-Users/sellers of drugs and users of alcohol are more likely to engage in criminal behavior than those who don't

1. Cause-and-effect relationship

-One must have an effect on the other

2. Direction of the relationship

-Direct: A causes B or other way around

-A = B or B = A

-Indirect: factor C causes someone to do A (use drugs) as well as B (commit crime)?

-C = A + B

3. Possession/sale of illegal substances is by definition criminal behavior, so we must distinguish between drug crimes and non-drug crimes

4. Legality

-Alcohol is legal, illicit drugs are not

5. Clarify whether and to what extent the connection between drugs with crime is

-A consequence of their criminal status or of their pharmacological properties

6. Close link between committing crime (especially violence) and being a victim

-Users are more likely to be offenders and victims

-Enslavement

-Predisposition Model

-Intensification Model

-Explained in other cards

-One of the 3 models of drugs and crime

-Addictive nature of drugs and inflated price due to illegality leads to committing crime to support the habit.

-Economic-compulsive/Medical model

-Shows if narcotics were legalized, thered be no connection between drug use and criminal behavior

-One of the 3 Drug and crime models

-Exists because criminals are deviant, antisocial people who have predispositions to crime and drug use

-Criminal Model

-Social circles where its accepted

-Legalizing would be futile, because they are engaged in crime before drug use

-Supported by Gottfredson and Hirschi's General Theory of Crime

-One of the 3 models of drugs and crime

-Contrary to enslavement because..

-Juvenile crime frequently precedes drug use

-More than 1/2 of addicts committed crime before they were addicted

-Drug addiction isnt random

-Certain people use and become involved with drugs, and these are the people who tend to commit crime

-Contrary to the predisposition model because..

-When addicts abstain from drugs, their crime rate plummets

-Addicts in maintenance programs (methadone) commit 1/2 to 1/3 volume of money making crimes when they're off the program and using drugs again

-Though drug use doesnt create criminality from a law-abiding way of life, the use/addiction to narcotics intensifies and perpetuates criminality

-Goode says no consistent pattern for what comes first, drug use or crime.

3 models of drugs-violence nexus

Which works best?

-Psychopharmacological model

-Economic-compulsive model

-Systemic model.. work best because of

-Crack epidemic of 1980s

-Violence not caused by psychoactive (3%) or economic-compulsive (7%)

-Killings connected to crack and coke not caused by the effects of the drug, but by the violent and conflictual nature of the crack business

Info on other cards

-1 of the 3 models of the drugs-violence nexus

-Most common sense/traditional

-Psychological and physical effects of drugs cause violence and the chance of being victimized

-1 of the 3 Drugs-violence nexus models

-Primary motivation is to obtain money for drugs

-High-risk crimes such as robbery, theft, and burglary which often escalate into physical harm or violence against victims to support habit.

-1 of the 3 models of the drugs-violence nexus

-Systemic violence is

-"Normatively embedded in the social/economical networks of drug users/sellers."

-Absence of formal mechanisms of dispute resolution

-Black markets take law into own hands because they don't want to/cant operate with the law, which leads to them committing crime

-Males

-As coke use increased, likelihood of being a perpetrator to violence increased

-Females

-As coke use increased, the likelihood of being a victim increased

-Do to the "mode of living" or "subculture or violence" in which coke "may be a correlate, but not a cause of violence"

-If coke legalized, might magnify the coke-violence link.

-Very economic-compulsive

-Remove economic motive by providing addicts with cheap, pure heroin to sever violence

-After the 70s, heroin users became polydrug users

-Are aging and not being replaced by younger people

-Increased the likelihood of committing crimes

Alcohol and violence

Facts

What do criminologists mean?

Victimizations

-Alcohol very rarely an accompaniment of alcohol, because there's so much daily use of it and most of it is harmless

-But when violence does take place, alcohol use is very frequent

-Criminologists mean

-Drinkers have higher rates of violence than non-drinkers

-The more someone drinks, the greater likelihood that they'll inflict violence on someone else

-Victimizations

-Higher for drinkers

-More they drink, greater the chance

-Behavior under the influence of alcohol is cultural, not pharmacological

-Alcohol-violence link is culturally determined

-Predisposition and availability

-Need both, neither is sufficient 

Most illicit drugs could be..

