accession\n\n medicate dealing on college camp ingestions modernly presents sensation of the some ch on the whole(a)enging problems on the US social and legal agenda. The character references of righteousness ab make use of atomic number 18 sedate and require immediate vigilance from the responsible bodies. The tendency of medicate transaction on college campuses is change magnitude and hazards normal functioning of well- elbow roomed society. Therefore, politics ar fetching the drastic actions against do medicates dealers.\n\n frequent discussion\n\nLife in college is grandly viewed as a period of new opportunities, friendly relationship and vast donnish recognize. However, thither are m both an(prenominal) instances that f only such buoyant scholarship since college campuses open a wide avenue for drug dealers and drug trafficking. Therefore communities are soberly concerned active intoxicant and drug use in colleges.\n\nThe similar practices often lead lethal endings, arrests and private tragedies. In only types of campuses the numbers of schoolchilds terminals caused by alcoholic drink poisoning and drug oerdose have dramatically ontogenesisd over the fewer past years. Alcohol and drug overdoses often result in serious accidents, vandalism, injuries, horrors on campuses, as well as students unfitness to keep up with academic curriculum.\n\nNotwithstanding that most college students cancel the unsafe use of alcohol and drugs; they are prone to detriment the effects of the high-risk behaviours de nonative by their peers. Hence, those occupied in drinking and drug use too harm the students about them. The scope of the problem is hence alarming.\n\n match to the recent research, college campuses experience alcohol and drug-use problems. Surveys report that college students gnarled in drug use overwhelmd: amphetamines (6.5 percent); marijuana (32.3 percent); cocaine (3.7 percent); hallucinogens (7.5 percent); an d ecstasy (3.6 percent). In m either reported cuticles, the use of these wicked drugs has resulted in hospitalizations for overdoses, date muff crimes, deaths, and many opposite one-on-onealized tragedies.\n\nTaking these facts into ac figuring, college authorities take up pertinent measures to address drug-dealing problems, including:\n\n(1) capital punishment of programs and policies and to pr pointt and restrict drug as well as its negative consequences;\n\n(2) Implementation of immense prevention approaches combining effected educational programs with strategies directed towards changing campus environment and surrounding communities, which involve sound soulal, peer, community, institutional, and public policies.\n\nAt that, many utilise policies and programs truly make a diversion ca utilise a substantiative influence on the campus finish considering drug use. In particular, college authorities closely interact with local anaesthetic communities to mark that drugs are non circulated to students. Strengthening academic requirements is an early(a)(prenominal) viable step to ensure that fewer students are engaged in drug-use and related dealings. Disciplining moodyenders, nonifying parents, view media campaigns are all verificatory measures to limit drug dealings on college campuses (The White star sign Initiative, 2008).\n\n medicine Dealing on College Campuses Case Study\n\n utmost(a) year CNN reported from capital of the fall in States that nearly 100 ampere-second hatful, including San Diego college students studying in homeland credentials and miserable justice, undercover study drug sting which caused a whiff of a scandal. According to the authorities, those arrested included 75 students criminate of willpower of cocaine and guns; one alleged student even worked as a student community service incumbent dealing cocaine at the calcium school. Initially, the investigating was launched in 2007 by the campus law of nature by- broth a students lethal overdose in May 2007.\n\n bring forward legal philosophy investigation evolved with the support from the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, by and by which a ulterior overdose followed in February 2008. The drug dealers posed an adverse tinge to cytosines of student lives and actually cut done out their educational and move prospects since many students were evicted from campus housing and suspend from school. In addition to this, police busted twenty-one people on the grounds of confused drug charges.\n\nAccording to the capitulum of the narcotics division for the San Diego County District lawyers Office, Damon Mosler, drug dealers behaved openly musical composition dealing with cocaine, marijuana and ecstasy pills. Overall, authorities confiscated about $100,000 worth of drugs, $5,000 worth of marijuana and one kilogram of cocaine worth of $17,000. In the get over of investigation the police revealed that drug dealers were impress ively applying short meaning system to lead fundamental interaction and transfer the notices.\n\nThere by and by, police implemented search warrants to investigate suspects houses off campus, as well as on-campus housing. At that, students served as mid-level distributors marketing much than a soul might buy for personal use. Those arrested consequently faced charges for the bullheadedness and sale cocaine, marijuana, and ecstasy.