Question

Consider the following argument: There are many arguments for the elimination or modification of current U. S. drug laws, but one of the most persuasive involves what negative effects drug laws are having on society in comparison with the effects of the drugs themselves. In the past ten years, most forms of drug use have dropped significantly, especially among teens. Despite this, non-violent drug offenders accounted for 21.1 percent of the federal prison population. First time drug offenders serve, on average, a sentence three months longer than kidnappers, nine months longer than burglars, and thirty-three months longer than sex abusers. In 1992, the average cost of keeping an inmate in either state or federal prison was about $20,000 per prisoner per year. The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world, with 455 prisoners per 100,000 population. It is maintaining these prisoners at great expense in an environment where they are unlikely to develop a socially constructive attitude. Perhaps it is time that we reconsider our attitudes toward those who choose to use drugs; failure to do so may cost society even more than it already has.

Determine whether or not the argument uses any deceptive statistics. Give your opinion on whether or not the argument has persuaded you. Explain why or why not.

Answer 1

In my view, it appears that the argument is using some amount of deceptive statistics, by omitting important information. For instance, it is mentioned that non-violent drug offenders accounted for 21.1 percent of the federal prison population in the last 10 years, but no information has been provided about the proportion in the previous years. The next line, comparing drug offenders to sex abusers, kidnappers and burglars also also seems to be incomplete as drug offenders can include a wide variety of crimes some of which can be extremely violent in nature.

All in all, I am not very convinced by this argument. Another point that this argument makes is the amount of money spent in keeping drug related offenders in prison. From the previous line of thought, the author of the argument makes a leap to this one without a proper transition.