The War on Drugs

Examining Cause and

Effect Relationships
363.4 Bernards, Neal,\
BER The war on
drugs : examining
_'_ J
 GRAVES-HUME PUBLIC

i.
II
3 051
1 i «. 11
001 5951 3

DATE DUE

j
Bernards, Neal,
363. 4 The war on drugs :
BER examining cause and
effect relationships

Q uuteA Public JlibAasiy.

901 Washington St.
Mendota, SL 61342
Phone: 815/538-5142
 —

In Memory
of

JULIUS L. SCHALLER

<0 1987 GAYLORD

The War on Drugs
Examining Cause and Effect
Relationships

Curriculum Consultant: JoAnne Buggey, Ph.D.

College of Education, University of Minnesota

By Neal Bernards

GRAVES PUBLIC LIBRARY

MENDOTA, IL 61342

juHtOfS VIEWPOINTS
* 1/fFM/POfMTS®

<P
Greenhaven Press, Inc.
Post Office Box 289009
San Diego, CA 92198-0009
Titles in the opposing viewpoints juniors series:

Advertising Male/Female Roles

AIDS Nuclear Power
Alcohol The Palestinian Conflict
Animal Rights Patriotism
Causes of Crime Population
Child Abuse Poverty
Death Penalty Prisons
Drugs and Sports Smoking
Endangered Species Television
The Environment Toxic Wastes
Garbage The G.S. Constitution
Gun Control The War on Drugs
The Homeless Working Mothers
Immigration Zoos

Cover photo by: Gniphoto/Ed Elberfeld

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Bernards, Neal, 1963-
The war on drugs : examining cause and effect relationships / by Neal
Bernards; curriculum consultant, JoAnne Buggey.
p. cm. — (Opposing viewpoints juniors)
Summary: Presents opposing viewpoints on the war on drugs and
other aspects of drug abuse.
ISBN 0-89908-612-8
1. Narcotics, Control of—Gnited States—Juvenile literature.
[1. Narcotics, Control of. 2. Drug abuse.] 1. Buggey, JoAnne.
II. Title. III. Series.
HN5809.5.B47 1991
363.4'5'0973—dc20 91-22021

No part of this book may be reproduced or used in any other form or

by any other means, electrical, mechanical, or otherwise, including, but
not limited to, photocopy, recording, or any information storage and
retrieval system, without prior written permission from the publisher.

Copyright 1991 by Greenhaven Press, Inc.

 CONTENTS

The Purpose of This Book: An Introduction to Opposing Viewpoints... 4

Skill Introduction: Examining Cause and Effect Relationships 5
Sample Viewpoint A: I think we can win the war on drugs. 6
Sample Viewpoint B: I don’t think we can win the war on drugs. 7
Analyzing the
Sample Viewpoints: Tallying Causes and Effects. 8

Chapter <1
«Li Preface: Is the War on Drugs Necessary?.. ..9
Viewpoint 1: The war on drugs is necessary. 10
Viewpoint 2: The war on drugs is not necessary.. 12
Critical Thinking Skill 1: Examining Cause and Effect 14

Chapter
Preface: Does Drug Testing Violate Workers’ Civil Rights?. 15
Viewpoint 3: Drug testing violates workers’ civil rights. 16
Viewpoint 4: Protecting the public should override civil rights 18
Critical Thinking Skill 2: Examining Cause and Effect. 20

Chapter <5}
Preface: Will the Death Penalty Help Win the War on Drugs?. 21
Viewpoint 5: The death penalty will help win the war on drugs. 22
Viewpoint 6: The death penalty will not help win the war on drugs 24
Critical Thinking Skill 3: Writing an Essay (Ising Cause and Effect
Arguments. 26