Heroin/coke to gold?

-Produced as cheaply as aspirin, instead they are almost the most expensive thing on earth.

-Coke = 30x amount of gold

-Heroin = 10x amount of coke

-Biggest economic enterprise on earth

-Highly centralized with a 'boss of bosses,' in the US who controls the entire enterprise

-Illicit drugs represent a drain on or a clear-cut, unambiguous cost the economogy

-All false

-Coke highest (55%)

-Marijuana (17%)

-Meth (9%)

-Other (4%)

-Marijuana at 1,000 tons

-Heroin at 13.3 tons

-In 2000, 65 billion spent on drugs

-Most on coke than all drugs combined!

-As overall purity rises, price drops

-Coke less used now then it was

-Economic reality of the drug trade is a lot more modest than estimates

-Its actually decentralized and continues to become more so.

-Dealers work in hundreds, possibly thousands, different independent enterprises

-Smuggled in by all types of people (sexes, races, nationalities)

-Every drug has its own distribution patterns

-Sources, routes, price structure, characters

The myth of the drug trade as an economic liability (Myth 3)

Costs of the trade

Economically..

-Drug cost to society is 160 billion

-While healthcare is 15 billion

-Losses in economic productivity 110 billion

-And everything else 35 billion

-Economically, drug trade is like every other industry 

-Effects the economy the way legal things do

-No difference between legal and illegal economic enterprises with respect to contributing to the economy

Thr myth of the drug trade as an economic liability (Myth 3)

Crime..

Demand..

Profits..

-Crime is not economically productive, is detrimental to society

-Demand is number one factor that allows drug trade to flourish

-Profits

-In Columbia, coke is just as profitable as coffee

-In US, Marijuana is more profitable than corn

-By wiping out either, you create a ripple effect that effects everyone from the grower to the consumer

-Explains where drugs come from (1 of 3 models)

-Refers to systems of trafficking that harvest a product requring little or nothing (aside from drying and separating parts of the plant) in converting it into the ultimate product

-Consumed as grown (marijuana)

-Reasons why the transaction doesnt take place

-Social and economic, not technological

-Explains where drugs come from (1 of 3 models)

-Refers to a completely synthetic substance that doesnt have its own origin or as an agricultural product at all

-Means produced in a lab

-User needs a manufacture with technical expertise to make the product

-Where drugs come from (1 of 3 models)

-Refers to a substance that began as an agricultural product whose principal psychoactive agent is then synthesized from the plant into a chemical to create the drug

-Agricultural and in the lab

-Heroin

-User relies on grower and manufacturer

-Golden triangle

-Southeast Asia (Burma, Laos, Cambodia, Thailand)

-Golden Crescent

-Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Eastern Turkey

-Latin America

-Most from south America

-Black tar

-Found by the west cost

-Virtually all in US comes from Colombia, Peru, or Bolivia

-90%

-Roughly 2/3s comes through Mexican border

-Can also enter by boat in Caribbean

Where Marijuana comes from

Leading states for indoor/outdoor growing

Whos mostly the growers?

-Very decentralized

-More than 1/4 grown domestically, other 1/2 from Mexico, 1/4 from Columbia, and 1/4 from other countries

-Leading states for indoor growing

-California

-Florida

-Oregon

-Washington

-Wisconsin

-Leading states for outdoor growing

-California

-Hawaii

-Kentucky

-Tennessee

-Growers overwhelmingly white

-Production and trafficking either domestic or crosses Mexican border

-Biker gang to Mexican gangs for distribution

-Mexican labs larger and part of criminal cartel

-Western Europe

-Mainly Belgium and Netherlands

-80% from here

-Remainder distributed by Russian or Israeli organized criminal syndicates

-Production difficult, time-consuming, and complex requiring chemical sophistication

-Small number of labs (one or two dozens provide bulk)

-CA or northwest

-Chemists dont normally sell it, but give crystallized form to few associates to distribute

-Prohibiton

-Without it, drug trade would either not exist or exist in radically different terms

-Drug trade be much larger

-Number of drug treatment centers would rise

-Prices would drop

-Dismantling of the French Connection heroin-trafficking network by French PD, US Federal Agents, and NYC PD

-Provided 80% of heroin in the US

-Created panic among users, found heroin from other places

-Collapse of the Soviet union

-Economic privatization

-Money laundering

-Globalization

-Poverty

-Weak/Corrupt local and federal governments

Collapse of the Soviet Union

Economic privatization

-Both were key factors for global development of the drug trade, along with others.

