Intro -- Contents -- Introduction: Drug Policy with a New Focus -- 1. Toward a Balanced Drug-Prevention Strategy: A Conceptual Map -- 2. Drug Users and Drug Dealers -- 3. Is Addiction a Chronic, Relapsing Disease? -- 4. Is Drug Addiction a Brain Disease? -- 5. If Addiction Is Involuntary, How Can Punishment Help? -- 6. Controlling Drug Use and Crime with Testing, Sanctions, and Treatment -- 7. Limits on the Role of Testing and Sanctions -- 8. How Should Low-Level Drug Dealers Be Punished? -- 9. Reflections on Drug Policy and Social Policy -- Postscript -- Contributors.
Zugriffsoptionen:
Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
Long-established principles of federalism have limited federal action against violent crime. An important question is whether those principles ought now to be relaxed. We distinguish two roles for the federal government: direct operations and financial assistance. Regarding direct operations, the natural division of labor among federal, state, and local enforcement agencies should be maintained, and federal enforcement agencies should be diverted to the fight against street crime only on an emergency, backup basis and only while the emergency exists. Regarding financial assistance, traditional principles of federalism that favor local decisions over national decisions should apply unless some important federal interest—such as the protection of individual rights; the encouragement of innovation and learning; or the protection of one state against the actions of others—is engaged. If such an interest is engaged, that interest ought to be reflected in federal restrictions on how the money can be used. When we apply these principles to recent federal legislation, we conclude that the nation's interest in experimenting with the potential of community policing justifies a federal categorical grant program, while the effort to encourage states to stiffen their sentencing requirements does not.
With increasing public concern over violent crime & drug abuse, the federal government, in violation of long-standing principles of federalism, has attempted to play a larger role in crime prevention at the local level. A greater federal presence in shaping local crime prevention efforts is not advisable. Two roles for the federal government are outlined: direct operations & financial assistance. Regarding direct operations, the natural division of labor among federal, state, & local enforcement should be maintained, & use of federal law enforcement agencies & personnel should be reserved for emergencies only. Regarding financial assistance, localities should wield decision-making power over finances unless federal interests, eg, protection of individual rights, are directly involved. Federal financing of community policing & state efforts to stiffen sentencing requirements are discussed. Adapted from the source document.
Frontmatter -- Contents -- Introduction: Drug Policy with a New Focus -- 1 Toward a Balanced Drug-Prevention Strategy: A Conceptual Map -- 2 Drug Users and Drug Dealers -- 3 Is Addiction a Chronic, Relapsing Disease? -- 4 Is Drug Addiction a Brain Disease? -- 5 If Addiction Is Involuntary, How Can Punishment Help? -- 6 Controlling Drug Use and Crime with Testing, Sanctions, and Treatment -- 7 Limits on the Role of Testing and Sanctions -- 8 How Should Low-Level Drug Dealers Be Punished? -- 9 Reflections on Drug Policy and Social Policy -- Postscript -- Contributors
Zugriffsoptionen:
Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
