In the article The Lockdown, one main focus is how the criminal justice system

 

has put so much stress on the war on drugs that it has given law enforcement facilitation

 

to violate the Fourth Amendment. There have also been exceptions that revolve around

 

this amendment for the sake of the war on drugs. The Fourth Amendment basically states

 

that people have the right for protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. As

 

the war came about, the Supreme Court has made “drug exceptions”. For example, in

 

California v. Acevedo (1991), searches were being made without warrants or defective

 

warrants and the court stood by it and supported it. Another example of the violation of

 

this amendment was in the case of Terry v. Ohio (1968). This case influenced the start of

 

the stop and frisk rule because the Supreme Court stated that if a police officer believes a

 

person is involved in some kind of suspicious, dangerous criminal activity, the officer is

 

entitled for the “protection of himself and others in the area” to conduct a search for

 

“weapons that might be used to harm” others. This just gave them more power for

 

searches as long as they gave “consent”. The Supreme Court has even given law

 

enforcement the ability to conduct “consent searches”, so all they have to do is ask the

 

person if they could talk to them and if they could put their hands up for a search. Most

 

people would comply and hardly ever say no, so this is how police says they “ask” for

 

consent. Police has even taken it a step further by using “pretext stops” in order to hunt

 

for drugs. Pretextual stops are basically stops that the police conducts to any motorist (in

 

search of drugs) and use a minor traffic violation as an excuse to search their vehicle. If a

 

person refuses to be searched, they could be put in jail, not for the minor traffic violation,

but for the fine or, they could even bring out the drug sniffing canines to smell their

 

vehicle because according to the Supreme Court, drug sniffing canines are not considered

 

as an actual “search”, therefore it is not a violation the Fourth Amendment. It is clear

 

that the “exceptions” being made for the Fourth Amendment have a strong tie to the war

 

on drugs. As police have less restrictions, it means they could easily arrest people and

 

accuse anyone of a drug crime.

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2012/05/02/teen-drug-abuse-becoming-epidemic-must-be-addressed.htm

http://www.foxnews.com

http://press.foxnews.com/corporate-info/

http://press.foxnews.com

One reason why Fox News Channel can be trusted is because, Fox News Channel (FNC) was operating since October 7, 1996, the website himself provides information about the site himself and it provide online help called “Online Help Center” for comments, suggestions and concerns.Fox News Channel is well known by his 24 hour news service dedicated to deliver breaking news as well as political and business news. Fox News Channel has been the most watched news channel in the country for more than 14 years and according to a Suffolk University (Boston), FNC is the most trusted television news source in the country. Owned by 21st Century Fox (the world’s premier portfolio of cable, film, pay tv and satellite assets spanning six continents across the globe), it is available in more than 90 million homes and dominates the cable news landscape. Another Reason why we should trust FNC is because, employees are journalist professional, professor and and those who obtain their doctorate. Employer such as, Arthur Adam Housley, Sean Hannity, Ainsley Earhardt, Alan Colmes… and Dr Manny Alvarez who is (the author of the topic “teen drug abuse becoming an epidemic, must be addressed”) and who is a member of numerous professional societies, including the society of prenatal care, American Institute of Ultrasound and medicine and the American Society for blood and Marrow transplantation.

 

 

In Batman’s Bad Call, excerpted from “Chasing the Scream” by Johann Hari, he explains how people could do unusual things and how they struggle when they’re lonely, how addiction is not chemical base but environmental base. One example of this is when he says what Bruce noticed in the rat experiment, “What they discovered was startling. It turned out that the rats in isolated cages used up to 25 milligrams of morphine a day…rats in the happy cages used hardly any morphine at all…” according to Bruce’s experiment being along triggers the need of something/someone, which is why they become addicts, like the lonely rat consumed the 25 milligrams of morphine. Another example is when Bruce compared the experiment done with the soldiers from the Vietnam war with the rat experiment, “…some 20 percent of U.S. soldiers had become addicted to heroin there…The war ended. The addicts came home…95 percent of them, within a year, simply stopped” this shows us that their loneliness during war lead them to consume heroin, they felt empty and in need of something to fill that space up, that’s why when they got home to their families they didn’t feel the need to use drugs anymore. The drugs gave them some sort of comfort and calmer feeling. He also talked about drinking coffee which is a habit and it’s not a chemical hook that you will have the need to consumer it everyday at all times. People with bad and lonely childhood tend to grow up with addiction.