Chapter
Preface: Can Education Programs Reduce Teen Drug Abuse?. 27
Viewpoint 7: Education programs can reduce teen drug abuse. 28
Viewpoint 8: Education programs cannot reduce teen drug abuse 30
Critical Thinking Skill 4: Examining Cause and Effect in Editorial
Cartoons. 32
 THE PURPOSE OF
THIS BOOK
An Introduction to
Opposing Viewpoints
When people disagree, it is hard to figure out
who is right. You may decide one person is
right just because the person is your friend or
a relative. But this is not a very good reason
to agree or disagree with someone. It is better
if you try to understand why these people
disagree. On what main points do they differ?
Read or listen to each person’s argument
carefully. Separate the facts and opinions that
each person presents. Finally, decide which
argument best matches what you think. This
process, examining an argument without
emotion, is part of what critical thinking is all
about.
This is not easy. Many things make it hard
to understand and form opinions. People’s
values, ages, and experiences all influence
the way they think. This is why learning to
read and think critically is an invaluable skill.
Opposing Viewpoints Juniors books will help
4 JUNIORS
you learn and practice skills to improve your
ability to read critically. By reading opposing
views on an issue, you will become familiar
with methods people use to attempt to
convince you that their point of view is right.
And you will learn to separate the authors’
opinions from the facts they present.
Each Opposing Viewpoints Juniors book
focuses on one critical thinking skill that will
help you judge the views presented. Some of
these skills are telling fact from opinion,
recognizing propaganda techniques, and
locating and analyzing the main idea. These
skills will allow you to examine opposing
viewpoints more easily.
Each viewpoint in this book is
paraphrased from the original to make it
easier to read. The viewpoints are placed in a
running debate and are always placed with
the pro view first.
 SKILL INTRODUCTION
Examining Cause and Effect
Relationships
In this Opposing Viewpoints Juniors book,
you will learn about the basic critical thinking
skill of examining cause and effect. By
learning how to identify cause and effect
statements, you will be able to better evaluate
the reasons authors give for their arguments.
A cause and effect statement claims that
one thing causes another. Some examples of
cause and effect statements are: Cigarette
smoking causes lung cancer. She gets higher
grades because she flatters the teacher.
People use drugs because they are poor and
don’t have jobs. In each sample sentence, the
writer tells about one thing (the cause)
making something else happen (the effect).
Notice that some sentences can be proven
to be true while others are mostly a matter of
the writer’s opinion. For example, many
medical studies have shown that sentence 1
is true; there is a very strong cause and effect
relationship between smoking and cancer.
But sentence 2 might be harder to prove.
There could be many reasons (causes) why
“she gets high grades.” The writer tells us one
possible cause, but we would have to know a
lot more about the situation before we could
accept the writer’s statement as true.
It is important to evaluate cause and effect
statements. Just because an author tells us
that one thing causes another thing to
happen, it is not necessarily true. Some
things to ask yourself when you are
evaluating a cause and effect statement are:
Does the statement seem logical? Does it
make sense? Does the writer (or speaker)
give any evidence to support the statement?
If so, what kind of evidence is it? Some kinds
of evidence are more reliable than others. A
writer might use personal experience,
scientific studies, opinions from experts,
observations—the writer actually observes
the thing happening—or several examples
that all show the same relationship.
In the viewpoints in this book, the authors
take different stands on the war on drugs. The
authors disagree both on what effects drugs
have on society, and on who or what has
caused the drug-related problems. You will be
asked to identify the causes and effects each
author supplies to prove his or her argument.
Next, you will be asked to analyze the cause
and effect statements. For example, does the
author’s reasoning seem logical? Or are the
causes and effects exaggerated or irrelevant?
Finally, in the critical thinking activities at the
end of every pair of viewpoints, you will be
asked to determine which author presents the
most logical causes and effects.
We asked two students their opinions
about the war on drugs. Examine their
viewpoints. Look for examples of cause and
effect in their arguments.
THE WAR ON DRUGS 5
 SAMPLE
VIEWPOINT Mark:

I think we can win the war on drugs.

I think America can win the war on drugs if people try harder to
solve the problem. Drug dealers and users are responsible for the
situation. If the police arrest more of them, drug use will go down
because people will get frightened away from drugs.
Besides, we have to win the war on drugs. Thousands of people
die from drugs every year. Users overdose; pushers get killed by
their rivals; and innocent people get caught in between. Drugs are
ruining America. The big drug busts of the last few years prove
that something can be done. Many big drug dealers are in prison. If
we keep punishing drug dealers, we can win the war on drugs.

6 JUNIORS
 SAMPLE D
viewpoint D Laura:

I don’t think we can win the war on drugs.

Drugs aren’t the problem. Laws against drugs are the problem.
Making something illegal makes it more expensive. People will pay
more to get illegal items. Since many illegal drugs are expensive,
dealers can make a lot of money from them. And if dealers can
make money from drugs, they will. It is the American way.
We can’t win the war on drugs. The police can’t stop drugs from
coming into the United States. If users want them, dealers will
supply them. We are wasting our time and money.

THE WAR ON DRUGS 7

 ANALYZING THE
SAMPLE VIEWPOINTS

Mark and Laura have very different opinions about whether or not
the war on drugs can be won. Both of them give examples of
cause and effect in their arguments.

Mark:
CAUSE EFFECT
Drug dealers and users are Users overdose.
responsible for the drug Dealers die from violence.
problem. Innocent people get hurt.

Police arrest users and dealers. Drug use goes down.

Laura:
CAUSE EFFECT
Many drugs are illegal. They are expensive.
Drugs are expensive. Dealers can make a lot of
money.

In this sample, Mark and Laura have very different beliefs about
the war on drugs. Both Mark and Laura think they are right about
the war on drugs. What conclusions would you come to from this
sample? Whom do you agree with? Why?
As you continue to read through the viewpoints in this book, try
keeping a tally like the one above to compare the authors’
arguments.

8 JUNIORS
CHAPTER

preface: Is the War on Drugs

Necessary?

Federal officials estimate that Americans use well over seventy

tons of cocaine per year. The dollar value of this and other drugs
brought illegally into the country totals about seventy billion
dollars. This makes drugs the nation’s leading import after oil.
However, there are some encouraging numbers. First, the
number of cocaine users has begun to level off. And second, the
Drug Enforcement Administration now seizes about thirty-five to
forty metric tons of cocaine per year. But the cost is high.
Since 1980 the United States has spent over ten billion dollars
to fight the war on drugs. Many people question whether or not the
war is necessary.
Some, like police chief Reuben Greenberg in Charleston, South
Carolina, and New York congressional representative Charles
Rangel, believe tough measures must be taken to stop drug use.
They think widespread drug use will ruin America.
Others, like columnist William F. Buckley, Jr. and former
secretary of state George Shultz, believe the war against drugs has
failed. Rather than fight a costly, unwinnable war, they suggest the
United States legalize some drugs. The war on drugs is more
dangerous, they claim, than drugs themselves.
In this chapter, the authors will use many cause and effect
arguments. The questions in the margins will help you look for
causes and effects.

THE WAR ON DRUGS 9

VIEWPOINT JL The war on drugs is necessary

Editor’s Note: This viewpoint states that the war on drugs is

necessary to protect American society. The author maintains that drug
use kills hundreds of users each year and causes thousands of
accidents in the workplace. As you read, take note of the cause and
effect arguments the author uses.

