DEA Agent Jack Riley, "[Chicago's] most famous federal agent since the days of The Untouchables" (-Rolling Stone)tells the inside story of his 30-year hunt for the drug kingpin known as El Chapo, and reveals the true causes of the American opioid epidemic. Jack Riley, grandson of a Chicago cop known for using his fists, was born to be a drug warrior. Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán Loera, who farmed marijuana and opium poppies as a teenager in Mexico, was born to be a drug lord. Their worlds collided when Riley, a career special agent with the Drug Enforcement Administration, was promoted to lead the fight against Chapo on the border at El Paso. Drug Warrior is the story of Riley's decades-long hunt for the world's most wanted drug lord, set against the rise of modern international drug trafficking, and America's spiraling opioid epidemic. Jack Riley started his career as an undercover street agent in Chicago busting small-time dealers. By the time he worked his way up to second in command of the DEA-a post few field agents ever reach-he had overseen every major mission to capture foreign drug kingpins since the 1990s, and had witnessed first-hand how El Chapo changed the game. As brilliant as he was lethal, Chapo not only decimated his competition, he foresaw Americans' dependence on opioids and heroin, and manipulated supply to increase demand. Riley's story culminates as he and the DEA win their greatest victory-the capture and extradition of his long-time nemesis-and Chapo faces his darkest fear: U.S. justice. A riveting memoir of life inside the drug wars, and a never-before-seen glimpse of the inner-workings of the DEA, Drug Warrior is a critical examination of how America's opioid crisis came to be, and the extraordinary people fighting it.

This book provides the first multidisciplinary and nonpartisan analysis of how the United States should decide on the legal status of cocaine, heroin and marijuana. It draws on data about the experiences of Western European nations with less punitive drug policies as well as new analyses of America's experience with legal cocaine and heroin a century ago, and of America's efforts to regulate gambling, prostitution, alcohol and cigarettes. It offers projections on the likely consequences of a number of different legalization regimes and shows that the choice about how to regulate drugs involves complicated tradeoffs among goals and conflict among social groups. The book presents a sophisticated discussion of how society should deal with the uncertainty about the consequences of legal change. Finally, it explains, in terms of individual attitudes toward risk, why it is so difficult to accomplish substantial reform of drug policy in America.

In this book, Horace Bartilow develops a theory of embedded corporatism to explain the U.S. government's war on drugs. Stemming from President Richard Nixon's 1971 call for an international approach to this "war," U.S. drug enforcement policy has persisted with few changes to the present day, despite widespread criticism of its effectiveness and of its unequal effects on hundreds of millions of people across the Americas. While researchers consistently emphasize the role of race in U.S. drug enforcement, Bartilow's empirical analysis highlights the class dimension of the drug war and the immense power that American corporations wield within the regime. Drawing on qualitative case study methods, declassified U.S. government documents, and advanced econometric estimators that analyze cross-national data, Bartilow demonstrates how corporate power is projected and embedded—in lobbying, financing of federal elections, funding of policy think tanks, and interlocks with the federal government and the military. Embedded corporatism, he explains, creates the conditions by which interests of state and nonstate members of the regime converge to promote capital accumulation. The subsequent human rights repression, illiberal democratic governments, antiworker practices, and widening income inequality throughout the Americas, Bartilow argues, are the pathological policy outcomes of embedded corporatism in drug enforcement.

Argues that despite increasing levels of government action, illicit drugs are more readily available than ever, and analyzes the failure of our drug policy

Miller not only argues that criminal justice zealots are harming the democracy they are sworn to protect, but that authoritarians unfriendly to democracy are stoking public fear in order to convince citizens to relinquish traditional legal rights. Those are the very rights that thwart implementation of an agenda of social control through government power. Miller contends that an imaginary "drug crisis" has been manufactured by authoritarians in order to mask their war on democracy. He not only examines numerous civil rights sacrificed in the name of drugs, but demonstrates how their loss harms ordinary Americans in their everyday lives.

Book Description: A unique collection of original essays that investigates the impacts of the war on drugs on children and young people. With contributions from around the world and utilizing a wide range of styles and approaches including ethnographic studies, personal accounts and interviews, the book asks three fundamental questions: What have been the costs to children of the war on drugs? Is the protection of children from drugs a solid justification for current policies? What kinds of public fears and preconceptions exist in relation to drugs and the drug trade?

A balanced and sophisticated analysis of the true costs, benefits, and consequences of enforcing drug prohibition is presented in this book. Miron argues that prohibition's effects on drug use have been modest and that prohibition has numerous side effects, most of them highly undesirable. In particular, prohibition is shown to directly increase violent crime, even in cases where it deters drug use. Miron's analysis leads to a disturbing finding—the more resources given to the fight against drugs, the greater the homicide rate. The costs and benefits of several alternatives to the war on drugs are examined. The conclusion is unequivocal and states that any of the most widely discussed alternatives is likely to be a substantial improvement over current policy.