-Collapse of the Soviet Union

-People were now willing to participate in the drug trade for profit

-Due to unraveling socialism and the move toward free trade

-Eastern Europe (Russia, Poland, Czech Republic) major amphetamine and meth-producing and distributing coutnries

-Economic privatization

-Economies were becoming increasingly privatized, liberalized, and deregulated.

-China = free-trade zones

-Creation of European Union

-Resulted in single currency for Europe and opened free trade across borders

-North America Trade Agreement: Removed thousands of trade barrier between US and Mexico/Canada

-Worldwide economic deregulation has expedited flow of goods both illicit and licit across countries

-Removed thousands of trade barriers between US and Canada and US and Mexico

-Helped globalization of the drug trade

Money laundering

Globalization

-Key factors in the global development of the drug trade

-Money laundering

-Offshore banks offer financial secrecy and client confidentiality

-Leeichtenstein has more post office box corps (and banks) than people

-Permits traffickers to launder money earned in the illicit drug trade back into the legitimate economy, avoiding law enforcement

-Globalization

-Product of political, economic, and technological cultural and social changes

-Worldwide illicit drug trade is one consequence

-'Borderless' world creating superhighway for traffickers to transport drugs

-Economic vacuum created when supply is shut down in a given country or region

-Entrepreneurs in another country quickly pick up where they left off

-Is possibly the single most factor most responsible for the enormous expansion

Poverty 

Weak/Corrupt Local and Federal Government

-Reasons for global development of the drug trade

-Poverty

-Upperlevel drug dealers are wealthy

-'Foot soldiers' of drug trade are poor

-Gap in wealth between industrialized, developed countries and poor developing countries

-Poverty assumes an increasingly greater role in drug trafficking

-Families participate in drug trafficking to make ends meet

-Drugs brought across border by poor couriers or smurfs/mules

-Poor area the greater incentive to produce, traffic, and sell drugs

-Weak corrupt local and federal governments

-When police/military cant enter an area for fear of being shot, they cant control illegal activities

-Drug production/trafficking can flourish

Street level economics of heroin abuse study

3 Criteria

-Respondents in study meet these criteria

-Recruited by ex-addicts/ex-offenders

-Used heroin (or methadone) during the period during investigation

-Lived on the street

-They engaged in criminal activity

-Buying and selling of drugs

-Actually spent less than estimated

-Heroin abuser doesnt purchase all the heroin they consume

-More frequently they use, less heroin they purchase

-Receieve a substantial amount by serving as day laborers of the heroin distributtion industry

-Cut and sell heroin and 'steer, tout, and cop' customers on the street

-Paid with heroin instead of cash

-Robbery, burglary and shoplifting accounted for nearly 2/3 of the sample's criminal income and between 1/3 and 1/2 of total income

-4 winners to 1 loser

-Criminal gang

-Auto theft and money making crimes

-Conflict

-Violent behavior

-Retreatist gang

-Drug-related behavior

-Majority are involved with selling illicit drugs 

-Gangs today dont spectialize in one type, but instead participate in all 3

-East Harlem Latinos

-Most minorities below poverty line on welfare

-4/10 decalred no wages at all, yet few were homeless

-Do to selling crack

-'Structural victimization'

-Selling crack allowed them to proudly embrace street culture

-Substance abuse not the problem

-Drug abuse is the epiphenomenal expression of a deeper, structural problem that is economic and racial inequality is the problem

-Lack of education and style of dress looked down upon by the workplace/labor market and experienced 'racially charged cultural miscommunication'

-To do with selling crack in El Barrio and the racial disparities 

Racial disparities in arrest and incarceration, and class and ethnic style of dress

crack

-Congress approved a 100-to-1 ratio for the quantity of power cocaine (500g) versus crack cocaine (5g) that can draw the same five year sentence 