Drugs are ruining American society. With over 23 million regular

The author claims that
drugs cause many of
America’s problems.
The author uses statistics
to support his cause and
effect argument.
Drug use raises health
costs. Why do drugs have
that effect?
drug users, the United States leads the world in illegal drug use. Of
those 23 million users, about 1.5 million are considered addicts.
These people steal from their employers by not being able to work
hard, and they lie, steal, and cheat from their fellow citizens to get
drugs.
One look at Americans’ health proves the war on drugs is
necessary. According to the Senate Task Force for a Drug-Free
America, over thirty thousand people were admitted to hospital
emergency rooms in 1986 for drug-related health problems. Worse
yet, drug use is responsible for 10 to 15 percent of all highway
traffic fatalities. If we do not stop rampant drug use, Americans will
slowly kill themselves.
Drug use also costs the American economy over one hundred
billion dollars each year in lost work, accidents, and health-care
costs. Regular drug users call in to work sick twice as often as non¬
drug users, and their health bills are three times as high. Reducing
drug use could save businesses billions of dollars every year.

Percent of High School

Seniors Who Have
Used Cocaine

■ EVER USED COCAINE

ffij USED COCAINE IN LAST YEAR

M USED COCAINE IN LAST 30 DAYS

“1
20%

SOURCE: Institute for Social Research, 1986

10 JUNIORS
Steve Kelley. Reprinted with permission.

For some, street crime is the best reason to continue the war on
drugs. Drugs are expensive. To get money to purchase them, In the author’s opinion,
many users steal and rob from innocent victims. And the violence what causes much of
between drug gangs is renowned. Drive-by shootings and drug-
America’s street crime?
related murders have become commonplace in some urban
neighborhoods.
America’s lax attitude toward drug use is to blame for our drug
problem. We have created a society that says it is okay to go What does the author say
through life in stoned numbness. Fortunately, this attitude can be is the cause of America’s
drug problem?
changed. With strict laws and tough police enforcement, illegal
drug use can be stopped. A serious war on drugs by police
officers, parents, teachers, politicians, and students is necessary to
solve the problem.
Reuben Greenberg, the police chief in Charleston, South
Carolina, writes, “If we Americans put all our might and muscle, all What effect does the
our brains and determination into it, the victory can be ours.” author see if the war on
drugs is not fought?
Without a war on drugs, America is doomed to a future of
economic decline, violence, and death.

Life without a war on drugs

The author believes drugs cause many problems. Name three of

the problems. What does the author think will happen if the war on
drugs is not fought?

THE WAR ON DRUGS 1 1

VIEWPOINT C-i The war on drugs is not necessary

Editor’s Note: The author of the following viewpoint lists many

reasons why the war on drugs is not necessary. He argues that it is an
expensive war that can never be won. He suggests legalizing drugs.
The author uses many cause and effect arguments. Watch for them and
note their effectiveness.

With over twenty-three million regular drug users in America, the

According to the author,
why are drug busts not
effective?
Is this cause and effect
argument based on the
author’s opinion or an
expert’s opinion?
What things does the
author say cause the high
cost of the drug war?
war on drugs cannot be won. It is futile. To think that drug use can
be stopped by a drug bust here and a drug bust there is naive. As
long as there is a demand for drugs, and as long as there is money
to be made from selling them, they will remain. James Bowman
writes in The Spectator, a conservative political opinion magazine,
that “there will always be poor people; there will always be drugs
and drug users; there will always be civil violence.”
Rather than accepting the fact that drugs cannot be stopped,
the United States spends billions of dollars each year trying to end
the flow. In 1988 alone, the U.S. Navy and Coast Guard spent forty
million dollars looking for drugs on the high seas. They seized a
total of seventeen ships. These costs are far too great for the
benefits earned.
Even when drug busts are successful, they cost the taxpayers
money. Police officers must be paid and prisoners must be housed.
Already our prisons are overcrowded. Each new cell costs fifty
thousand dollars. Creating additional drug laws would only add to

DRUG USE DECLINES

High school
seniors who,
in the last thirty
days,

used
marijuana only

used
some other
illegal drug

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

12 JUNIORS
 caused by caused by street crimes committed
poisoned or get money for drugs
impure drugs

caused by murders in black

market drug dealings

Annual O
CD
CD

Deaths
Caused By O
co
Laws Against O
LU
o
caused by drug related AIDS Drugs DC
z>
O
cn

the problem. Building enough jails to house criminals convicted of

drug charges would cost hundreds of billions of dollars.
And for what? Despite all the scare stories in the media, illegal
drugs do not cause that many health problems. Legal drugs are far
worse. Each year, tobacco kills 300,000 people. Alcohol is
responsible for another 100,000 deaths annually. Meanwhile,
illegal drugs killed only 3,403 people in 1987.
Although media attention on the drug problem is growing, drug
use is actually dropping. Few newspapers or magazines report the
fact that cocaine use among the general population has been
steadily falling for the last five years.
The real solution to drugs is to legalize them. Keeping drugs
illegal only drives up their cost. If they become legal, the price will What does the author
go down. If the price goes down, then drug dealers will not be able think would be the
to make as much money. If they cannot make money selling effect of legalizing
drugs, they will go out of business. If they go out of business, drugs?
violence on the streets will drop because dealers will no longer
fight over drugs.

Drug use and legalization

The author argues that there is a link between illegal drugs and
violence. What is his solution to the problem? List two effects the
author believes legalizing drugs would have.

