the NRA and the second amendment are quite amazing and alarming. “Over 30,000 Americans die and more than 100,000 are injured every year from largely preventable gun violence.” (Rosenthal 2) Compared to other countries those numbers are disgusting. The United Kingdom has had one of the lowest gun homicide rates in the world. According to the Wikipedia article “Gun Politics in the United Kingdom” it stated: “In 2009 0.7 recorded intentional homicides were committed with a firearm per 100,000 inhabitants.”  It is extremely difficult to become a gun owner in the United Kingdom and there isn’t a strong force, or pressure group as they are called, in Britain like the NRA. Solely stating ‘self defense’, is not a good enough reason to obtain a gun in the U.K. either.

Interest groups are important and necessary in American society and politics because it is a representation of American’s freedom to free speech and expression. However there needs to be a balance in the power that some of these groups gain like that of the NRA. It’s difficult to try to regulate and limit these groups in the climate of pluralism and without putting an unconstitutional strain on the first amendment. However, we have yet to see what the outcome will be in this new political arena as it is an election year. The benefits and incentives in interest groups are what are most alarming. The “free-rider” issue is a very serious one. Those who enjoy the benefits and incentives of collective goods but did not participate in acquiring them are free riders. There are a variety of benefits, those being; informational, material, solidary and purposive benefits. Most interest and lobbying groups reap all if not most types of those benefits.  The NRA and NORML are just two out of many organizations in the United States influencing policies, bills and court cases. They represent two completely different sets of people that are controversial and difficult to discuss in public political conversations by government officials. While there are many common types of interest groups such as business, agricultural, labor, professional, public interest, ideological, public sector groups and others, they all reach different demographics and represent something of significance. The disadvantage to the influence political interest groups have on governmental policies is how it may take attention off other competing groups like those described with the different opposing channels against NORML . That same example applies to the competition between the NRA and pro-environmental interest groups. “Despite the array of interest groups in American politics, however, we can be sure that not all interests are represented equally nor that the results of this group competition are always consistent with the common good.”  (Ginberg, Lowi 405)

~CP

Bibliography

Ginsberg, Benjamin, and Theodore Lowi. We the People An Introduction to American Politics. 8th Essential Edition . 2010. 453. Print.

Rosenthal , John . “Standing Your Ground in the NRA’s America.” Huffington Post . (2012): 6. Web. 27 Apr. 2012. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-rosenthal/nra-gun-violence

Wikipedia contributors. “National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws.” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 19 Mar 2012. Web. 27 Apr 2012.

Vodka (водка) What is it really?

Understanding Russia

Vodka

водка

When I think of Russia, I think of how influential they are and I look back on their history and relationship with the United States, and I recognize the strong impact they have on the world economically, scientifically and culturally. One of Russia’s most significant features that stands out in their culture besides their notorious wars and political conflicts, there is good ole fashion alcohol; specifically vodka.  Водка is Slavic Russian for vodka. Vodka has been a part of their culture for centuries that date back to nearly the 12^th century and some even say as early as the 8th.  Interestingly, the origins of vodka are masked in mystery. Many debate between Russia and Poland when it concerns vodka’s origins and who played a major part in the movement of vodka.  Some even believe that Persia is the birthplace of vodka and Sweden had a major contribution in the vodka movement. What cannot be denied are Russia’s close ties with the history of vodka.

In the 12^th century in Russia, vodka meant ‘the water of life’. It initially was made with water, rye and ethanol. Originally, vodka was not that high in alcohol volume. Vodka production then went to change into high potato distillations and then was filtered through honey to eliminate the oil aromas. Today vodka is commonly distilled from rye, wheat, barely, and sometimes corn at very high proofs and filtered through charcoal.   Like most alcohols, vodka was initially used as a medicine. Vodka was also originally referred to as spirits. Poland used vodka strictly for medicinal purposes in the early ages and called it ‘gorzalka’ in Polish. The world would begin to change because of the vodka movement.

Alcoholism in Russia dates back to nearly Ivan IV, when he developed many kabaks aka taverns in the cities that many men became in debt to a few decades later. It was around this time it was serving its purpose as an intoxicating beverage. It became the national drink of Poland and at one point Poland exported a lot of vodka to Russia. It later became the national drink in Russia around the 17^th century and composed of approximately 40% of the government’s revenue.  Studies also show that those in Western Europe do not suffer from the affects of alcoholism as much as those in eastern parts of Russia.