-85% of powder of crack cocaine defendants who appear in court are black, while only 30% of coke defendants are black (50% Hispanic, 30% white)

-Bill deemed racist, fueled rising percentage rising percentage of black prison inmates convicted of a drug crime

-Middle class, mostly white dealers deal in private settings to people they know, thus not getting caught as much

-Inner-city dealers, mostly black, lacked private setting and sell to users they dont personally know, increasing the chance of being apprehended

-Drug use declined in the 1970s-1990s and has remained stable since

-Yet arrest/incarcerations have skyrocketed

-Due to stricter enforcement

-Parole being denied more than in the past, some states have eliminated it completely

-Parole is more often revoked than it was in the past, parolees now sent back to prison for infractions once overlooked

-Most important.. Not only are drug arrest more likely to result in incarceration that was true in the past, the increase is greater than it was for property and violent offenses

-Punishing of persons who ignore law and partake in relevant prohibited acitivity

-Someone engaged in a drug transaction or who is in possession may be arrested, prosecuted, etc

-Drug possesion and sales are crime

-To do with prohibition

Hawks: Prohibitionists that support war on drugs with punitive policy

Drove: Oppose war on drugs and pro legalization

-Punitive argument that is strict.

-Given activity can be reduced or eliminated by law enforcement. 

-Crime deterred in an absolute sense by law enforcement

-Punitive

-Moderate punitive version, which makes use of logic

-View that in the absence of law enforcement, incidence of an activity would be greater than it is, given law enforcement

-Provides schedules of drugs with carrying controls and penalties for violations

-3 categories of psychoactive substances are controlled by law

-Legal

-Perscription

-Illegal

-Schedule II-IV under Controlled Substance Act

-Schedule II.. Coke, amphetamines, short acting barbiturates

-Used for 2 populations

-Mentally disorders

-In mental hospitals or outpatients

-Addicts

-Methadone maintenence 

-Says current law enforcement towards illicit drugs has moved beyond simple prohibition to a punitive policy with a military metaphor

-'war on drugs'

-Says this metaphor has evolved into a reality in which military are actually fighting

-Funded by Reagan

-Says 'War on drugs' has fallen out of favor in recent years because it denies or underplays non-warlike features of the countries multi prolonged effort to deal with the drug problem

-Focus on things such as education, which became more important to govt. in recent years

Asset Forfeiture Act

which law did miller/selva say it was a good example of?

-Authorization and liquidation of all ill-gotten drug assets such as cars, jewelry, boats, etc.

-Goes directly to combat drug trafficking operations

-Miller/Selva argue that its a good example of 'Law of unanticipated consequences,' police are more interested in seizing assets than actually taking drugs off the street

-Take drugs off the street, disrupt or terminate the sale of drugs, reduce the abuse/use of drugs, reduce the social problems they cause

-Using this extra income to supplement their budgets- this can cause corruption on an organizational level.. police will more likely to go after drug cases with more cash seizures

-Found local agencies prone to depend on asset forfeiture for their budgetary strength while federal agencies were less dependent because their budgets are secure regardless of the size of their seizure

-Found it can be dysfunctional from a law enforcement perspective when it becomes more important than deterrence

-Proactive: neighborhood patrol, surviellance, undercover work, etc

-Predominant in 60s

-Reactive: Moreso today, deployed when a criminal act takes place and a citizen reported it

-Enacted as a result of mass drug use in NYC in early 80s

-Represented a shirt towards proactive policing and a strong police presence in which drug dogs, helicopters, and mounted patrol rode the streets

-Results

-Decreased drug sale but hardly disappeared

-Displacement of drugs in areas police not prevalent in

-Neighborhoods where drug dealing was prevalent presented police with a problem in finding drug dealers because they were so entrenched in the environment

-Decrease in publicly visible street dealing

-Written by MacCoun and Reuter

-Undertook whats considered the most thorough and systematic evaluation of drug prohibition ever attempted

-Found it plausible that drug penalties could be reduced without increasing use and tjhat legalization could result in increases in use