THE WAR ON DRUGS 13

 CRITICAL fl
THINKING 11
= SKILL Examining Cause and Effect

The authors of viewpoints 1 and 2 have very different opinions on

the need for a war on drugs. In answering the margin questions,
you have already thought about many of the causes and effects
the authors presented. In this activity, you will review some of
these and compare and contrast the authors’ reasoning.

Viewpoint 1:
The war on drugs is necessary
CAUSE EFFECT
1.5 million people are they lie, cheat, and steal
addicted to drugs

workers use drugs businesses lose one hundred

billion dollars a year

Viewpoint 2:
The war on drugs is not necessary
CAUSE EFFECT
the demand for drugs is drug prices remain high
constant

In viewpoint 1, the author attempts to prove that the war on drugs

is necessary. What evidence does the author offer that this is true?
Does the author’s conclusion seem logical? Why or why not?
In viewpoint 2, the author offers proof to support a different
conclusion. What evidence does the author present to prove his
case that the war on drugs is not necessary? Do his conclusions
seem logical? Why or why not?
Which viewpoint do you believe presents the best case for or
against the war on drugs? Why?

14 JUNIORS
CHAPTER

preface: Does Drug Testing

Violate Workers’ Civil
Rights?

The term civil rights means the legal rights Americans have as
individuals. Many of those rights are identified in the Bill of Rights,
which is a list of ten amendments, or additions, to the Constitution.
The Bill of Rights states that each American should enjoy certain
freedoms, including speech, religion, and the right to a trial by jury.
More importantly for this book, the Fourth Amendment in the
Bill of Rights states that individuals must be free from unreasonable
search and seizure. This means people can expect to be safe from
unnecessary police searches of their homes, property, or bodies.
This is also called the right to privacy.
The amendment states that all searches must be reasonable.
That is, the police must have a good reason, backed by some kind
of evidence of criminal activity, before conducting a search. Many
people, like Loren Siegal of the American Civil Liberties Onion, an
organization dedicated to preserving individual rights, believe that
random drug tests are not reasonable. People subjected to random
drug tests are generally selected by computer. The tests are not
based on performance, accidents, or attendance records, but
simply on chance. The randomness is designed to keep all
employees drug-free out of a fear that one day their name will
come up for testing. Siegal views this randomness and prying into
workers’ lives as an invasion of personal privacy. He thinks drug
tests violate individual liberties without good cause.
Many other people believe that drug testing must be done, and
worrying about privacy should not prevent testing. They claim that
workers in jobs involving public safety, such as police officers,
airline pilots, firefighters, railway workers, and bus drivers, must be
drug-free. Robert L. DuPont, the director of the National Institute on
Drug Abuse, a research organization, believes that making sure
people in these important positions are not using drugs is more
important than worrying about whether drug tests violate their
privacy.
The viewpoints in this chapter debate whether drug testing
violates workers’ civil rights. Watch for the cause and effect
arguments used by the authors to support their arguments.

THE WAR ON DRUGS 15

 3 Drug testing violates workers’
civil rights

Editor’s Note: The author of the following viewpoint writes that

random drug testing violates workers’ civil rights. He argues that drug
testing is unreasonable and unconstitutional. Note the effect the author
believes drug testing will have on government powers.

America’s founders added the Bill of Rights to the Constitution for

What does the author say
caused America’s founders
to preserve freedom in the
Constitution?
How do drug tests affect
the right to privacy, in the
author’s opinion?
According to Hentoff, how
would drug testing change
the right to privacy?
a reason: to protect individuals from the government. They were
afraid of granting the government too much power. They feared
government would try to control citizens’ lives. America’s founders
wanted their people to live free. They wanted citizens to have a
right to privacy.
Unfortunately, the right to privacy is slowly slipping away. The
public outcry over drugs has created a climate where individual
rights seem to matter less than fighting the war on drugs. That
attitude is contrary to the Constitution’s call for freedom. Drug
testing is the most frightening example of people’s rights being
taken away.
Random drug tests are both unreasonable and intrusive. They
are unreasonable because they do more than test whether an
employee is under the influence of drugs at work. They can also
show if a person used drugs a few days, or even weeks, before the
test. They have nothing to do with work performance or safety. A
bus driver who smoked a joint on Saturday night is not a threat to
students who ride his bus on Monday. But the marijuana will show
up in his drug test and he may be fired. That is a violation of his
civil rights.
Drug tests are intrusive because they demand a physical
specimen from the person being tested. To be intrusive means to
intrude into someone’s life. For most drug tests, a blood or urine
sample is required. Either method involves an embarrassing
process of collecting the specimen. That is intrusive. No worker
should be subjected to such embarrassment without good cause.
Forcing someone who is guilty of no crimes to urinate into a jar is
an unnecessary violation of privacy.
Nat Hentoff, a political columnist for the alternative weekly New
York paper, The Village Voice, writes, “Once you can force blood
and urine tests on someone who has done nothing wrong, there is
no balance of rights. There are no privacy rights left.” The effect of
continued testing would be a belief that the government could
intrude into people’s lives anytime it wants.

16 JGMIORS
 Surprisingly, in 1989 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that railway
workers could be randomly tested for drugs. However, the justices The author quotes
who disagreed used strong language to express their dissent. They Supreme Court justices
were not convinced that drug testing protects public safety, and who agree with his opinion.
Do you think this helps his
they were very concerned about the threat to individual rights that
argument?
testing posed. They wrote, “There is no drug exception to the
Constitution.” What they meant is that the government cannot use
the war on drugs as an excuse to violate people’s rights.
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia wondered where the
lines in drug testing would be drawn. If the Supreme Court makes Why is Justice Scalia
exceptions for some jobs, he argued, who could stop the concerned about the
effects of testing workers?
government from making other exceptions?
Will the government start testing cab drivers, construction
workers, and school crossing guards because they hold safety-
sensitive jobs? The list of people who could be tested goes on
forever. Where does it stop?

