Neighborhoods With Drug Patrol Units Are Less Likely To Have Drug Sales Than Neighborhoods Without Drug Patrol Units

Introduction

            Major disquiets have invariably been raised over the effects of drugs on the aggressive traits, cognitive behavior and psychological arousal of individuals using them. Numerous arguments have inclined towards the suggestion that neighborhoods with drugs have detrimental consequences on the individuals involved. Drugs in general have the capacity to enhance aggressive tendencies and hence it is plausible to indicate that drugs therefore lead to negative aggressive predispositions.  This essay interrogates the imports of studies carried out in this area and seeks to accentuate the perils presented to society by violent dealers in the light that activities inculcate violent behaviors on the users. This work evaluates further the effect of using drugsin a bid to sustain the postulate that indeed drugs inculcate violent behaviors on the users. To effectively address the gist of this work, drug users have, in this paper, been considered as teaching tools as far as human behavior is concerned.

Thesis Statement

            Considerably popular for minors and adults alike, drug dealers exposes society to significant jeopardies by proving a bad influence in terms of psychological and cognitive behavior changes of the users, more ominously is the risk of such users translating such violent ferociousness into neighborhood threats. The effects of apparently speedily changing auditory as well as visual stimuli related to producing automatic adjusting responses makes the drug users instrumental as teaching tools. In this regard therefore violent drug dealers have the capacity to enhance stimuli that are so vivid making them easy to learn and commit them to memory.

Read also Root Causes of Specific Crimes that Occurs in Low-Income Neighborhoods

Argument 1: Drug Exposure Precipitates into Long-Term Deleterious Aggressive Behavior

            Evidence from scientific research have indicated that use of drugs do have an incremental and long term influence on the individuals who use them (Chalk, 2012). It has been noted that a person using drugs shows an increment in aggressive behavior as well as antagonistic expectations. Crucial to note is the fact that drug users not only increases the aggressive thoughts but also enhances angry feelings and psychological arousal. Anderson et al. (2010) notes that drugs do decrease the helping behavior and feelings of apathy demonstrated for other individuals. Drug users, as it is with other addictive substances, tend to identify with a fictional character. Drug addicts do therefore experience similar visual perspectives as those of the fictional character although from a detached visual perspective. Identifying with a fictional character will consequently lead to a character to behave more aggressively (Bushman, 2013).

Read also Significance of Drug Courts in the United States – CJUS 230 Final Research Paper

Counter Argument

            The drug patrol units have for a long time been claimed to curb drug sales and consequent violent aggression. In addition, studies have shown that most drug users do not consider themselves as violent. Most drug users assert that they use drugs dealers and yet they have not been involved in any violent acts (Bushman, 2013). Looking at murder for instance, exposure to drug dealers in any neighborhood may not necessarily get one into committing murder since murder there has been no reports of people committing murder being involved in drugs dealers prior to the act. 

Read also Timeline of Major Legislations on the Enforcement of Drug Laws in the United States

            It can be argued also that non-exciting and frustrating drug users that are not violent can indirectly increase aggressive cognitive behaviors that can consequently lead to violence in the neighborhood. According to Pollard et al. (2011) as cited in Bushman (2013) long exposure to drugs results in the development, tryout and subsequent automatization of aggressive knowledge and social expectations. While one may become aggressive from using  drugs,  the social ideals innate in them may shield them from engaging in any violent acts.

Invalidating the Counter Argument

            The society experiences a great challenge in evaluating the impacts and influences on events in the occasion that the base rate of probability of the event is considerably low. Bushman (2013) argues therefore that it is not unusual for people to claim that those who use drugs have not been involved in acts of murder following the fact that the individual who commits murder are in essence few. It is thus difficult to predict rare events such as murder by employing a parameter such as exposure to drugs.  To this regard, the base factor indicating that drug use pose negative effects on an individual’s aggression is ignored in making a conclusion that drug dealers in the neighborhood do not necessarily lead to violent acts in real life.

Argument 2: Using Drugs  Reinforces Transferability of Violent Aggression to the Neighborhood

            A wide spectrum of drug dealers gives rewards to violent behavior commensurate with awarding points to users or in some cases allowing the user to proceed to an advanced level of the addiction. Pollard et al. (2011) suggests that rewarding behavior serves to increase the frequency of such behaviors. The design of drugs intends to give the user clear objectives which are significantly adaptable to the pace of consumption of the user. The adaptations of these intentions can be seen as a key to motivation and addiction.

            The mastery of skills in the use is reinforced by the illusionary ‘impressive” sound and ‘visual’ effects and points awards. The awards and captivating effects goes a long way in motivating the user to continue using. The enhanced performance becomes automatized and hence the user will seek to acquire and employ new skills to be used in different environments and settings.  The employment of the skills in new settings ensures that they are transferable from the drug context to the neighborhood. In view that drugs have been used effectively as teaching tools indicates the capability of drug dealers in exerting violent effects on the user in the neighborhood (Anderson et al. 2007).

Read also The Triggering Dynamics of Aggression and Violence – Research Paper

Counter Argument

            In repudiating the conviction that exposure to drugs influences the users to the point of shifting the aggressive behavior changes to the neighborhood environment, one may seek to relate the drugs influences to proven theoretical details of aggression. It should be noted that the distal causes of aggression comes in two categories namely biological modifiers and environmental modifiers. In this case it may be palpable to argue that what would lead to an individual to commit an act of violence is not entirely due to exposure to drugs. Innate biological factors contribute arguably in equal measure to aggression. A person’s decision process is subject to the internal state of being (Anderson, 2009). This follows therefore that for a person using  drugs to commit an act of violence or endanger society is subject to a good extent to internal processes and the biological modifiers not related to the exposure of drug dealers in the neighborhood which can be termed as an environmental modifier.  

Refuting the Counter Argument

            While the psychological processes by which exposure to drugs produces a violent result are not as intuitive as the biological processes, the occurrence of violent aggression is subject to a combination of these processes (Bushman,2013). The consequences of this blend of biological and environmental processes will subsequently give a bad effect on the individual. This indicates therefore that a person exposed to drugs will have a stronger push to commit a violent act subject to their changed aggressiveness and cognitive behavior.  

            Bushman (2013) draws a correlation between using drugs and smoking cigarettes. In his analogy, Bushman (2013) alludes that while a single cigarette may not lead to the emergence of lung cancer, increased smoking over time predisposes one to the risk of contracting the illness. In the same similarity, a continued exposure to drug dealers in the neighborhood heightens an accumulated effect on users’ aggression irrespective of the inward biological modifiers. While one cannot estimate the levels of aggression that one develops, it is evident that the effects build up with time.

Conclusion            

Using drugs and continued exposure to the same threatens the ethical fabric of the users and in so doing they pose a danger to society. Having explicated the effects of drugs in distorting one’s cognitive behavior and psychological arousal, it is palpable that such drugs increase the risk of people being involved in violent acts owing to the fact that they in addition feature death and destruction.  This makes the useful in school and therapeutic settings as a tool train and improve one’s psycho-motor coordination by simulating real life events.  Drug dealers in the neighborhood on the other hand contribute primarily in release and control of aggressions that may result in the ease to engage in violent acts thus posing a danger to society at large.

Share with your friends
Order Unique Answer Now