An important thing to note in the history of vodka in Russia is the prohibition that took place in Russia around WWI under Soviet Rule. It was 1914 when prohibition was imposed. The UK, France and Germany imposed less harsh rules and there was even a small prohibition in America as well, Russia completely ceased all retail sales of vodka and strictly limited it to restaurants. Prohibition went on to last for roughly 11 years through the Russian Revolution and Civil War and into the Soviet rule into roughly 1925.  The notorious leader Joseph Stalin however, established a vodka state monopoly specifically to boost the economy. However, in the later Soviet, under Gorbachev in 1985 he campaigned to reduce the Russian alcohol consumption. It was referred to as “Dry Law”, in which prices were raised, sales were restricted in specific times of the day and if people were caught at their jobs intoxicated, they were persecuted.

Alcoholism has affected the health of Russia tremendously. Many car related deaths in the early 80’s were resulted from intoxicated drivers on the road. The life expectancy of men in Russia is significantly low in Russia especially in comparison to the women. The average Russian male lives to approximately 60 years old while women usually out live men by 13 years. Alcohol is definitely a factor in that given the amount and the strength of alcohol that is consumed throughout the year.

Clear vodka had become very popular in Poland after 1925. After WWII, the vodka distilleries in Poland were all taken over by Poland’s communist government. After the solidarity movement, all distilleries were privatized which resulted in leading a major development of vodka brands.  Before 1950, vodka was mainly a European thing. By 1975, vodka had replaced the popular bourbon liquor in the United States. It grew in popularity because it lacked smell and had neutral flavors. Vodka also replaced many liquors in cocktails like gin and other familiar drinks that are in those like martinis and manhattans.

Critically acclaimed entertainer, media mogul and successful entrepreneur Sean “Diddy” Combs introduced the world to his branded vodka Ciroc in 2001. A successful Frenchman Jean-Sabastein Robiquet has developed the portfolio for the beverage. It is a French produced, American owned company and they exclusively use grapes instead of grain to distill their alcohol. This is apart of a big debate in the European Union, whether hard liquors can be branded as vodka. However, there is a standard; as of 2007, the standard minimum alcohol volume content for European alcohol in the European Union is 37.5%.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         

The “vodka belt” wants liquors to say, “Vodka, produced from…” if it is not of the standard set by the EU. Brands like Ciroc will have to be rebranded if this does happen in the EU. Some people are concerned the issue will grow beyond the EU because Ciroc is the fastest growing US vodka producer and if expelled from the EU, there may be some retaliation in the WTO. Ciroc is not true a Russianmen’s vodka. French grapes and other fruits are used as opposed to standard Russian vodka’s distilled in potato and other grains.

When people think of Russian cocktails, they commonly think of white Russians, which are composed of vodka, kahlua and cream. However, a White Russian is not Russian in origin. One cocktail that is of Russian origin is the Moscow Mule Vodka Cocktail which consists of vodka, chilled ginger ale, a slice of lime along with squeezed lime juice, and a piece of cucumber peel.

Vodka is one of the world’s most famous alcoholic beverages. Given the power it has, I would say “Russian Soul” does exist in it. Vodka has affected its nation and the world and will remain stark in culture for many years to come. Russians should slow it down with their consumption a little given the negative affects its had on its people rather than considering the positive affects its had on the economy but keep the production coming.

 

-CP

Bibliography

Samborski, Sam. (n.d.). The History of Vodka. Retrieved May 5, 2011, from http://www.samborski.net/vodka_culture

The Importance of Anxiety

Politics in Time

 

 

The Importance of Anxiety

 

                Anxiety plays an important role in human life because it correlates with so many elements humans encounter on a regular basis. Anxiety is the uneasiness of the mind caused by either fear and/or misfortune. Anxiety is eagerness and existing in the state if apprehension. Anxiousness directly correlates with the concept of time and how the past, present and future is perceived. Fear, misfortune, judgment, and apprehension are all related closely to morality, responsibility and agency because each of those things are intertwined with direct actions, which over all affect the structure of society and defines the status quo. Irrational and rational decisions that people make based on their actions in the present and for the future experienced a stage of uneasiness and anxiety at one point. Anxiety exists among desires. In Thomas Hobbs’s essay, Leviathan, and Adam Smith’s Theory of Moral Sentiments, they both touch on anxiety and its relation to the future, judgment and free will.