Drug testing’s effect on individual rights

What does the author think caused the call for widespread random
drug testing? What effect does he think continued testing would
have on individual rights?

THE WAR ON DRUGS 17

 4 Protecting the public should override
Editor’s Note: In the following viewpoint, the author states that drug
testing is needed to protect the public from drug users in safety-
sensitive jobs. Examine the cause and effect arguments the author
employs.
What does the author say
caused the need for drug
testing?
According to the author,
how would drug testing
affect people’s drug use?
According to the author,
why does the public not
complain about certain
searches?
18 JUNIORS
civil rights
Drug testing of certain workers is needed to protect the public.
Imagine the damage a drug-using airline pilot or a drunk bus driver
could do to their passengers. Random drug testing can help
prevent tragic accidents.
Unfortunately, widespread testing has come only after several
deadly transportation accidents. One such incident is directly
related to drug use. In 1987, two trains collided near Chase,
Maryland, killing 16 people and leaving 174 injured. The reason?
The engineer and brake tender of a freight train shared a joint on
the job. While operating the three-engine train, the stoned engineer
ignored several warning signals. He drove his train onto a track
just ahead of an Amtrak passenger train going 105 miles per hour.
Tragedies like this make drug testing critical. Without it, the
public will live in constant fear of drug-related accidents. Drug
abuse is a serious problem that can only be stopped if people
know they will lose their jobs for coming to work with chemicals in
their bodies.
Is it unreasonable to test people in order to find lawbreakers?
Most Americans do not think so, especially when public safety is
involved. Immigration officials question travelers coming into the
country. Airline passengers walk through metal detectors at
airports. Few people complain about these tactics because they
know it is for their own good. If these tactics are acceptable, then
making certain an airline pilot or bus driver is sober is just as
important.
The protection of public safety takes priority over the right of
people to use drugs. Businessman John W. Johnstone Jr., in a
speech delivered at the White House, asks the question, “Doesn’t it
make simple common sense that the public’s right to safety and
life itself should outweigh an individual’s questionable right to
abuse drugs?”
This does not mean all employees should be tested, just those
who work in safety-sensitive jobs. These would include jobs like air
traffic controllers, railroad engineers, surgeons, bus drivers,
firefighters, police officers, drug enforcement agents, and truck
 V)o
o
-C
Q-
p
b
§
0)
-O

CL
<
-O
JZ
CL
CC
O)
o
o
JZ
CL

SOURCE: Communication Campaigns About Drugs: Government, Media, and the Public, Pamela J. Shoemaker, ed.

drivers. If these people can get away with using drugs, then
American society is in danger.
Those who complain that drug testing is intrusive are wrong.
Drug testing does not intrude into most Americans’ lives. It only The author writes that drug
intrudes on those who are guilty. Those who are drug-free usually tests cause drug users to
do not mind drug tests. Journalist Paul Qlastris writes of drug tests, worry. Why does he not
“Only the guilty have anything to fear. What is wrong with having think that is bad?
the guilty worry about what they are doing? What is wrong with
keeping them from harming the rest of us?”

Drug testing and public safety

The author believes the public has a right to safety. What does he
think would happen if workers in certain jobs are not tested for drug
use? What effect does the author think drug testing will have on
drug users?

THE WAR ON DRUGS 19

 CRITICAL <o)
THINKING &
— SKILL Examining Cause and Effect

This activity will allow you to practice'examining cause and effect

relationships. The statements below focus on the subject matter of
this book. Read each paragraph and consider it carefully. For each
paragraph, identify the cause and effect relationship.
If you are doing this activity as a member of a class or group,
compare your answers with other class or group members. You will
find that others may have different answers than you do. Listening
to the reasons others give for their answers can help you in
examining cause and effect.

EXAMPLE: Drugs can ruin a society. They destroy the health of

the nation’s workers. They create criminals out of
inner-city youth. They breed violence. And they
corrupt government officials.

Cause: drugs Effect: poor health, crime,

violence, and
corruption

1. Drug-running street gangs now rule many urban

neighborhoods. People who live in those neighborhoods are
afraid to walk the streets or allow their children to play in the
parks.

Cause:_ Effect:_

2. The drug lords of South America have killed hundreds of

judges, police officers, and government officials in Colombia
and Bolivia. The citizens in those countries will not fight the
drug business out of fear for their lives.

Cause:_ Effect:_

3. Teenagers can either make minimum wage at a local fast-food

restaurant or they can sell drugs and make hundreds of dollars
a week. With choices like that, there will always be drug
dealers.

Cause:_ Effect:_

4. Politicians have whipped the public into an anti-drug frenzy. As

a result, there is a popular outcry for drastic measures like drug
testing and long prison sentences for those convicted of drug
crimes.

Cause:_ Effect:_

20 JUNIORS
CHAPTER

preface: Will the Death Penalty

Help Win the War on
Drugs?

