This segment will be exploring how other criminological theories inform our understanding on the drug and crime debate. Labelling through discourse and rational choice offer substantive contributions against the war on drugs. The concept of drugs use links closely to the study of labelling theorist Howard Becker (1963).Through research and policy implications our knowledge of drugs is constructed through expertise knowledge on who ‘uses drugs’ and ‘how drugs are used’ and these are established through discourses such as punishment for the labelled users. Instead of looking at why particular social groups get involved in crime, labelling theorist seek to see why individuals may accept the label as ‘deviant’; as no act is inherently criminal itself (Glen, R et al, 2015). Foucault refers to the term discourse as an explanation of power relationships expressed through society (Grace,W and Mchoul,A.W.1995:35). His concept of ‘power and knowledge’ uses agents such as the media as the ‘powerful’ agency that inform, glamorize or stigmatise ‘the drug users’ who are punished through the criminal justice system and are in more cases likely to be incarcerated who are normally black- African American working class males(Glen,R et al, 2015).
This is an example of how power can be applied through the media to inform society with information of what the illegal drugs user looks like. However these bad labels may led to further deviance and also in some cases people are addicted to drugs or it might be a medical problem.
It is also key to consider the explanation choice theorist offer on the debate on drugs .It is contended that it is in the right of individuals to decide what substances they put into their body, legal or illegal drugs, this is not something that should not be decided by the state. To preface this argument rational choice theorist offer an explanation that individuals have free will. Cornish and Clarke (1987) proposed their theory based on the assumptions that “Criminals act to gain the greatest pleasure through crime” (Gaines, L.K and Kremling, J.2013:83). This relates to the idea of freedom in the neo-liberal state. This idea is exercised through the individuals’ freedom of right and responsibility. Thus people who take drugs have the freedom to indulge in drugs as much as they desire. Other expert knowledge constructed through discourse include operation through public health. Harm minimisation and official discourse encourages users to ‘harm safely ‘.For example strategies for drug misuser’s attendance to support drug programmes are seen as more beneficial to reduce the abuse of drugs. The harm minimisation approach aims to address licit/ illicit drugs and alcohol issues by reducing the harmful consequences it has on the individual’s welfare, public health and society. This idea constructs the recreational user who makes rational, free choice. Per contra dependant drug users are constructed as sick, irresponsible, bad decision makers who lack reasoning skills.
However this notion can be countered that choice theory only makes an assumption that individual have ‘free will’. The paradoxical argument of how safe
Also another idea that argues against the war on drugs is the toleration of other dangerous drugs, such as alcohol and tobacco as well as some prescription and over the counter substances suggests a sense of hypocrisy. For example tobacco is a lot more harmful to the body than drugs such a marijuana, tobacco also increase the chances on cancer.
The War on Drugs 