Eng 1120 - the War on Drugs

Chase Lovell

Mrs. Busby

English 1120

26 February 2017

The War on Drugs

African Americans comprise 14% of regular drug users, but 37% of those arrested for drug offenses. Racial discrimination along with other issues concerning with The War on Drugs have been a huge topic of conversation for years. There are many debates going on about the ending The War on Drugs. In the article, Race and the Drug War, the author has a firm opinion on how discriminatory our generation is in The War on Drugs. In another article, The Economics Behind the U.S. Government's Unwinnable War on Drugs, Powell addresses the supply and demand side of conversation. While those two articles have great conversation, The United States War on Drugs, is an article about the effects and solutions of The War on Drugs. which could significant to the United States today. Legalize Pot? You Must Be High, is an article that addresses multiple conversation, but the main topics would be the risks and cost of drugs and how that effects human’s health and society. All the authors have different viewpoints and take different approaches to developing their arguments. Along with different point of views, each author uses a different tone, style, among other rhetorical devices, to support their claim. The information and rhetorical strategies provided by the authors help inform the audience on the different conversations on The War on Drugs, which could persuade someone from one point of view to another.

The different conversation on The War on Drugs has been around since the 1930’s. The articles explain the different perspectives The War on Drugs is involved in. One perspective is the racial discrimination. Many supporters believe African Americans are more at risk than whites to become imprisoned. Another perspective of The War on Drugs is the economic side. The economics behind The War on Drugs show that there are many advantages behind legalizing drugs. Meanwhile, the discussion of potential solutions and effects give different viewpoints and allows different audience members to get a good grasp on what could be. Also, many arguments and conversation could arise from the different risk and cost of legalizing drugs. The authors can voice their opinions, which could cause a stir between the audience. Each author supports their viewpoint, which allows for certain debates and counter-arguments to be heard. Many Americans have opposing viewpoints in certain perspectives, which leads a spark in a national debate.

In the article “Race and the Drug War,” the author uses a “the basics” slide show to point out important facts on the issue of racial discrimination. The author uses a video by hip hop artist Jay Z to depict the impact of the War on Drugs has had African Americans communities in the past decades. This type of video could attract a more mature audience, likely college students or older. While the video is very appealing, the article uses eye-opening facts and opinions that could also draw the reader in. The author seems to be trying to reach out to all different kinds of people, to which the audience could not be limited to just a certain group of people.

One of the main reasons the author gives is the racial discrimination within communities. The author claims that “African Americans serve almost as much time in federal prison for a drug offense as whites do for a violent offense” (DPA). This data was found by the head of the board of directors, a credible source that adds supporting evidence to the authors argument. The use of these statistics takes advantage of a logos point of view. The authors use logos by using logical and clear statistical evidence to support his claim. Following this statement, the author goes on to compare the arrest rates between African Americans and Whites.

In the article “The Economics Behind the U.S. Governments Unwinnable War on Drugs,” Powell provides a very long and dull article of the economics side of The War on Drugs. In the article, Powell uses graphs to show how The War on Drugs effects our economy. The graphs may seem helpful, but if you have not studied economics then you will not understand the graph. The graph is confusing and will not help the readers get a good grasp as to what is effecting the economy. The article seems to be pointed towards an educated crowd, with maybe some knowledge in economics. While Powell seems to know the facts about the economy, his audience would be limited due to confusing graphs.

One point Powell explains pertains to the supply side of The War on Drugs. Powell explains that “The economic analysis of fighting a supply-side drug war predicts that the war will enhance drug suppliers' revenues, enabling them to continuously ratchet up their efforts to supply drugs in response to greater enforcement” (Powell). Powell believes that drug prohibition is a failure and that drugs will lead to more violence and escalating cost. Powell also touches on the cost of drug prohibition and how prohibition can impact the economy. Powell’s reasons seem to legit and valid for someone to that be persuaded to choosing a side in the conversation.

        Likewise, the article “The Unites States War on Drugs,” is a long essay on the history, effects, and solutions on the War on Drugs. The article is deep, which makes it hard to remain focus while reading the article. The essay is loaded with rhetorical questions, which allows the readers to really think about what they are reading. The others word choice is sophisticated, which makes it seem like the article is intended for a more educated audience. Even though the article is very knowledgeable, the audience could be limited. (say why it is significant)

        In contrast to “The United States War on Drugs” rhetorical strategies, the author explains the history, major problems, and possible solutions to The War on Drugs. One major problem the author points out is the effects that drugs can do to our body. The author states “There have been incidents of people, high on LSD, ripping their hands out of hand-cuffs, by breaking every bone in their hands” (Stanford). The author also acknowledges that certain drugs are more serious than others, but has a firm opinion about marijuana being in a different category.

        Meanwhile, In the article “Legalize Pot? You Must Be High”, Nemko is very professional about his points. Due to kind of an intense title, the article is not very attractive for one to click. Even though the topic is brisk, the article is strong. Nemko uses a strong and sophisticated word choice, making it seem like he is trying to present his opinion to a more mature and scholarly audience. Nemko does a great job of providing credibility to his argument by including links throughout the article to his sources from which his information was gathered, showing readers that his information can be trusted. The article consists of six main reasons as to why the United States should keep marijuana illegal. The six main reasons had specific points and facts that back up the main adrgument. The article is well structured, providing an easy read so that readers will clearly understand Nemko’s argument.