-Severity of punishment doesnt decrease drug use

-Capacity of law enforcement to stamp out the drug supply by seizing supplies and arresting traffickers is limited (reasons on another card)

-Relative Deterrence does work because legalization means higher use

-Higher the price. the less the use

-Its multi national, elimination of one means greater sale for others

-Can be produced in small places around the globe

-Major employer and contributes to society

-Violent and large armies of drug cartel

-Intercepting a proportion of illegal drugs at the border is impossible.. smugglers inventive in hiding illegal cargo

Drug courts

Facts and goals

-Divert offenders away from penal system and into an alternative program of counseling, therapy, education, job training, and close monitoring, including urine tests and threats of jail

-Judges address each defendant directly

-Cost effective in reducing recidivism, criminal behavior and costs

-Critics say all drug offenders should be incarcerated

-The legalizes believe the threat of jail shouldnt be used, we dont threat to incarcerate alcoholics

-Goals

-Individual and organizational

-Those with a history of violent crime or those convicted of 2 nondrug felonies not eligible

-Medical model that regards abuse as a disease

-Argue drug abuse has grabbed hold of the offender and affected decision making that contrasts with moral model which argues drug abusers still responbile for their actions

-70%-90% failure rate

-Must be mesured by reductions in use not total abstention

-Must be tailored to specific addict

-People in these are low achieving, uneducated members of society with mental problems

-Reduction of drus

-Reduction in alcohol use

-Reduction in criminality

-Acquisition of education/marketable skills with employment

-Metabolic: High doses for longer periods of time in theory for addict's life

-Adaptive: Administer small doses for shorter periods and eventually withdraws addicts from methadone

-Residential or live in programs

-Drug-free existence is the not only a realistic goal but a necessary one

-Abuse not the main problem but the personality

-Cost free

-Local groups

-Based on 12 steps and users must admit they are powerless and submit to a higher power (god)

-Looked at clients in treatment programs between 69-72

-Found programs are effective in improving post treatment performance 

-Spawned TOPS and DATOS

-Examined treatment outcomes of over 11,000 abusers who entered programs between 79-81

-Most thorough and systematic

-Didnt look at outcomes of AA or NA

-Only a 1/5 of sample made up of daily narcotic users, where DARPS was made up of daily

-Longer clients enrolled the greater the success rate

-Methadone maintence enrolled clients for a longer period

-All 3 reduced use

-Reduction of predatory crime significant, declining to 1/2 to 1/3 of pretreatment levels

-Employment figures not impressive

-Changes in alcohol consumption were small

-Interviewed 10,000 clients between 91-93 enrolled in 96 programs in 11 cities. 

-Studied all 3 programs, as well as a new program for coke abusers

-Older than TOPS clients, more likely female, more likely to use coke

-Coke main drug

-Found daily consumption of coke reduced by 2/3 a year, 5 years after leaving program

-Similar results to TOPS

-Doesnt mean substance is legal since police can confidcate drug and possess may be fined

-Legalization doesnt mean there would be no parameters surrounding drugs like age limits

·      1.Criminalization makes illegal drugs expensive and therefore profitable to sell. Due to the profit motive there will always be someone willing to risk selling drugs even if one drug seller is stamped out they will be replaced

·         2. Argue that current legal drugs are more harmful then the illegal drugs

·         3. Prohibition is futile because criminalization does not deter use – argue that people that want to use drugs are already doing so

·         4.  Prohibition encourages the distribution and therefore the use of harder, stronger, more dangerous drugs- a premium is placed on drugs that are less bulky and easier to conceal (iron law of prohibition – the more intense the law enforcement the more potent the prohibited substance becomes

·         5. Drug dealers sell in a market in which there are no controls on the purity and potency of their product – hence users can be consuming contaminated and dangerous substances

·         6. Undercutting the profit motive would force organized crime out of the drug trade – criminal gangs and mobs would hold less power

·         7. The current level of violence is solely a product of the illegal nature of the drug trade- legalization would deter this violence

·         8. By placing such a huge priority on the drug war and encouraging the arresting of dealers- the government has opened the door to the violation of the civil liberties of citizens on a massive scale – false or mistaken arrests, wrongful seizure of property etc. are all a result of prohibition