                “Anxiety for the future time, disposeth men to inquire into the causes of things: because the knowledge of them, maketh men the better able to order the present to their best advantage“(Leviathan, Pt. I, Ch. 11, para. 24). Hobbes is describing the correlation between anxiousness, curiosity and the future. If there is something to anticipate and look forward to in the future, one might be anxious and curious about the series of events leading to that point. Hobbes describes this paragraph, as “Curiosity knows, from care of future time.”  People are all curious about the future. Curiosity, whether pessimistic or optimistic, determines the perspective on the expectations of the future.  However, Hobbes believed humans are engaged in guided thought. Guided thoughts stems from understanding that comes from reflection, memory and experience. Most experiences whether positive or negative, happiness or sadness can have an anxious element to it because it is the anticipation that causes the discomfort of the unknown. Anxiety exists when one anticipates success. It is the uneasiness in waiting and not fully knowing what the future beholds that is brought on by anxiety. In that, there is a lack of control. If one cannot determine what to expect in the future it would be difficult to control the actual present.

                Hobbes discusses dependency and power in chapter ten of Leviathan, which relates to desires and anxiety. Specifically he talks about self-value and knowing your worth. “ The value of worth of a man, is as of all things his price; that is to say, so much as would be given for the use of this power: and therefore is not absolute; but a thing dependent on the need and judgment of another… And as in other things, so in men, not the seller, but the buyer determines the price” (Leviathan, Pt. I, Ch. 3, para. 16). It is assertion and differentiating between falsehoods regarding self that is caused and effected from anxiety.

Dependency in itself can cause anxiety. It is not a simple concept to know your worth and understand your own self-value based on the judgments of others. Acceptance is an intricate process that is required at a high level when dealing with the judgments of others. It is the element of fear of judgment and understanding self-value that causes the anxiety, the fear of unfavorable judgment, and the fear of being in a state of apprehension. Relying on someone else causes frustration and clearly takes away the grip on control. Depending on the judgmental opinions of others is essential to understanding self-value, yet dependence in itself limits agency as free will is fractured.

                Adam Smith went more into detail about anxiety in the Theory of Moral Sentiments essay. “Among the candidates for excellence in those different arts, the anxiety about the public opinion is always much greater in the former than in the latter” (The Theory of Moral Sentiments, Ch 2, part 1, pg25). The significance does not lie in the actuality of the accomplishment; rather it is the judgment that brings about the anxiety.  Excelling in something brings gratification, yet the conclusions drawn from the outside causes the uneasiness.  To judge and to be judged through the eyes of peers and people other than self provokes anxiety. No one can escape judgment as people encounter it daily.

                “In the misfortunes for which the nature of things admits, or seems to admit, of a remedy, but in which the means of applying that remedy are not within the reach of the sufferer, his vain and fruitless attempts to restore himself to his former situation, his continual anxiety for their success, his repeated disappointments upon their miscarriage, are what chiefly hinder him from resuming his natural tranquility…” (The Theory of Moral Sentiments, Ch 3, part 3, para 75). In life, people experience great accomplishments as well as disappointments and Smith is saying anxiety exists in both. There is not always going to be a solution to the problem, which naturally causes anxiety.  However, it is the anxiety in success and its assessment that causes comparison and competition that affects agency and morality.

                 “When the happiness or misery of others, indeed, in no respect depends upon our conduct, when our interests are altogether separated and detached from theirs, so that there is neither connexion, nor competition between them, we do not always think it so necessary to restrain, either our natural and perhaps, improper anxiety about our own affairs, or our natural and, perhaps, equally improper indifference about those of men”  (The Theory of Moral Sentiments, Pt, 3, ch 3, para 49). Anxiety can hinder one’s agency especially caused by competition and struggle with power. Power is such a dominant force that can cause one to question his actions based off competition.  Power directly causes competition, but competition can adversely cause conflict as well as new ideas.