 

 

 

in the article “lockdown” the author michelle alexander tries to show to the readers how the criminal justice system has “few legal rules that meaningfully constrain the police in the war on drugs” and how “it has made the roundup of millions of americans for nonviolent drug offenses relatively easy”. she proves this to the reader by using the change in the fourth amendment and how “the supreme court has seized every opportunity to facilitate the drug war, primarily by eviscerating fourth amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures by the police”. she also states that “the police could not stop and search someone without a warrant unless there was probable cause to believe that the individual was engaged in criminal activity. that was basic fourth amendment principle.” but in Terry vs. Ohio, the supreme court modified their understanding, by ruling that if and when a police officer observes unusual conduct by someone the officer is entitled for the protection of himself and others in the area to conduct a limited search to discover weapons that might be used against the officer. known as the stop-and-frisk rule. this is an important part of her argument because now the reader can see that the police no longer have to have any reason to search someone. alexander argues this by using the case Florida vs. Bostick where a “Random” search occurred and lead to Terrance Bostick’s arrest. other courts argued that this is how we start racial and ethnic discrimination. so it’s no surprise when he percentage of drug arrests that result in prison sentences have quadrupled proving Alexander’s point. police with no constraint will lead to more racial and ethnic discrimination which will lead to more searches arrests.

In Chasing the Scream, Johann Hari blames people’s addiction to drugs on their environment. He uses an experiment conducted by Bruce Alexander using drugs and rats to explain why addiction is influenced by their habitat. In this experiment, rats that were in an empty cage took more drugs than rats that were in a cage filled with toys, activities, and friends, which took less drugs. Hari uses this experiment to prove that the lonely rats had no choice but to become addicted to these drugs. He argues that the rats that were in a happy environment chose to stay away from the drugs and spend their time doing other things. Johann Hari also uses studies done on humans to link drug use to people’s surroundings. According to studies done on soldiers in the Vietnam War, about twenty percent of them had become addicted to heroine while being deployed. The same study later showed that 95% of the soldiers that were addicted, stopped using the drug when they returned home. This led Johann Hari to further believe that these people were simply addicted to drugs not because of a chemical issue, but because their environment gave them no other choice. Bruce Alexander’s rat experiment and the study on the soldiers during Vietnam War both showed results of addiction to drug forming because of the subject’s surroundings. These conclusions are the reason as to why Hari argues that drug abuse isn’t chemically induced. Through these examples and more, he has proven to us that a person’s environment plays a role in how they can either become victims of drug abuse or completely avoid it.

In Chasing the scream, author Johann Hari uses the idea of addiction as a key focus in one of his chapters. The impression that addiction has not only a physical dependency but also a mental dependency is explored and also, how addiction can be influenced by a person’s environment.

 

For instance, a study was done where rats were placed in an empty cage and given two bottles of water, one with just water and the other with morphine. The rats were left there over a period of time and later researchers would check which bottle the rats drunk from the most. After conducting the first experiment it was concluded that the rats were addicted because of the chemical dependency. However, Bruce the main character argues that because the rats were placed in an empty cage they had nothing better to do but drink the morphine water. He was able to prove this theory with a follow up experiment identical to the first one, but making two sets of cages. One empty and one with items that rats can enjoy, such as a wheel and fun colors and other rats. The rats were all given morphine water, then after the same time elapsed, researchers noticed that the rats in the more interactive cage didn’t continue drinking any morphine water, while the empty cage had the same results as the first experiment. This gave room for the assumption that addiction can be continued by what someone is surrounded by.

 

Brue describes addiction, other than looking at the chemical dependency, as a “psychological state of feeling you need the drug to give you the sensation of feeling calmer, … or what ever it does for you.” This statement was the follow up response after a number of evidence were described. After reading the different proofs I cannot help but agree with Bruce. It seems that addiction is mainly psychological, with every case having a deeper situation behind. These findings are important to understand and further investigate because this could be a potential break through needed to lower the number of addicts in existence.

In chapter 13 of the excerpt Chasing the Dream, the author begins talking about an experiment he had seen being conducted on rats which to him at first seemed “intriguing” but he is able to experience on his own later on. Johann tests out a few theories he has on the concept of addiction and what may be the cause of it. One of the many examples he uses is a “rat park” in which he creates two different environment for two sets of rats, one filled with everything a rat could dream of and the other environment was just a lonesome rat. through this experiment he was able to determine that the environment of a person plays a huge part on their addiction because the person filled with wheels and other rats barely touched the morphine yet the rat which was by itself consumed a lot of the morphine. He also tested the effect of addiction on the soldiers from Vietnam which ended up having a completely different outcome then expected. Through these experiments he was able to see that many of those who were weak were a result of a bad childhood. Having a bad childhood prevents people from being able to form a healthy relationship with other people hence being prone to a life of loneliness and being able to get addicted faster/ easier. Johann says that if the rats and soldiers could not get out of this world physically they would get out mentally which is why they resulted to drugs, to get away from the pain. He also addresses a very important point when he says the problem is not the people but the culture, there needs to be ways to make a “social recovery”.