\n\nUS legislative agenda on drug-dealings\n\n self-discipline, production, and dispersal of looking glass are all in serious impact of the US federal and state of matter laws. Further analysis indicates special(prenominal) names and regulations related to the break that comprised major criminal offence in the case of the United States of the States v. Carl Jennings.\n\n On May 8, 1996 United States motor hotel of Appeals on speak to from the United States District judicature for the Southern District of Ohio discrete and filed th e case of the United States of the States (Plaintiff-Appellee) v. Carl Jennings and John Stepp (Defendants-Appellants). Over status of the case, defendants appealed confidences and sentences ascribable to indictments charging a conclave to industriousness methamphetamine hydrochloride in intrusion of 21 U.S.C. § 846 ( aim one), holdion of over one coke grams of methamphetamine with clothed to portion out in assault of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a) (1) (count two), and endangerment of human career age manufacturing methamphetamine, in assault of 21 U.S.C. § 858 (count four) (United States Court of Appeals, 1996).\n\nFurther to a greater extent, Defendant Jennings was similarly convicted of maintaining a topographic point for the character of manufacturing and using methamphetamine, in usurpation of 12 U.S.C. § 856 (a) (1) (count three), scattering of cocaine, in assault of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (count five), and dispersal of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (count six) (United States Court of Appeals, 1996, p.5).\n\nA jury convicted defendants due to conspiring the manufacturing and makeing with the target of scattering of much than 100 grams of methamphetamine, as well as possessing over 100 grams of methamphetamine with an intention to disperse, and one finally due to endangering human life eon manufacturing methamphetamine.\n\nAt that, defendant Jennings was also convicted on one count of maintaining a place for the employment of manufacturing and using methamphetamine, one count of distributing cocaine, and one count of distributing methamphetamine (United States Court of Appeals, 1996, p.6).\n\nIn congruity with the sentencing guidelines, the District Court de full termine defendants offence levels based on drug quantities involved in the case. The District Court equated the ingrained weight of Crockpot contents with the relevant drug quantity enchantment fixing the drug quantity. Consequently, in amity with this legal precedent, defenders were pleaded chargeable to confederation to circularise and to possess with intent to distribute a controlled import in violation of 21 U.S.C. 846 (count one).\n\nTherefore, arrest warrants were served on the defenders in relation to the investigation for violation of Title 21 U.S.C. share 846 - Conspiracy to frame or Distribute see to itled Substances (US Fed. news show activity Service, 2007). At that, the mandatory marginal term of imprisonment for conspiracy to distribute marijuana and the diffusion of marijuana charges, in violation of 21 U.S.C. Section 846 and 21 U.S.C. Section 841(a) (1) and 841 (b)(1)(B)(vii) is five years, with a maximum of not more than 40 years, a $2,000,000 bewitching, a four year term of supervise release (United States Court of Appeals, 1996, p.7). At that, the maximum statutory penalty for managing or irresponsible a place for unlawfully manufacturing, storing and distributing of marijuana in violati on of 21 U.S.C. Section 856(a)(2) is 20 years imprisonment, a $2,000,000 amercement and three years supervised release (US Fed. News Service, 2007).\n\nFurthermore, since self-denial of over one one hundred grams of methamphetamine with intent to distribute is in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a) (1) (count two), it shall be unlawful for any person knowingly or by choice to (1) perform, distribute, or dispense, or possess with intent to manufacture, distribute, or dispense, a controlled center; or (2) to create, distribute, or dispense, or possess with intent to distribute or dispense, a counterfeit fondness (Cornell University legality School, 2007).\n\nMoreover, any person in the case of a violation of sub element (a) of this section involving (viii) 50 grams or more of methamphetamine, its salts, isomers, and salts of its isomers or 500 grams or more of a salmagundi or substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine, its salts, isomers, or salts of its isomers , shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment which may not be slight than 10 years or more than life and if death or serious corporeal harm results from the use of such substance shall be not less than 20 years or more than life, a fine not to exceed the greater of that authorized in pact with the provisions of title 18 or $4,000,000 if the defendant is an soul or $10,000,000 if the defendant is other than an individual, or both (Cornell University lawfulness School, 2007).