"DRUG OFFENCES ARE VICTIMLESS CRIMES AND SHOULD BE TREATED AS SUCH". DISCUSS
University of Portsmouth
Bsc. (Hons) Policing and Police Studies
"DRUG OFFENCES ARE VICTIMLESS CRIMES AND SHOULD BE TREATED AS SUCH". DISCUSS
.
Registration Number 227296
The UK Parliament announced in May 2002 that 'There are no easy answers to the problems posed by drug abuse, but it seems to us that certain trends are unmistakable. If there is any single lesson from the experience of the last 30 years, it is that policies based wholly or mainly on enforcement are destined to fail. It remains an unhappy fact that the best efforts of police and Customs have had little, if any, impact on the availability of illegal drugs and this is reflected in the prices on the street which are as low as they have ever been. The best that can be said, and the evidence for this is shaky, is that we have succeeded in containing the problem'.
The 2001/2002 British Crime Survey estimates that 34% of 16 to 59 year-olds have used an illicit drug at some time and 12% have used a Class 'A' drug1. Along with abortion, prostitution, homosexuality, drug misuse is often referred to as a 'victimless' crime. It will be the intention of this paper to brief the Chief Constable concerning a critical policing issue, namely the use of controlled drugs. This paper will discuss the view that 'drug offences are victimless crimes and should be treated as such'. In the short scope of this paper it will be my intention to focus on the UK drugs market. I will explain what is meant by 'victimless' crimes. I will focus on how controlled drugs are currently governed in the UK, some of the social costs in terms of criminal justice and health and the 'knock-on' effects to the community.
Crime can be defined simply as a violation of the criminal law. One of the reasons for introducing such laws is to regulate the behaviour of some, that harm others or society. It has been argued that what is the benefit of controlling behaviours, which do not cause any direct harm. This picks up on one of the central elements to the consensus theory of crime. Bedau (1974) sets out four principles that define victimless crimes. Firstly there must be consensual participation of all involved. Second is the fact that no participant complains to the police. The third is that the participants genuinely believe that the activity does them no harm and finally most of these offences involve the willing exchange of desired goods or services between adults. There are exceptions to these main beliefs, which Bedau accepts, such as drunkenness or drugs use, which involve no transaction.
The production, distribution and use of drugs usually fall quite easily into these values. Those who make, deal and take drugs all do so freely. Quite obviously they do not broadcast their involvement to the law enforcement agencies. Those who use controlled drugs see this as a personal choice, taken for pleasure and either do not see, or ignore, any harm that they cause in the long run. Cannabis users openly promote what they claim is the medicinal2 values of its use.
The law in this country regulates the use of drugs in different ways. Some forms, such as tobacco and alcohol, are subject to licensing arrangements and supply is only permitted to those over a certain age. Others are available by prescription from medical practitioners. Heroin, Cocaine and cannabis are examples of what are commonly know as controlled
drugs. This means their production, distribution, sale or use are criminalised. The law also controls certain behaviours associated with the use of these drugs, for example, drink/drug driving regulations.
The way that the so-called victimless crimes are now seen, has altered drastically in the last forty years or so. Changes in legislation and an attempted move towards decriminalisation have led to some marked differences. Abortion is now available more easily than prior to the Abortion Act 1967. The legal status of prostitution shifted in the 1960's with the laws offering a clear distinction between private and public acts of indecency. Homosexuality is no longer outlawed in the way that it was before the passing of the Sexual Offences Act 1967 and the Criminal Justice and Public Order ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
The way that the so-called victimless crimes are now seen, has altered drastically in the last forty years or so. Changes in legislation and an attempted move towards decriminalisation have led to some marked differences. Abortion is now available more easily than prior to the Abortion Act 1967. The legal status of prostitution shifted in the 1960's with the laws offering a clear distinction between private and public acts of indecency. Homosexuality is no longer outlawed in the way that it was before the passing of the Sexual Offences Act 1967 and the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994. This came about, as it was argued that there were no direct victims and that these activities all involved consenting adults. However, declaring that you have had an abortion or pronouncing yourself as a prostitute or as homosexual are still seen as unacceptable in the media and probably on the doorsteps of most UK households.
Many people who support the decriminalisation of these types of offences do so on the premise that criminalising them failed to control the problem. In some cases it has been argued that the criminalisation actually increased it. There are also the wider implications when considering whether decriminalisation is viable option or not.
ACPO3 have stated that they do not support decriminalisation as the impact on the community and criminal justice system is unknown. It has been suggested that by decriminalising soft drugs such as cannabis, this will allow more focus on class 'A' drugs. Experiences in the Netherlands have shown that this does not always follow. There are also concerns that the UK could become a destination for 'drug tourists', which would increase crime and lead to community erosion. There is also no guarantee that users of decriminalised drugs will not be further exploited by organised crime groups, who may flourish in a legal market. There is also the potential for harm through putting others at risk by operating machinery or driving or in fact by supplying drugs to the young or vulnerable.