                Anxiety manifests itself amongst many different emotions, actions, satisfactions and dissatisfactions.  The ultimate goal is to attain happiness, although, it is curiosity and anxiety that exists in the pursuit. Anxiety exists in the future, as it is a continuous thing. People are actively investing in the present, preparing for the future through anxious actions like doubt, fear, uneasiness amongst many other feelings.  Anxiousness starkly appears throughout the completion of something whether it was a task, duty or desire. Because anxiety affects the grasp, that people have on the control in their present lives and how one perceives themselves in the future. It affects overall confidence and how one conducts himself. As Hobbes describes, humans have continuous desires and the power to fulfill them. Anxiety is certainty. How does one really know if they are certain of anything? How does one fully know and understand something especially pertaining to self and their value to themselves and society? Anxiety is the unknown. The importance of anxiety is how it determines thoughts and actions. Generally, people are responsible for their actions. Anxiousness causes insecurity and doubtfulness that inevitably is a hindrance to our overall agency.  Free will is compromised if there is a constant doubt in ability due to anxiety. However, one cannot recognize others without recognizing self. Anxiety is not necessarily a positive or a negative, rather it is essential to personal responsibility.  It is duty that is related to action. Actions are determined by moral judgment and ethics which have all been affected directly or indirectly by conscious or subconscious anxiety. Happiness and failure cannot exists without anxiety because general morality, responsibility and agency are all intertwined with it. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Legalizing Marijuana: The Evolving Perception of Drug Use in America

Public Opinion

Issue: Legalizing Marijuana: The Evolving Perception of Drug Use in America

In 1971 the Nixon administration thought the efforts to control drugs in America was not sufficient enough. An official war was declared on drugs.  Ever since the declaration was made, many administrations following, have tried to reinforce it and make America a drug free country. Unfortunately, this war has been going on for several decades and many people have started to accept that we may not be winning this war. Actually, there are some that will even argue the war on drugs has harmed us as society. Many argue that drugs are winning the war. The attitudes of the American people have changed dramatically over the last four decades. As more research surfaces that invite favorability for the legalization and/or decriminalization of drugs, specifically marijuana, we may see a major change in the American legal system that inevitably affects society as a whole. Though if regulated correctly, the positive outcomes would outweigh the negative.

Current Position: The War on Drugs has affected many people

“America’s drug problem manifests itself in many ways. Illegal drugs are linked to high crime levels, high imprisonment rates, and wasted lives. The harms associated with drugs and draw law enforcement disproportionately affect African Americans. Increasingly the answer to the drug problem is presented in terms of a debate between the supporters of tough drug-law enforcement policies, which focus on long sentences for drug offenders, and opponents who reject tough sentences as too costly for the Africa American Community”.  (Tracey L. Meares) This concept of African American families being severely affected by the “drug problem” in America is common and has been recently argued by Newark New Jersey’s mayor Cory Booker. Booker has seen firsthand the effects the drug war has had on his city. On May 23^rd of this year, Booker tweeted, “In NJ blacks are about 15% of the population but over 60% of prison populations and DRUGS fuel much of the incarceration.” He goes on to tweet, “I fear that legalizing it all would lead 2 more addiction, however, I’m with you on medical marijuana. And NJ should do more to make it real for those who need it.” According to the White House Blog, on August 3^rd, President Obama signed the Fair Sentencing Act in the Oval Office, “which reduces the disparity in the amounts of powder cocaine and crack cocaine required for the imposition of mandatory minimum sentences and eliminated the mandatory minimum sentence for simple possession of crack cocaine. It also increases the monetary penalties for major drug traffickers.  Sir Richard Branson, founder of the Virgin group recently had an interview with Tony Metcalf of the NY Metro publication where he goes on to say, “The fundamental difference in America is that it is a war against black people in America. Its black people … 85 percent of people who go to prison for drug use in America is black people. They don’t take more drugs, but it’s a racist law against black people in America.”

I believe the attitude towards America’s current drug problems are more focused pharmaceutical drugs.  There’s no denying in the significant increase in pharmaceutical ads, pharmaceutical prescriptions, more pharmaceutical addiction and crime over the last four decades. The pharmaceutical related deaths over the last three years in itself is quite alarming.

The attitudes are changing on marijuana usage and drug legalization in America.