The public’s desire for a war on drugs has forced politicians to

search for new solutions to the problem. Many measures have
already been taken: strict enforcement of anti-drug laws, police
crackdowns on drug dealers, border checks for drug smugglers,
and drug tests for chemical use in the workplace. However, some
experts suggest that even more drastic measures are needed.
One such measure is the death penalty for drug kingpins.
Kingpins, or bosses, make millions of dollars from producing,
transporting, and selling drugs. Many politicians and private
citizens believe kingpins deserve the death penalty because they
kill police officers, judges, fellow drug traffickers, and drug users in
their pursuit of drug profits.
Many other people do not believe such a measure should be
used. They think the death penalty for successful drug dealers is
too drastic. They argue that most rapists and murderers in
America do not receive the death penalty. Why then should drug
dealers be put to death?
The authors in this chapter debate whether the death penalty
will help win the war on drugs. Read carefully and answer the
cause and effect questions in the margins.

THE WAR ON DRUGS 21

 5 The death penalty will help
Editor’s Note: In the following viewpoint, the author writes that the
death penalty for drug kingpins will help solve the drug problem. He
maintains that handing out severe punishment for drug crimes will have
the effect of shutting down the drug trade.
Does this cause and effect
argument seem logical?
Why or why not?
Rathbone supports the
death penalty. What does
he think will happen
without it?
The author claims that
violence is needed to win
the war on drugs. Who does
he say caused this need for
violence?
In the author’s opinion,
what effect will the death
penalty have?
22 JUNIORS
win the war on drugs
The drug crisis in America is a huge problem that can only be
solved by taking drastic measures. The death penalty for wealthy
drug lords is a drastic measure and it is a necessary measure.
Gun-toting thugs in several South American countries have
terrorized the local population into not fighting drugs. Drug money
has corrupted government officials the world over. Innocent
citizens have been caught in the crossfire of drug gangs’ gun
battles in America’s cities. To turn this battle around, the public
must be willing to “bite the bullet.” They must overcome their fear
and allow the supreme punishment for drug traffickers who deal in
murder and money.
Do not underestimate the importance of the war on drugs. It is a
battle for the future of America’s children. DeForest Z. Rathbone,
Jr., in the book America Under Siege, states that he has no
patience with those who oppose the death penalty for drug dealers.
He writes, “As long as people are going to die anyway from the
illegal drug trade, it would be better that those who die be the
kingpin drug traffickers themselves rather than our own children.”
Americans must remember that the kingpins started the
violence. It was the Colombians who began killing anti-drug
government officials. Next, the street gangs began killing other
gang members, police officers, and innocent bystanders. If drug
runners want to live by violence, they should be ready to die by
violence. It is the only force they understand.
As Representative George W. Gekas said when addressing the
CI.S. Congress, “We can stop at nothing because the drug dealers
themselves will stop at nothing.”
Using the death penalty is not a measure to harass small-time
dealers or casual drug users. What the police and federal agents
want are the drug leaders who have created this endless cycle of
violence, corruption, and bloodshed.
The death penalty will serve as the best deterrent to drug
dealing. A deterrent is something that stops a person from doing
something. If we execute a few drug lords, other drug dealers will
realize the profit of their dirty business is not worth the risk. The
death penalty would deter others from becoming drug dealers
 __It*
facMUUfhkHr

om w your.

© Adair/Rothco. Reprinted with permission.

because of the price they might have to pay. That price would be
their life. According to the author,
This is no time to be squeamish. By allowing the death penalty why would the death
penalty cause people to
for drug lords, CI.S. officials can send the message that they are
avoid dealing drugs?
fighting a serious drug war they intend to win.

The death penalty and drug dealing

The author writes that drastic measures are needed to win the war on
drugs. In his opinion, what caused the need for the death penalty?
What effect does the author think the death penalty will have on
drug dealers?

THE WAR ON DRGGS 23

 6 The death penalty will not help win the
war on drugs

Editor’s Note: In this viewpoint, the author states that the death
penalty will have the opposite effect of the one that is intended. He
believes a death penalty for drug lords will drive the price of drugs up.
With higher prices, he argues, more people will be attracted to drug
dealing as a way to get rich quick. Take note of the author’s careful
use of cause and effect arguments.

The author writes that the
death penalty will make
people feel good. Why does
he consider that bad?
In the author’s opinion,
what would cause drug
prices to rise?
While the death penalty for drug lords may make people feel good,
it will do nothing to help win the war on drugs. Actually, it will have
the opposite effect.
If the United States starts executing drug kingpins, the price of
drugs will rise. The reason is really quite simple. Say, for example,
there are one hundred very wealthy, powerful drug lords in the
world. If drug agents can arrest fifty of them and bring them to the
United States for trial, about twenty-five might be convicted. This
is ignoring all the problems of getting drug lords out of foreign
countries and into U.S. jails without an international uproar.
If twenty-five of them get the death penalty, that leaves only
seventy-five to supply the world’s drug habits. And as we know
from economics, less competition generally means higher prices.
Since the demand for drugs will remain the same, the suppliers
can charge a higher price.

Tony Auth. © 1988 Universal Press Syndicate. Reprinted with permission. All rights reserved.