Collison accuses the 'British System' of operating in a manner 'that appeals to, and fosters, a burification in thought '(Collison 1993). He argues that victims of drugs use and associated disease need help and treatment in various ways. He is also clear that those who make the market work by importing and supplying, and therefore profit from and encourage the dependency of others, should be heavily punished. This thinking presumes that both sides of the 'British System' are dealing with different people. This is not the case. It was found that drug counsellors and doctors encourage users to come forward to receive treatment. Whilst the criminal justice system was processing increasing numbers of drugs offenders through police stations and the courts. Collison criticises the latter process here as it was shown that the two parts were frequently dealing with the same person (Collison 1993 ibid).
The total value of the UK drugs market has been estimated at 6,613.54 million pounds sterling. These figures include the use by regular, occasional and prison users in the UK population aged between 16 and 59 years. However, a proportion of those who use illegal drugs have serious problems of dependency, and they need substantial sums of money to finance their drug use. This can run to several hundred pounds a week for dependent heroin users, and higher figures still have been reported for some crack users. Bramley-Harker found of all the crack users in his study, 40 per cent were using crack on a daily basis and 2 daily users (1.9%) had weekly expenditures in excess of £2,000.
The relationship between crime and drug use is complex. There are two elements to the economic impact of crime according to Brand and Price. The first element is the cost to the criminal justice system dealing with the crimes committed (including drug offences). For some crimes and some criminal justice costs, (e.g., prison costs), the government spending may occur some time after the offence was committed. Also, the level of expenditure will depend not only on the offending rate but also the success of the criminal justice system in apprehending and detaining offenders.
The second element of the economic costs of crime is the impact on the victims of crime. These costs can take the form of expenditures taken in anticipation of crime, for example, shop security measures or burglar alarms for homes. There are also more direct victim costs of crime in terms of material or physical damage and loss, and the wider fear of crime elements (Brand and Price, 2000).
There are also other social economic costs associated with drugs use. 'Young recreational users are at risk from toxicity and overdose which exceptionally lead to death. Such deaths have public finance consequences (health care use) and obviously involve a social loss (the additional health resources and the years of life lost). There are additional health care consequences from toxicity and overdose that do not result in mortality. It is assumed that any death reported related to cocaine use from those aged under 25 should be attributed to problem use. Twenty deaths from ecstasy were reported by coroners in 2000' (Pollard, 2001). It was estimated that the social cost of the twenty deaths mentioned above exceeded twenty -two million pounds. This equates to an estimate of £670 for the medical and ambulance costs; £750,640 for the human costs and £393,580 for the lost output component per person5. But can a young human life really be valued in this way? The total estimated social cost in terms of expenditure was over £12 billion for 2000. This equates to £6,564 per year averaged over all Class 'A' drug users and £35,456 for problem drug users.6
Other social costs are seen in other studies into why some people use drugs. The co-existence of drugs sex working and drugs misuse has been well documented, even if the causal relationship is elusive and hard to demonstrate. Various studies have shown that problem drug users engage in sex work. 7A secondary effect to the correlation between prostitution and drugs use is that both can, as increased earnings from sex work allowed higher drugs consumption. This in turn required more earnings from prostitution.
Violence and a range of intimidatory tactics run straight through the heart of the drugs industry. In these illicit markets, violence is used as a tool to ensure contract compliance, principally as a means of ensuring that creditors do not default on debt. It is also implicit in ensuring loyalty, trust and enforcing order.
'It's part and parcel isn't it? It goes with the business. If you can't pay up for your
drugs, what else can they use?' (Male, age 36 years. Source: prison interview) (Hobbs and Pearson 2001)8
Left Realists and Feminists have helped place the victim firmly on the political map and the criminological agenda. They have portrayed us all as a victim of crime in one form or another. Whether this would be through increased insurance premiums and local authority spending or even by limiting where we can go due to the perceived public order
problems that crime and drugs, in particular, may raise. The lack of attention given to the victim has been highlighted through successive government policies in this area. They have tended to focus on crime as a problem, which attacks society ignoring the effects that it has on the individual victim. In fact criminology has failed to devote time to victims because its propensity is to view the offenders as the victim, whilst the actual victim was just presumed to exist.
Factors such as associated violence, even though not usually reported, raises the fear of crime and affect the quality of life in the community. The expertise used in the past by international drug traffickers is known to lead to other areas of serious and organised crime. Routes traditionally used to smuggle drugs are now used in human smuggling and trafficking, which is now, according to N.C.I.S., the second most serious threat to the UK.9
In conclusion, I would agree that drug offences are victimless to a certain degree. The relationship between the user and the crime is a consensual one. The drugs are taken for pleasure and through choice as outlined by Bedau. There are, however, victims and to treat drug offences as victimless crimes would be to ignore them. Drug dependants, whose needs are exploited by suppliers, are victims. Those 'third party' members of the community who suffer the acquisition crime needed to feed these habits are victims. It can also be said that the increased financial outgoings taken from taxpaying families makes them victims.
