Debate, Week 3: Civilian Drones in the United States

Students in the summer offering of my Introduction to American Politics course were assigned to write their final paper on one of three contemporary political debates in the United States – the legalization of marijuana, access to guns, and the use of civilian drones. You can find the discussion about legalizing marijuana here and gun control here.

This week, my students discuss the use of civilian drones in the United States. When students in the class were asked in a survey where or not it is acceptable for the American government to monitor communications from American citizens, 36% agreed that this is acceptable, 53% disagreed, and 11% reported not knowing. As the responses suggest, Americans know very little about drone use, government policy, or their rights.

Heavily Regulate Drone Use

Response 1, Taylor P*

In recent decades drone use has increased dramatically. Drones have a wide variety of applications for individuals and the government such as, “environmental monitoring, tracking of livestock and wildlife, measurement of meteorological and geophysical phenomena, and observation of large-scale human constructions such as buildings, energy infrastructure such as electricity networks and gas and water pipelines, and road-, air- and sea-traffic”(Clarke 2014, 286). Although many people believe that these applications have positive impacts, others believe drone surveillance is detrimental to the privacy of people and infringes upon our Fourth Amendment rights. Some people are convinced that drones are harmful to our civil liberties by disproportionately targeting minorities and “other usual suspects” (Wright 2012,184). Others believe drones are actively hostile towards individuals. No matter which argument you agree with, more regulations need to be implemented to restrict drone use.

While the debate about drone use is ongoing, David Wright (2012) takes the stance that while drones can be useful, it is more important to provide privacy to individuals. Privacy is a major concern due to the fact that drones are targeting their surveillance upon the “already marginalized populations” to monitor their whereabouts and activities (Wright 2012, 194). According to Wright, drones do not have regulations or laws in place that effectively limit the activity of drones. The Fourth Amendment does not “protect already marginalized individuals and populations from disproportionate surveillance by Unmanned Aircraft Systems” (Wright 2012, 193). Specifically, drone surveillance has been used to single out “the poor, people of color and anti-government protesters” when monitoring large crowds, such as in drone surveillance monitored political rallies in New York and Washington D.C. (Wright 2012, 188). Wright’s stance on the position of drone use is that drones can effectively help make the United States a safer and better place; however, in order to make citizens feel safe with the use of drones, we need to regulate what drones can do to protect the privacy of individuals and keep individuals safe from discriminatory practices.  Continue reading

Debate, Week 2: What the Fight Over Guns is Really About

Students in the summer offering of my Introduction to American Politics course were assigned to write their final paper on one of three contemporary political debates in the United States – the legalization of marijuana, access to guns, and the use of civilian drones. For the next two weeks, I will post a few especially good responses from my students on each issue. You can find the discussion about legalizing marijuana here.

This week, my students discuss access to guns in the United States. When students in the class were asked in a survey which response comes closest to their views about government policy on access to guns, 43% stated that the government should make it more difficult for people to buy guns that it is now, 50% agreed that the government should keep the rules about the same, and 7% stated that the government should make it easier for people to buy guns than it is now. No one reported not knowing their views on the issue. The responses below convey just how complicated the gun issue is.

Protect Second Amendment Rights

Response 1, Samuel A*

At a time when issues such as police brutality, border control and war on terrorism headline the everyday mass media sources in the United States, another pressing issue looms in the background. That is the issue of how accessible guns should be in the United States of America. As with every pressing issue, there are critics on each side, some in support of gun control and some that do not support it. What makes this issue unique, however, is that there seems to be a majority of extremists, both in support and not in support. The majority of those that support gun control seem to want guns abolished all together in the United States while those that support guns seem to want no controls or restrictions whatsoever. Though, there is admittedly more nuance than those two extremes. Another factor that makes the issue of gun control somewhat unique is that there are many logical arguments from each side that are very difficult to ignore or argue against.  Continue reading

Debate, Week 1: Is ‘Big Marijuana’ Inevitable?

Students in the summer offering of my Introduction to American Politics course were assigned to write their final paper on one of three contemporary political debates in the United States – the legalization of marijuana, access to guns, and the use of civilian drones. For the next three weeks, I will post a few especially good responses from my students on each issue.

This week, my students discuss whether or not marijuana should be legalized for personal use in the United States. When students in the class were asked in a survey whether or not possession of small amounts of marijuana for personal use should be legalized, 75% of them favored legalization, 18% opposed and 7% reported not knowing.  As you’ll see from the commentary below, there is much more nuance than these numbers suggest.

Yes, Legalize Marijuana for Personal Use

Response 1, Ashley A.*

The debate over legalization of marijuana has been the talk of many Americans in the past few years. Policy makers, law enforcement and citizens all have a unique viewpoint as to whether or not the use and possession of marijuana should be legal. Those supporting legalization believe that marijuana can be regulated and the use can be monitored to ensure safety (The New York Times, 2014). If marijuana were to be legalized, American society would see less individuals incarcerated allowing less complications for them when it came to applying for jobs, receiving education, and housing. The economy could be stimulated as a result of the legalization due to taxes and job opportunities (The New York Times, 2014). Those opposing legalization argue that its use could lead to increased drug abuse as it is considered a “gateway” drug. Others say that since there is a large market for marijuana, advertising will increase leaving more people aware of the benefits but ignorant about the possible negative effects (The New York Times, 2014). Thus, it will leave a culture of uninformed drug users and an unregulated market.

The decision to use marijuana should be up to individuals. With the right rules and regulations in place, legalizing marijuana could reduce crime rates, stimulate the economy and increase well being in American society (Caulkins, 2012). Marijuana is the most widely used illegal drug, resulting in a large black market as well (Caulkins, 2012). In fact, 52% of drug related arrests were related to marijuana (American Civil Liberties Union, 2015). If it is commercialized, those distributing the drug will be in the safety and security of a store rather than the streets reducing crime rates (Caulkins, 2012).

With individuals being incarcerated for simply possessing the drug, state governments must pay tremendous amounts to enforce the laws set in place. For example, Massachusetts would save 120.6 million every year if marijuana were legalized (Miron, 2003). Not only would states see a dramatic decrease in money spent on incarceration, but a dramatic increase in profits generated through taxation. Massachusetts would see 16.9 million dollars in revenue as a result of legalizing marijuana (Miron, 2003). In sum, federal and state governments would see a dramatic increase in revenue that could then be used for the betterment of society.  Continue reading