THE DRUG USE—PROPERTY CRIME CONNECTION: THREE MODELS

Quoted from: Between Politics and Reason

  Chapter 9.   Drugs and Crime

    Erich Goode — State University of New York, Stony Brook

"Currently, drugs and crime are connected in very specific ways; their connection bears directly on the issue of whether or not property crime would decline under legalization. At least three "models" spell out the different ways they could be connected: the "enslavement" or "medical" model, the "criminal" model, and the "intensification" model."
    "The enslavement (or "medical") model is the one that has been adopted by the legalizers. It goes as follows. Addicts and abusers become "enslaved," unable to control their use of they drug; they spend so much money on it that they are unable to support their habit by working at a regular, legitimate job. Consequently, they must engage in crime; they have no choice in the matter. The enslavement model argues that addiction came first and crime followed as a consequence; addicts turn to crime because of their addiction. In the absence of addiction, those persons who are now enslaved to a drug would not commit moneymaking crimes, at least not to the same degree. Under legalization, in contrast heroin and cocaine would cost just a dollar or so per dose, and a huge slice of crime would be wiped out virtually overnight (Inciardi, 1992, pp.l50,153,159,248,263). The enslavement model makes two assumptions: first, that addicts and abusers are motivated to use their drugs of choice primarily because they want to avoid painful, body-wracking withdrawal symptoms and, second, that they will be satisfied with maintenance and will not seek intoxication or a high." (back)
    "The criminal model argues that it is not addicts who turn to crime but criminals who turn to drugs. Long before they become dependent on heroin and cocaine, those who eventually do so were already engaging in a variety of criminal activities. Persons who eventually become drug addicts and abusers were delinquents and criminals first; only later do they turn to drug use. The type of person who engages in criminal behavior—moneymaking crimes included—is the same type of person who experiments with and becomes dependent on drugs. Addiction has nothing to do with their criminal behavior; they are not enslaved to a drug so much as participants on a criminal lifestyle. Their drug use is a reflection or an indicator of that lifestyle; it is a later phase of a deviant tendency or career. Take away the drugs and they would still commit a great deal of crime; make drugs inexpensive, and they would still commit a great deal of crime; make drugs legal, again, and they would still commit a great deal of crime. Such persons belong in prison, this argument holds; legalization isn't going to reform their criminal tendencies (Inciardi, 1992, pp.l51,160-163)." (back)
   "T he intensification model represents something of a blend or compromise between the enslavement and the criminal models (Inciardi, 1992, pp.l58,163,248). It argues that, yes, criminal careers are already well established long before someone abuses, becomes dependent on, or even uses illegal drugs. Take away the drugs and, indeed, these same persons would still commit crimes vastly in excess of the rate of the general population. Legalization will not eliminate their criminal activities; indeed, most drug-dependent persons are deeply entrenched in a criminal lifestyle—dependency or no dependency, drugs or no drugs. Drug abuse and criminal activity are simply part and parcel of the way some people live. Drugs and crime are not causally connected so much as manifestations of the same deviant tendencies. On the other hand, the heavy use of cocaine and heroin certainly intensifies the likelihood that addicts and abusers will commit crimes, especially moneymaking crimes. Researchers have followed samples of heroin addicts over a period of years. The number of days on which these addicts committed crimes was extremely high during periods of nonaddiction (that is, during abstention or when enrolled in a methadone maintenance program)—but strikingly lower than the number of days during which they remained addicted (Anglin and Speckart, 1988; Nurco et al., 1988). The conclusions are inescapable: Drug abuse does not create or cause criminal behavior, but it does intensify or drive it. Legalization would not wipe out moneymaking crime among addicts and abusers, but it may very well reduce it (Inciardi, 1992, pp.l58, 163, 248)." (back)

See: http://www.druglibrary.org/special/goode/bpr9.htm for complete work and references

URL: http://www.umsl.edu/~keelr/180/goodedrugsandcrime.htm
Owner: Robert O. Keel rok@umsl.edu
References and Credits for this Page of Notes
Last Updated: Tuesday, April 5, 2005 10:49