Respond to DQB

Two unintended consequences of the War on Drugs that come to mind include criminality perpetuated through the cycle of illicit drug use (i.e. theft and other property crimes committed to facilitate illicit drug abuse) and costs associated with the War on Drugs (i.e. court fees, incarceration related costs, etc.).  Generally, I do not feel that society has benefited from the War on Drugs.  Internationally, the War on Drugs has demonstrably increased the drug trade as well as having impact on terrorism.  Two strategies to alleviate the impact of the War on Drugs include decriminalization of illicit drugs and or legalization of illicit drugs.

As far as the criminality associated with illicit drug use, as Reiman and Leighton (2016) point out, a cycle develops based upon an addicts “need” to use whatever drug they use outweighing the risk associated with crimes committed to facilitate their addiction.  Crimes often associated with illicit drug use, other than mere possession and dealing charges, include theft and other property crimes (Reiman & Leighton, 2016).  It is explained that due to the illegality of illicit drugs, abusers are forced to fund their habits by steeling in order to garner the funds to purchase their drugs.  Often, the result then, is a form of incarceration and or fine, which inevitably creates further hardship and financial ruin for the addict.  Thus, the addict commits further crime to fuel their addiction and as a means of generating income.  In the case of heroin, Reiman and Leighton (2016) explain that abusers often become dealers as a means of insuring supply for their own habit as well as creating income to both support their abuse and for other means (p. 40).  The cycle continues and has the potential to expand as a result.

Costs associated with the War on Drugs are very high.  Some of these costs include funding and grants for law enforcement officers’ salaries and overtime to conduct interdiction and other drug related investigations, and court and incarceration costs (i.e. attorney fees, administrative costs, laboratory costs, corrections officers’ salaries, prison facility costs, parole and probation officer salaries, and much more).  Reiman and Leighton (2016) write, “The National Drug Control Budget alone was $25.9 billion for fiscal year 2010” (p. 43).  This does not even account for the costs associated with crimes related to drug use such as theft and other property crimes, estimated in excess of “$25.7 billion… during 2010” (Reiman and Leighton, 2016, p. 41).  Additionally, this does not account for social costs.  As an example, if a primary income addict is incarcerated, the strain of the remaining family members may force the family to seek social assistance (i.e. welfare or other financial relief and assistance).

Needless to say, I do not feel the War on Drugs has been beneficial to society at large.  I feel the perpetuation of criminality associated with the War on Drugs strains, whether directly or indirectly, society as described above (i.e. the cycle of crime and costs associated with drug abuse).  Further, it may also be a cause for the divide between law enforcement and citizens.  This is especially evident in low income areas, which have a propensity for a majority of minority groups.  Unfortunately the high crime associated with these areas furthers the perception of racial disparity in law enforcement as well as sentencing.  Again, there is a perceived perpetual cycle of criminality along with the resulting associated social ramifications due to drug and related crimes.

As Reiman and Leighton (2016) point out, the War on Drugs has seemingly increased international drug production, trade, and violence associated with feuding cartels.  Another aspect which is often given little notice is that the illicit drug trade is associated with funding international terrorism.  The following is an excerpt testimony explaining the nexus of drugs and international terrorism by Assistant Secretary for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, Assistant Secretary Rand Beers:

There often is a nexus between terrorism and organized crime, including drug trafficking. Links between terrorist organizations and drug traffickers take many forms, ranging from facilitation — protection, transportation, and taxation — to direct trafficking by the terrorist organization itself in order to finance its activities. Traffickers and terrorists have similar logistical needs in terms of material and the covert movement of goods, people and money.

Relationships between drug traffickers and terrorists benefit both. Drug traffickers benefit from the terrorists’ military skills, weapons supply, and access to clandestine organizations. Terrorists gain a source of revenue and expertise in illicit transfer and laundering of proceeds from illicit transactions. Both groups bring corrupt officials whose services provide mutual benefits, such as greater access to fraudulent documents, including passports and customs papers. Drug traffickers may also gain considerable freedom of movement when they operate in conjunction with terrorists who control large amounts of territory.  (Narco-Terror:  The Worldwide Connection Between Drugs and Terror, 2002)

Often the strategies recommended to “win” the War on Drugs include decriminalization of illicit drugs or legalization of illicit drugs.  I am not fond of the idea of legalizing illicit drugs.  I generally believe that little good comes from illicit drug use/abuse/addiction.  On the other hand, I do feel there is weight behind arguments for decriminalization.  Over the past couple of years I have a better understanding of the importance of treatment efforts over incarceration and mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenses related to “personal use.”  If drug addiction is a medical condition, it should be treated as such.  We do not incarcerate people for having cancer or for having the common cold.  The argument, then, is for treatment efforts instead of incarceration.  The suggestion is that through treatment, addiction will subside and subsequently reduce crimes associated with illicit drug abuse.

References

Narco-Terror: The Worldwide Connection Between Drugs and Terror: Testimony before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Technology, Terrorism and Government Information, 107^th Cong. (2002) (Testimony of Assistant Secretary Rand Beers). Retrieved from http://2001-2009.state.gov/p/inl/rls/rm/8743.htm

Reiman, J., & Leighton, P. (2013). The rich get richer and the poor get prison: Ideology, class, and criminal justice (10th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.