The socio- economic cost is estimated to be more than twelve billion pounds, it is continually said that 'the use of Class A drugs in the last year among 16- to 24-year-olds has not changed significantly since 1994' (British Crime Survey 2002). I would like to see a shift in policy from a focused detection model to one that invests the huge sums of money currently spent more effectively. Such enforcement methods can tend to alienate the police and other partners from the community, who need their help. The introduction of Drug Action Teams and more referral schemes will help treat the social problems attached to drugs use.
In closing I would like to see drug offences treated as victim centred crimes, rather than as victimless offences. Law enforcement efforts should be concentrated at an international and organised crime, thus allowing other community partners to lead a multi agency approach at the local level. This may offer the community greater value for money in assisting the third party victims of drugs crime and at the same time helping the social victims who are the users.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
A.C.P.O. Drugs Committee, (2002), A Review of Drugs Policy and Proposals for the Future.
Aust, R. Sharp, C. and Goulden, C. (2002), Prevalence of Drug Use: Key Findings from the 2001/2002 British Crime Survey, London, Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate
Bramley-Harker, E. (2001), Sizing the UK Market for Illicit Drugs. Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate, Occasional Paper No 74.
Bedau, H. (1974), 'Are There Really "Crimes Without Victims?"' in Williams, K. (1997), Textbook on Criminology (Third Edition). Bell and Bain, Glasgow.
Collison, M. (1993), 'Punishing Drugs: Criminal Justice and Drugs Use'. The British Journal of Criminology, Vol. 33, No.3.
Collison, M. (1994), 'Drug Crime, Drug Problems and Criminal Justice: Sentencing Trends and Enforcement Targets'. The Howard Journal, Vol. 33, No.1.
Dorn, N., Murji, K. and South, N. (1992), Traffickers. Drug Markets and Law Enforcement. London, Routledge.
Godfrey, C., Eaton, G., McDougall, C. and Culver, A. (2002), The economic and social costs of Class A drug use in England and Wales. Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate, Home Office Research Study 249.
Green, P., Mills, C. and Read, T. (1994), 'The Characteristics and Sentencing of Illegal Drug Importers'. British Journal of Criminology', Vol. 34, No.4
Hobbs, D. and Pearson, G. (2001), Middle Market Drug Distribution. Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate, Research Study 227.
Home Office (1985), Tackling Drug Misuse. London, H.M.S.O.
Jones S, (2001), Criminology. London, Butterworth.
May, T. Edmonds, M. and Hough, M. (1999), Street Business: The Links Between Sex and Drug Markets. Home Office, Police Research Group Crime Prevention Unit Series Paper 118.
Moore S, (1996), Investigating Crime and Deviance. London, Collins Educational.
Morris, S. (1998), Clubs, Drugs and Doormen. Police Research Group Crime Detection and Prevention Series, Paper 86.
Murji, K. (1993), 'Drug Enforcement Strategies'. Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, Vol. 32, No. 3.
National Criminal Intelligence Service, (2002), UK Threat Assessment of Serious and Organised Crime 2002. London, NCIS.
Newburn, T. and Elliott, J. (1998), Police Anti-Drugs Strategies Tackling Drugs Together Three Years On. Police Research Group Crime Detection and Prevention Series, Paper 89.
Reiner, R. (1991), Chief Constables. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
South, N. (1994), 'Drugs: Control, Crime and Criminological Studies', in Maguire, M., Morgan, R. and Reiner, R. (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Tackling Drugs Together. (A Consultation Document on a Strategy for England 1995-1998), (1994), London, H.M.S.O.
Tackling Drugs Together. (A Strategy for England 1995-1998), (1995), London, H.M.S.O.
.
As defined by the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971
2 Government backed research is still ongoing into the possible benefits that cannabis may offer.
3 The Association of Chief Police Officers.
4 Figures taken from Bramley-Harker E. (2001), Sizing the UK Market for Illicit Drugs, The Research, Development and Statistics Directorate Occasional Paper No 74.
5 Figures taken from Bramley-Harker E. (2001), Sizing the UK Market for Illicit Drugs, Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate Occasional Paper No 74.
6 Figures taken from Godfrey C, Eaton G. McDougall C. and Culver A. (2002), The economic and social costs of Class A drug use in England and Wales, Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate, Home Office Research Study 249.
7 See May, T. Edmonds, M. and Hough, M. (1999) Street Business: The Links Between Sex and Drug Markets, Home Office, Police Research Group Crime Prevention Unit Series Paper 118.
8 Hobbs D. and Pearson G. (2001), Middle Market Drug Distribution, Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate, Research Study 227.
9 NCIS UK Threat assessment 2002.