Atkinson, Korri. “States spend $3.6 b8illion on racially biased marijuana arrests.” Proquest.com. New York Amsterdam News, 20 June 2013. Web. 18 July, 2015
Atkinson Khorri a journalist and author for the New York Amsterdam Newspaper, writes on a report from the American Civil Liberties Union named “The War on Marijuana in Black and White” highlighting the U.S. biases arrests on marijuana. Khorri juxtaposes the enormous amount of arrests of African Americans compared to those of whites. He also indicates that there is a huge amount of money being spent to regulate marijuana laws and for incarcerating convicts when the U.S could be making profit from marijuana if it was to be legalized. Khorri emphasizes with the ACUL call for marijuana legalization to eliminate racial biases.
Based on the report between 2001 and 2010 there were more than seven million arrests for marijuana possession in the U.S. with more than 800,000 arrests in 2010 alone. According to the director of ACLU Criminal Law Report Project, state and local governments have aggressively enforced the marijuana law selectively against black people and communities. The report demonstrates that Iowa has the greatest racial disparity arrest, although African Americans make up only 3.1 percent of the population, black Iowans are 8.3 times more likely to be arrested. For this reason the ACLU believes that police officers are being bias towards the whites and unfairly arresting more blacks than whites when it is obvious that African Americans don’t make up most of the population. To back up his argument Atkinson uses the analyses from the New York Civil Liberties Union, in which according to the analyses “Brooklyn and Manhattan have the highest ratio disparities in arrests in New York State, where Black New Yorkers are nine times more likely to be arrested.” As pointed out by the NY CLU, blacks are being handled unfairly compared to the whites, whatever happened to equality?
The author describes the useless amount of money being wasted on marijuana laws when legalizing marijuana can “…Save millions of dollars that are being used to enforce marijuana laws.” He indicates New York has spent more than $600 million enforcing marijuana with Black New Yorkers 4.5 times most likely to be arrested. The report suggest a regulation and a tax on marijuana to eradicate the unfair, specifically on racially targeted enforcement laws. In other words, the Union wants legalize marijuana to make profit and not waste millions of dollars on enforcing laws. Not only will it remove the racial bias that is present all over the U.S. including in large and small counties, cities, and rural areas and in high and low income communities, but it will help the economy grow. To support their argument the ACLU concludes that states will spend $200 billion dollars enforcing laws over the next six years if bans on marijuana continue.
The information obtained by the author can be useful to those supporting the legalization of marijuana. According to a survey 52 percent of Americans support the legalization while 45 percent oppose it. The data obtained by the ACLU is useful to demonstrate the controversies linked with marijuana such as crime and racism.
This article is very interesting with the fact that it is a constant reminder of how people treat other in this nation. There should be equality for everybody on the same level. I feel bad that people are being targeted for their skin color. Although I agree that legalizing marijuana may have come economic upsides there is no guaranteed that some people will still attempt to target African Americans for some other stuff.
I found this really interesting because my controversy essay discussed the racial disparity within the criminal justice system in regards to arrests. I agree with Juan that equality should be on the same level. It’s hard to believe that blacks are still the target, but it’s not unique.
This is the type of debate that lingers in the heads of individuals, people that are affected by this behavior and those that are not. However, for some reason it isn’t significantly discussed. I’m interested in hearing what critics would have to say in response to debaters that acknowledge this pattern. I would love to read your final paper.