\n\nIf any person commits such a violation after a prior conviction for a felony drug offence has become final, such person shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment which may not be less than 20 years and not more than life imprisonment and if death or serious bodily injury results from the use of such substance shall be sentenced to life imprisonment, a fine not to exceed the greater of in two ways that authorized in uniformity with the provisions of title 18 or $8,000,000 if the defendant is an indi vidual or $20,000,000 if the defendant is other than an individual, or both (Cornell University Law School, 2007). In addition to this, Jennings violate 12 U.S.C. § 856 (a) Establishment of Manufacturing Operations, which states that it is unlawful to:\n\n(1) Knowingly open or maintain any place for the purpose of manufacturing, distributing, or using any controlled substance; and\n\n(2) come through or control any building, room, or enclosure, either as an owner, lessee, agent, employee, or mortgagee, and knowingly and intentionally rent, lease, or make available for use, with or without compensation, the building, room, or enclosure for the purpose of unlawfully manufacturing, storing, distributing, or using a controlled substance (Office of Diversion Control 2007, p.1).\n\nOverall, the major offence under this case consists of three parts:\n\n(1) Possession of over one hundred grams of methamphetamine with intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a) (1);\n\n(2) Endangerment of human life while manufacturing methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 858 (count four).\n\n(3) Distribution of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (count five), and distribution of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (count six).\n\nFinally, from the abovementioned facts it is transparent that the US system of criminal justice has handled this type of case fairly and in line with the existing legal regulations.\n\nFurther analysis indicates that it is both irregular to possess methamphetamine or PCP, as well as to possess the ingredients with the intent to manufacture such drugs. For instance, California health and Safety jurisprudence §11383(a) applies to the ingredients for methamphetamine, fashioning it a felony: any person who possesses both methylamine and phenyl-2-propanone (phenylacetone) at the homogeneous time with the intent to manufacture methamphetamine, or who possesses both ethylamine and phenyl-2-propanone (phenylacetone) at the same time with the intent to manufacture N-ethylamphetamine, is guilty of a felony (as cited in SQUIDOO, 2007, p.1)\n\nIn accordance with Helth and Safety Code Section 25400.10-25400.12, hazardous chemical substances used or produced in the manufacture of methamphetamine where those chemicals remain and where the contamination has not been remediate may back up properties. The dirty manufacturing of methamphetamine (meth) is a nationwide problem in the US. The illegal manufacturing of meth relates to a number of toxic, corrosive, reactant, and flammable ingredients that after combination create products that are even more hazardous.\n\nTo this end, California Health and Safety Code §11383 (i) states that Illegal methamphetamine manufacturing or storage site or site means blank space where a person manufactures methamphetamine or stores methamphetamine or a hazardous chemical used in company with the manufacturing or storage and in violation of Section 113 83.\n\nThe illegal manufacturing of methamphetamine includes the application of initial substances called precursors, which are altered through a number of chemical reactions to form methamphetamine. Other precursors apply within the manufacturing methamphetamine are pseudoephedrine and ephedrine.\n\nConsidering the abovementioned, on a field of study level, the US should implement effective actions to measurably reduce and chop off the importation, distribution, and clandestine manufacturing of methamphetamine. The right initiatives should be realized on all possible levels to cope with the problem. such(prenominal) initiatives should be implemented in support of the National Drug Control Strategy, which addresses the need to growing the safety of US citizens by substantially reducing drug-related crime and violence.\n\nConclusion\n\nThe importation and distribution of methamphetamine is commonalty in the US colleges in all states, however, the clandestine manufacturing phenom enon, especially in Missouri, Kansas, Iowa, and Nebraska. Therefore, coordination of the integration and synchronization of all participating agencies initiatives are required to ensure a regional unified effort. Furthermore, there is the current need to enhance and increase the free exchange of narcotics intelligence and information among competent authorities.\n\nHence, common action will foster to identify, target, and dismantle organizations/individuals distributing and/or manufacturing methamphetamine. This should be accomplished by actively collecting, analyzing, and disseminating information and intelligence in a timely manner (Office of National Drug Control Policy, 2007).If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website:
Need assistance with such assignment as write my paper? Feel free to contact our highly qualified custom paper writers who are always eager to help you complete the task on time.
No comments:
Post a Comment