As a veteran pharmacist and attorney, I have a different perspective on how to mitigate societal problems in the United States caused by addiction and trafficking in illegal drugs such as heroin and cocaine. My readers are sophisticated and already knowledgeable regarding issues of substance abuse and the history of efforts by law enforcement to abate the problem.
I will not waste the reader’s time cataloging the well-publicized social ills attributable to drug addiction. Nor is it necessary to remind the reader of the many positive contributions that law enforcement makes to society.
President Nixon declared a “war on drugs”, created the DEA and initiated a series of long criminal sentences for illegal drug sales and use. Wars–even metaphorical ones–are extremely expensive and our country has poured billions of dollars into building more and larger prisons, hiring more DEA agents, paying off foreign governments to try to reduce drug production, covert warfare, etc. This has been an expensive failure that arguably has created more problems than it has reduced. The “war” focuses on reducing the “supply” side of the “supply and demand equation”.
Right now a large part of Mexico is embroiled in a war between rival narcotic traffickers that threatens to spread northward into the U.S. Border agents have been caught taking bribes from traffickers. This is what we know about. Our expensive prison system is overwhelmed with inmates including a large number who are there for marijuana use. Soldiers and law enforcement officers have been injured and killed, innocent bystanders have died too.
When it became obvious that the “War on Drugs” was failing, the government doubled down by adding asset forfeiture (seizure of money and property of sellers and users of illegal drugs). It seemed sensible at the time. The rationale was that drug traffickers are willing to risk long prison terms and even execution, because trafficking in illegal drugs is so lucrative. If law enforcement could seize the money, cars, boats, houses, bank accounts, etc. of drug dealers and even simple drug users, U.S. law enforcement could finally “turn the tide in the war on drugs”. This approach of asset forfeiture has not only failed to stop drug addiction and illegal drug abuse but actually has corrupted law enforcement and harmed our society. Why?
Presently, police officers observe drug dealers for sometimes years before swooping down to seize millions of dollars in assets accumulated by the drug dealer. All the while the drug dealer is operating, customers are overdosing, there is domestic violence in families and the other ills attributable to illegal drug abuse. Why wait years or even months? One could say it is to gather sufficient evidence to make an iron clad case but that might be naïve. Since law enforcement keeps 80% to 100% of the assets seized for themselves, a reasonable person might question their motivation. The reader can just Google “policing for profit”, “drug asset forfeiture abuses” and search the net and local newspapers for many stories of innocent persons being injured and killed during drug raids.
A more insidious problem with asset forfeiture is that the police have large amounts of money, a part of which is used to buy ever more lethal firearms, tanks, stun guns, grenades, flash bangs, black ninja suits and balaclava masks, helmets, helicopters and whatever else a salesman can persuade police officers is a cool thing to have in their arsenal. I submit that the very fact that police officers possess such excessive equipment makes it much more likely that police and citizens will be severely injured or killed accidentally. And just seeing the police rolling with a tank through a neighborhood with ski masks and black outfits is an affront to a civilized society.
Google this recent true story of actor Steven Seagal and publicity hound, Maricopa County Sheriff Arpaio using a tank in a residential neighborhood to knock down a garage, killing 50 chickens because they were executing a search warrant for suspected illegal chicken fighting! And yes, this was all filmed and will appear in Steven Seagal’s “Lawman” show! You can’t make up stuff this absurd. This excessive raid frightened citizens and the rumbling tanks broke home windows! The articles mention the frightened responses of neighbors living in this quiet neighborhood. Afterwards, the people in the neighborhood were shocked, outraged and ridiculed the police. Such heavy-handed tactics do not garner respect for government or law enforcement, but rather inspire fear, followed by resentment.
My approach to reducing illegal drug abuse/addiction
The smartest way to reduce drug trafficking and the societal ills caused by illegal drug abuse and addiction is to reduce demand for the product. Enlightened police officers, citizens and health professionals who work with drug addicts are uniform in recognizing that drug abuse/addiction is a medical problem that requires extensive and expensive medical treatment to rehabilitate the abuser/addict.
Prisons do not work for addicts without a real drug treatment program. Not only do people continue to use illegal drugs in the prison but turn right back to the same drugs or worse drugs when they are released. It is extremely expensive to incarcerate drug abusers. But most of you already know this, so what am I saying that is new? Read on.
Where a person’s only crime is use of marijuana, that person should not be incarcerated but should instead be directed for treatment and if punishment is required, community service and fines are more cost effective. With regard to dangerous hard drugs such as heroin, cocaine, methamphetamines, etc. then intense, effective medical treatment is mandatory.
The problem is the people who need treatment the most, do not have the money to pay for the needed treatment. My idea is to amend the existing asset forfeiture and seizure laws to take almost all of the proceeds seized to pay for real substance abuse and addiction treatment. Law enforcement should only receive the actual costs of arrests. In no event, should any individual members of law enforcement receive money or bonuses from the asset forfeiture.
Here is why my suggested amendment makes sense for society:
· The money taken from drug traffickers and users will be used to pay for medical treatment for addicts.
· Police will not have a financial incentive or motive to abuse asset forfeiture laws for their own personal or departmental financial gains.
· Law enforcement will be freed up to pursue other criminals, in particular, financial swindles that have cost the American public so dearly.
· As the number of abusers and addicts are reduced through effective medical treatment, the demand for the illegal drugs will be reduced and reduce the power and violence of narcotic traffickers.
· The number of people incarcerated and the expense to the taxpayers will be greatly reduced and there will be space for Wall Street swindlers to occupy in prison.
· Law enforcement officers and special op soldiers will have less need to put their lives in danger facing narcotic traffickers in foreign countries and at home.
· The reduction in the military style raids in neighborhoods will reduce accidental injuries and deaths to innocent bystanders as well as to repair the image of American law enforcement. No people in any country in the world has respect or loyalty to a regime where its police act violently and aggressively to its own citizens.
In summary, the law of supply and demand is primal. Since we cannot reduce the supply of illegal drugs we should try to reduce the demand.