Can You Get Over an Addiction? by Maia Szalavitz argues that addiction is shouldn’t be viewed as a moral problem or a progressive disease. Maia (2016) argues that addiction is “a learning disorder, a difference in the wiring of the brain that affects the way we process information about motivation, reward and punishment.” Which shows that addiction is not solely based on a chemical “hijack” of the brain rather than a difference in brain wiring. Maria explain that addiction can cause the brain to confuse essential priorities. For example “addiction occurs when these brain systems are focused on the wrong objects: a drug or self-destructive behavior like excessive gambling instead of a new sexual partner or a baby.” In Maria’s case, heroin provided a sense of relief, comfort and love that seemed essential by her brain rather than focusing on engaging in a relationship. Maria notes that understanding addiction can lead to a higher recovery and lead to a more profound treatment.

Maria Szalavitz argues that empathetic treatments can lead to higher recovery from addiction. Maria (2016) argue that” If addiction is like misguided love, then compassion is a far better approach than punishment” which allows the drug user to feel accepter and becomes able to overcome addiction and cop. Maria explains that twelve step programs tend to success with “only a minority of addicted people.” for example “ most treatment available in rehab facilities involves instruction in prayer, surrender to a higher power, confession and restitution prescribed by the steps…,people with other learning disorders aren’t pushed to apologize for their past behavior, nor are those affected by schizophrenia or depression.” hence empathy can provide a sense of understanding as in dealing with a “broken heart” rather than a chemical hijack.

The epidemic outbreak of opioid abuse rises treacherously in America. This epidemic is impartially claiming and destroying countless lives in its path. Sadly, children are being counted in this ordeal, many have become innocent victims of this epidemic outbreak. in an article by the editorial board of The New York Times, this concern was highlighted,  bringing to the forefront, the horrific, but real issues of this epidemic. The New York Times is a reputable source, founded since September 18th, 1851,ranks 39th in the world circulation and are currently credible publishers.

On January 16th  2017, The New York Times published an article, titled: Young Victims Of The Opioid Epidemic. This article states that opioid overdoses have claimed the lives of more than 300,000 individuals. That claim just in  the last fifteen years. Another jaw-dropping revelation in this article shows that this number includes 33,000 lives claimed by this epidemic in 2015 alone. The New York Times refers to a case in Pennsylvania, where a couple dies as a result of overdose, survived by their baby, who perished a few days later due to starvation.

The rise in the need for foster care according to The New York Times, are one of the attributes of this outbreak. They are claiming that there has been a significant rise in three years of the amount of children in foster care. The overdose of opioids are disabling parents, mentally, physically, emotionally and even terminating their lives. Therefore the children who are left behind are rescued by welfare officials or relatives, most children are placed in foster care. The problem is not being addressed properly by the state, federal or local officials as argued by the New York Times. Years of budget cutbacks constituted  to a loss of caseworkers. This detrimental domino effect creates a challenge to produce positive results in assisting the children that are affected by this epidemic crisis.

The abuse of opioids ( powerful prescription drugs ), has become undeniably one of our greatest concerns on the war on drugs. This epidemic has been proven by statistics, that children have become one of its prime victims. There isn’t a wide range of solution to this problem, due largely to the lack of financial stability in America. Children continue to suffer a plight caused by the very ones who should guard them ( their parents). There has to be a better solution, preferably, cutting at the root, so to speak, of the problem (the need for opioids). Are opioids the only avenue to solving the problem of pain?  could there be another way?

There are direct and indirect ways that this epidemic of opioid abuse affect children.  The New York times has expounded on some of the widespread topics.  Such as  are evident to the brutal nature of this epidemic:  parentless children, the lack of proper shelter, including foster care, insufficient governmental output or input, insufficient funding. All these factors are partial participants in the ongoing escalation of the needless suffering children experience from this epidemic. My personal belief is that if greater and more effective solutions are not reached sooner, this epidemic of opioid abuse will rollover to the next generation.  Our children are the future, we have to invest now to save the future (our children).