24 JUNIORS
 What the supporters of the death penalty want us to believe is
that drug prices would rise so high that they would become Why does the author
unaffordable. But they are wrong. Once prices rise, more people believe the death penalty
will be attracted to drug dealing because of the money that can be would not have the
desired effect?
made. New dealers will rush in to fill the gap left by the dead
dealers. Even the risk of dying for drug money will not stop them.
On another note, the death penalty for drug dealers is a bad
idea because it ignores the root of the drug problem: poverty and Why does the author term
joblessness. Rather than address those difficult issues, the death the death penalty a “bad
penalty provides a seemingly simple, easy solution. In politics this idea”? What effect does
he believe it would have?
is called a “quick fix.”
Quick fixes are usually used in desperate times. Mark A. R.
Kleiman, a professor at Harvard University, writes that it takes a According to Kleiman,
“desperate need to distract the public from drug policy disaster” to what causes politicians
use the death penalty for drug kingpins as a political tool. He to use “quick fixes”?
believes politicians are simply using it as a ploy to look tough in
the public’s eye.
As San Francisco Chronicle columnist Jon Carroll writes, “It’s
bureaucrats playing cowboy, talking tough on talk shows and then
retreating to maximum security official buildings.”
The effect of a death penalty for drug lords is not what it seems.
It would only make the problem worse while dragging society The phrase “an eye for an
down into an “eye for an eye” mentality. We need to rise above our eye” refers to an ancient
concept of justice: If a
emotions and search for a true solution to the drug problem.
person destroys another’s
eye, his or her eye should
also be destroyed.

Misuse of the death penalty

Why does the author not believe the death penalty will work in the
war on drugs?
After reading this viewpoint and the previous viewpoint, do you
think the death penalty for drug lords will help win the war on drugs?
Why or why not?

THE WAR ON DRUGS 25

 \

CRITICAL
THINKING c2)
= SKILL Writing an Essay Using Cause and Effect
Arguments

This book focuses on cause and effect arguments. Authors writing

about the war on drugs often use this type of argument to support
their cases. This activity will allow you to practice your skill in
using cause and effect arguments to write an essay.
Here is a sample paragraph using one cause and effect
argument:
According to the Justice Department, over 50 percent
of all high school students have used drugs by the time
they graduate. Those who use drugs, in turn, influence
other teens to use drugs. Peer pressure, then, is the
main reason teenagers use drugs.

A. Use the knowledge you have gained from reading the

viewpoints in this book to write your own essay using cause and
effect arguments. Choose one of the two topics listed below.
Use at least two cause and effect arguments in your essay.
1. The war on drugs should be continued.
2. The war on drugs should not be continued.

B. Compare your essay with those written by other members of the

class. Write down the cause and effect arguments the other
students used in the essays you read and answer the following
questions:

1. Were the students’ cause and effect arguments effective? Be

prepared to explain your answer.
2. Did the students use the same arguments you used? Are some
cause and effect arguments more logical than others? Give examples.

26 JGNIORS
preface: Can Education
Programs Reduce
Teen Drug Abuse?

The pressure on American teenagers to take drugs is enormous. A

Gallup poll taken in August 1989 showed that over four million
youths aged thirteen to seventeen had been offered illegal drugs
within the previous thirty days. And according to the CI.S. Justice
Department, about 57 percent of the nation’s students experiment
with drugs by the time they graduate from high school.
Parents, teachers, and politicians disagree on how best to solve
this problem. A solution is difficult because stopping teenage drug
use involves changing individual choices. One cannot simply pass
a law telling teens to ignore peer pressure to use drugs. An
effective way must be found to communicate the anti-drug
message.
Many educators see hope in using America’s schools to provide
the necessary anti-drug message. They maintain that school
programs have the greatest impact on this country’s youth.
William Bennett, who served as both Education Secretary and
director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, is a firm
believer in the power of teachers to turn students away from drugs.
He writes, “Educators, parents, and other adults in the community
can teach young people the lesson that drug use is wrong.”
Not everyone shares Bennett’s optimism though. Psychologist
Carol Tavris argues that school programs do not work to reduce
teenage drug abuse. Instead, she claims, school programs actually
have the opposite effect. In Tavris’ opinion, school programs make
drugs seem mysterious and forbidden, causing students to want to
try drugs.
As you read the viewpoints, pay attention to why the authors
believe drug education programs will or will not reduce teenage
drug use. There are no margin questions in these two viewpoints.
You must keep track of the causes and effects yourself. The focus
boxes at the end of each viewpoint will ask you about the authors’
arguments.

THE WAR ON DRUGS 27

 7 Education programs can reduce teen
drug abuse

Editor’s Note: The author of the following viewpoint argues that a

lack of information causes teenage drug abuse. Good school-based
education programs, he writes, can tell teens the dangers of drug use
and teach them to reject peer pressure. Watch for the author’s use of
cause and effect arguments and answer the questions in the focus box.

The old saying goes, “What you don’t know can’t hurt you.”
Unfortunately, in the case of teenagers and drugs, that saying is
wrong. What they do not know could kill them. And teens do not
know enough about drugs.
Their ignorance is the root cause of drug use. They experience
the excitement of drug use without knowing the consequences.
The effect is a nation full of students who are ruining their lives for
short-lived thrills. To wipe out the ignorance, drug information
must come from the schools. By educating students, teachers can
help reduce teenage drug abuse. As William DeJong, an analyst at
the Education Development Center, writes, “The principal way to
curb the demand for drugs is education.”

