Compare and contrast - Essay Example

On the other hand, Brown counteracts Moskos argument and in turn revokes the legalization of drugs in the U.S indicating that this would lead to more serious consequences as drugs will become accessible to more potential drug addicts including infants (455). Comparison and Contrast Both articles have a strong perception on the reason for drug regulation. Moreover, they concede the need of decreasing the use of illegal drugs because of the associate consequences. Additionally, the both recognize that enforcement will not solely solve the mystery of illegal drug use.

However, their approach on drug regulation differs considerably. Moskos’ article advocates for drug legalization arguing that it is impossible to regulate a prohibited drug. Consequently, the author adopts the legalization of illegal drugs such as marijuana, crack heroin, and crystal meth as a measure of regulating them through high taxes, which will regulate the users because of the high prices as opposed to law enforcement regulation indicating, “Law enforcement can’t reduce supply and demand” (452). . The two articles present diversified view on the main cause of illegal drug use, failure of illegal drugs regulation, and the effect it has on the society.

Moskos article (too dangerous not to regulate) substantially portrays that drug prohibition has largely contributed to the use of illegal drugs as well as promoting illegal drug trade. The author further indicates that the failure to regulate the use of illegal in most governments has been because of prohibition making it impossible for the state to regulate the circulation of the drugs. Moskos asserts crime, HIV spread, and violence as major consequences of prohibition. Contrastingly, Brown revokes prohibition of illegal drugs as the main cause of widespread of illegal drug abuse.

Brown contradicts Moskos argument by indicating that people do not use drugs because they are illegal thus not possible to overlook the use of law enforcement and interdiction in drug regulation. The author further explores the adverse effects of drug abuse indication that it does not only affect the individuals using, but also closely related members of the family and friends as opposed to Moskos effects seen to be on a personal perspective. Both articles have use examples to support their arguments.

However, the examples present contradicting results. Moskos indicates that the legalization of marijuana in Netherland that promoted the number of drug addicts. Furthermore, Moskos use the example of the measure that tried in vain to prohibit alcohol between 1920 and 1933, which facilitated the increase in crime that resulted to the end alcohol prohibition. On the other hand, Brown uses the example of the Dutch