·         9.  There are enormous costs and taxes due to enforcing prohibition – through legalization the sale of drugs could be tax

9. 10. Useful therapeutic drugs that are now banned (marijuana) would be reclassified so as to take their rightful place in medicine 

-Represents a mix of policies, it specific for different programs for different drugs

-Holland, Switzerland, and Liverpool follow this

-Goal is drug policy minimizes harm

-Small time addicts put into treatment, while big time are arrested

-Stressing treatment and rehab, no penal approaches

-Expandng drug maintence, especially methadone, exanding drug education, permitting heroin and marijuana for medical purposes

-Considering ways of controlling legal drugs, being flexible and pragmatic

-Says drug use would increase, but wouldnt be huge.

-Many people would still opt out.

-Believes in relative deterrence 

-The absolute number who are harmed, not proportion

-Number who are persuaded not to take a physical risk because of an entirely sepatate risk, the likelihood of arrest

-Goode argues if this was removed a substantial number would engage in drug use

-More readily and the more it can be adapted to everyday life, the more popular it will be.

-More disruptive, less likely it would be taken

-LSD very disruptive, coke and marijuana mildly disruptive

-Most people wouldnt take drugs that effect one's life so much

-States the more reinforcing a drug is, the more that a person will work to obtain it.

-Coke highly reinforcing and some people worry that with legalization, people will get hooked.

-Refers to the fact that addicts want to pursue getting high, but are pushed away by the fact that they have to commit crime.

-As search time for finding drugs increases, so does demand

-High costs

-With legalization, use would increase due to cheap price

-Alcohol and cigarettes to prove point

-When more expensive they're used less

-Number of use/addiction to narcotics to service men in vietnam and sharp decline when returning to US

-Must be a high correlation between availability of drugs and increased use in vietnam

-Higher rates of certain drug use among physicians and other health workers, who have greater access to drugs, than it true of the population as a whole

-4/10 doctors self medicate

-Addiction high for medical workers

-3% doctors and 5% medical students

-Generalist drug policy

-Hold definition of drugs based on psychoactive quality, not legality

-Wish to dismantle legal-illegal distinction

-Argue drug laws are the problem

-Treating abuse should be a medical problem not a legal one

-Drug users not irrational but simply choose to engage in behavior, like a hobby

-Pleasure they get benefit the society

-·         In their evaluation of costs and benefits progressive legalizers weigh the moral values of individual liberty, privacy, and tolerance of the addict very heavily while prohibitionists to some degree set these values aside and emphasize concrete, material values such as public health

·      -   Legalizers are optimists and believe that public drug use will not increase significantly while Prohibitionists believe it will increase dramatically.

     - Legalizers believe that harm comes from the criminalization of drugs while public prohibitionists argue that harm comes from drug use itself

-No

-More interested in community than the individual

-Believe individual doesnt have right to harm society through selfish drug use

-Focus on secondary harms such as HIV

-Level of enforcement

-Prohibitonist unlikely to create violence unless substantial enforcement and amount of violence increased with level of enforcement

-Giving doctors total control to perscribe drugs with no oversight by law enforcement

-This would deconstruct the black market

-Desired effect would be to increase number of people recieving drug treatment and reduce drug use

-Existing evidence doesnt make a strong case for this

-Some argue it rewards drug users by helping them

-Places high taxes on items such as drugs, but not so high that it create a black market

-Problem is that drug users would be using all their money on drugs which leaves no money for homes, food, clothes, etc.

-Of far greater quality and objectivity when compared to prohibition

-He doesnt have proof that legalization would be better, though

-Higher during those times

-During alcohol prohibiton and strict gun laws, violence very high

-People consume drugs because they think theyre better off with them, they weigh the costs 

-Some users are rational, the ideal policy reduces non rational consumption without reducing rational consumption

-Loss of utility by those whose consumption the intervtion reduces

-Direct cost of enforcing the policy

-Indirect consequence generated by the policy

1. Drug use is addictive: Consumption today makes one more likely to use in the future

-Not necessarily true, most people dont try drugs once and become addicted

2. Consumption harms the user

-Biased due to reliance on data sources where only the worst consequences are focused on