Effects of Drug Education as Reported

by Students in Grades 9 and 11
EFFECTS
Helped me avoid/reduce 36.5%
alcohol consumption
36.9%
Helped me avoid/reduce 33%
other drug use
29%

Helped me resist pressure 34.8%

from others to use/drink
32.1%

Helped me avoid harmful/ 33.8%

dangerous forms of drug use
27.1%

Helped me avoid driving 41.2%

under influence
28%
Helped me know more about 45.9%
drugs/alcohol
37.9%
Had no influence 6.3%
7.7%

Had already decided not 31.2%

to use/drink
32.4%

23 Grade 11

SOURCE: California Attorney General’s Office, 1986

28 JUNIORS
 Educational programs like DARE (Drug Abuse Resistance
Education) and SPECDA (School Program to Educate and Control
Drug Abuse) already have been proven to work. Research on the
DARE program shows that students who take the course are less
likely to take drugs or to accept other students who do. Students
who take the SPECDA program have a better understanding of
drugs’ effects. They also show a greater desire to remain drug-free.
The programs work because they teach students new skills. For
example, they teach students how to make their own decisions.
And they teach students the long-term health effects of drug use.
This combination gives teens the tools to resist drug use. Without
an understanding of what drugs do, teenagers can be easily
swayed by misinformation passed on by friends and older siblings.
With an understanding of drugs’ effects, they can make intelligent
decisions based on good information.
Schools remain the best antidote to bad information. Former
Secretary of Education William Bennett said schools are “uniquely
suited” to solving the teenage drug problem. Schools can be
effective because they swing peer pressure from being for drug use
to being against drug use.
Some say that parents should teach their children about the
effects of drug use. Most admit that this would be ideal. However,
what if the parents themselves do not know about drugs? What if
they fail to teach their children? What if they are drug users
themselves? And what if their children ignore what they say just to
be rebellious?
Well planned anti-drug programs are still the best weapon in the
teenage war on drugs. They fight the ignorance that is slowly
killing America’s youth through drug abuse.

The ignorance of drug use

According to the author, what is the main cause of teenage drug

use? How does he feel the problem can be solved? What effect does
the author believe drug education programs will have? Do you
agree with the author’s conclusions? Why or why not?

THE WAR ON DRUGS 29

 8 Education programs cannot reduce
teen drug abuse

Editor’s Note: In the following viewpoint, the author maintains that

school-based educational programs cannot reduce teenage drug abuse.
Attitudes that affect drug use, the author writes, are established well
before high school. As in the previous viewpoint, carefully note the
cause and effect arguments and answer the questions in the focus box.

America’s youth do not use drugs out of ignorance. They use them
either because they are poor or because they have no hope in the
future. These are the problems that must be addressed to reduce
teen drug abuse. It is not a matter of whether Billy knows the
difference between crack (smokeable cocaine) and crystal meth
(methamphetamine). It is a matter of giving Billy better choices for
the future.
The biggest problem with anti-drug education programs is that
they simply do not work. A 1987 report by the National Institute
for Justice found no evidence that drug education programs alone
led to a decrease in students’ drug use. There is ample evidence to
suggest that such programs actually increase student drug use.
Some argue that the programs arouse students’ curiosity about
drugs. If students are bored or feel helpless, drugs will sound like a
good alternative. This will cause them to try drugs.
Another explanation for the poor showing of education

Steve Artley. Reprinted by permission of Artley Cartoons.

30 JGMIORS
programs is that they often start too late. Psychologists contend
that most attitudes are formed by age eight or nine. Community
health specialist David Robbins writes, “Attitudes are formed very
young. If information isn’t shared and if limits are not set at an
early age, children are going to be more attracted by the lure of
drugs.”
High school anti-drug programs, then, are too little too late.
They cannot possibly hope to change teenagers’ attitudes that
have been set for five or six years. These attitudes are influenced
by family, friends, and the child’s environment. Often, that
environment is not very pleasant. Poverty, crime, divorce, abuse,
and unemployment affect many of the country’s youth.
To reduce drug abuse, parents and teachers must give
teenagers a sense of hope. That can be done through working to
solve the nation’s social and economic problems. Teens need to
believe that the future will be better than today. James Fyfe, a
former New York police officer who is now a professor of criminal
justice, believes that America’s bigger problems must be solved
before drug use can be stopped. He says that anti-drug programs
are “like little Peter [the famed Dutch boy] putting his finger in the
dike. He can’t keep his finger in there forever. Someday you have
to fix the dike.”
By focusing only on drugs, school programs miss the larger
issues. They ignore poverty, discrimination, joblessness, and
crime. Fix those problems, and Billy will stay off drugs. Let the
problems grow, and Billy will stay on drugs, along with his friends.

Teenagers and drug use

What does the author believe is the true cause of teenage drug use?
How does he think the problem can be solved? What does the
author think will happen if the root problems of drug abuse are not
solved? After reading the two viewpoints, which do you think is
more logical? Why?

THE WAR ON DRUGS 31

 CRITICAL A]
THINKING ^
SKILL Examining Cause and Effect in
Editorial Cartoons

Throughout this book, you have seen cartoons that illustrate the
ideas in the viewpoints. Editorial cartoons are an effective and
usually humorous way of presenting an opinion on an issue.
Cartoonists can illustrate the concept of cause and effect.
The cartoon below requires some thought to understand the
point it is making about Congress and the war on drugs. Look at
the cartoon. What effect does the cartoonist think the war on drugs
has had? Who does the cartoonist think is responsible for the
hysteria concerning the war on drugs? What do you think is the
cartoonist’s attitude toward the war on drugs?

© The Milwaukee Journal. Reprinted by permission.

Do you agree with the cartoonist’s point in the editorial

cartoon? Why or why not?
For further practice on your own, try looking at the daily
newspaper for editorial cartoons. Do some of them use the
concept of cause and effect to make their points?

32 JUNIORS
GRAVES PUBLIC LIBRARY
IW'E-NP-^— ■>
 <9
Greenhaven Press, Inc.
Post Office Box 289009
San Diego, CA 92198-0009

Those who do not know their opponent’s arguments do not con■□W-lrymstand their own.