Over the last decade many people feel like Marijuana should be administered medicinally and some even feel it should be used recreationally. According to the, Angus Reid Public Opinion Poll, released June 2012,“2/3^rds of adults in the United States believe the “War on Drugs” has been futile, and a majority continue to call for the legalization of marijuana in the country.”  The Angus Reid online survey consisted of a representative sample of 1,017 American adults. 68% think America has s serious drug abuse problem that affects the whole country. 66% think the “War on Drugs” has been a failure. 52% support the legalization of marijuana.  More specifically, 63% democrats believe the drug war has been a failure, coincidently 66% of republican’s agree, as well as 69% of independents.  Just recently, “Proposition 19: The Marijuana Legalization Initiative 2010” was placed on the statewide California ballot and was defeated by a very small margin. 46.5% voted in favor and 53.5% voted against it in the statewide election. If prop 9 had passed, the law would have read; “legalizes marijuana under California but not Federal Law. Permits Local Governments to Regulate and Tax Commercial Production, Distribution and Sale of Marijuana… etc.” All sales would have been legally restricted to those 21 years of age and older, used in a non public place and would have been allowed to grow marijuana in a space up to 25 square feet for personal use. (Ballotpedia.Org)  Ever since medicinal use was introduced in California in 1996, the attitudes of many people have swayed toward favorability of marijuana use.

Groups like NORML (National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws) and LEAP (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition) are advocates for marijuana legalization. Just earlier, this month on the 21^st of September, in Chicago there was a effort put forward by LEAP to try and have Colorado’s state legislation passed, legalizing marijuana..”

The prohibition on drug use is very similar to the alcohol prohibition in the 20^th century in that freedom is limited which increases crime. Notorious figures like Al Capone were produced out of the prohibition. The drug prohibition has produced notorious gangsters like Manuel Noriega, Frank Lucas, “Freeway” Ricki Ross, Dudus Coke and many more who have negatively influenced their communities and countries.  This particular drug war has had immense effects on Mexico.  Some people even speculate the drug wars effects have increased the drug related violence in Mexico especially since California’s decriminalization medicinal laws are not legal on a federal level.

States like Virginia and Colorado for example, are currently in the press quite often in regards to the issue of decriminalized and medicinal marijuana.

Conclusion: Comment and Recommendation

Overall, attitudes have drastically changed since actually declaring the war on drugs. Many are in favor of medicinal and recreational marijuana usage. If this were a regulated industry, the profits would most likely have a positive impact on the economy. It would not only create jobs, it would help with taxes and it would reduce crime. Making it accessible would unburden law enforcement agencies and allot them more time to focus on more threatening violent crimes.  Unfortunately, with very powerful and resourceful lobbying groups representing the alcohol and tobacco industries, it has been very difficult for marijuana to be decriminalized and /or legalized primarily because of the major loss they would encounter once marijuana becomes legally assessable.

It is therefore my recommendation that marijuana become legally accessible to people for medicinal and/or recreational use. A case would need to be presented to, and decided on by the Supreme Court to determine the legality of marijuana and drug use on a federal level. That federal legality has been an issue ever since the medicinal uses of marijuana was introduced. Despite the state legislation, there have been federally operated raids in marijuana dispensaries. If legalized, the economy would have a significant boost, GDP would increase, and jobs would be created significantly.

Imprisonment is not the appropriate response for drug use. Jail and prison do not properly rehabilitate drug users. Medical and mental counseling should primarily be made available and offered to drug offenders prior to entering the legal system and going through the same process as violent crime offenders.  The Fair Sentencing Act should not be restricted to crack/cocaine but all drugs, especially marijuana. These Acts being passed into legislation such as Prop 19 and The Fair Sentencing Act are clear evidence showing that America’s attitudes have changed since the Nixon, Regan and Bush 41 administrations. Now more than ever people perceive this war as a major failure with multiple resources and money wasted that could have been used more wisely.

 

Sources

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/09/21/current-former-cops-make-push-to-legalize-marijuana-ahead-of-election

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/08/03/president-obama-signs-fair-sentencing-act

Tracey , Meares. “Buffalo Criminal Law Review.” Buffalo Criminal Law Review. Vol 1..No.1 (1997): 174. Print.

 

-Court Court