LE Perspectives on Drug Abuse & Drug Policy in the US

[Nephrology]

In the last couple decades, there have been major changes in domestic US drug policy & patterns of drug abuse, including the opiate crisis, the legalization of recreational marijuana in several states, and the rise of Mexican drug cartels, among many others. While these changes affect nearly every American, I am particularly interested to hear the perspectives and opinions of our members in Law Enforcement (current or retired) on this topic.

Specifically: what changes in patterns of drug use/associated criminality have you observed in your careers? Have you observed changes in drug enforcement policy, either at the level of state/federal gov't or within your department/respective prosecutor's office? How do you feel about these changes, or the policies that exist today? What would you do differently, if anything, about the way we approach the use of illegal narcotics as a society?

Particularly interested in the inherent tension between treating drug abuse as a criminal matter vs. medical concern at the user level, as well as changes in the social patterns of drug use (who is using, who is selling, how the illicit drug market has changed over time, and so forth). Feel free to share any other thoughts/opinions/anecdotes you may have on this topic as well.

To be clear: I am not interested in the opinions of those not in LE (even if you are another first responder or in an allied profession), nor am I interested in turning this into a debate about the war on drugs. I want LE posters to feel free to share their opinions, whatever they might be, without having to justify or defend them.

With this in mind, here are a couple ground rules:

1. LE perspectives only. If you are not in LE, please restrict your replies to questions only. In general, I'd prefer that we non-LE posters keep our ears open, mouths closed. The only exception are lawyers with substantial experience defending/prosecuting drug or drug-related cases.

2. No picking fights. LE or otherwise, please do not turn this into a debate. It's OK to ask why someone feels a certain way, or for LE posters to share contrasting/opposing opinions, but I insist that we do so without this descending into bickering. We are all adults and thus should be more than capable of respecting

3. No politics. As a corollary, please do your best to keep politics out of this. I know drug policy is inherently political, but please try to restrict your opinions to specific laws, policies or decisions without dragging political affiliation into the mix. It's fine to recognize political parties/figures in general terms (e.g. "Under the Obama administration/our Republican state AG, I noticed changes in XYZ") but please stay objective and avoid mud-flinging (e.g. "Under the Obama administration/our Republican state AG, I noticed changes in XYZ and that this was destroying America and Freedom and Christmas.") Tom is closing down the Trump threads over XMas for a reason, so let's avoid making his life more difficult.

If you'd really like to share something that does not conform to these rules, please start another thread. I consulted with our mods before posting specifically because I recognize the potential for this thread to run off the rails, so I am hopeful that you will all help me out by being respectful of the above guidelines.

Thanks in advance to our LE posters for your replies. Very much looking forward to listening to what you all have to say.

[ssb]

Particularly interested in the inherent tension between treating drug abuse as a criminal matter vs. medical concern at the user level, as well as changes in the social patterns of drug use (who is using, who is selling, how the illicit drug market has changed over time, and so forth). Feel free to share any other thoughts/opinions/anecdotes you may have on this topic as well.

The thing, at least in my state, is some form of recovery court. Drug addicts (and those mental health needs and, on a very limited basis, veterans) get a court of their own to encourage rehabilitation and recovery specific to the issues they present. The drug courts are well-integrated with various community stakeholders, representatives from the prosecution and public defender, parole/probation, and treatment providers. They're generally regarded as an effective concept when implemented properly. In another jurisdiction where I've worked, the re-arrest rate for drug court participants was something like 30% vs. probationers as a whole -- which was considered to be good. I have mixed feelings about certain issues at a micro level, but as a concept I'm generally supportive.

Our average first-time illicit user for an opiate is in their teens, same for benzos (which are #3 for abuse for us, coming in behind cheap Mexican meth). The epidemic affects McDonald's teenagers, trust-fund kids, tradespeople, and white-collar professionals pretty much equally. My personal opinion is that it's because long-term prescriptions have been normalized, and illicit use isn't seen the way that, say, meth use is. Direction from on high says that attitude shall not exist in my office, and efforts are underway to change that within the community and the justice system as a whole around here.

As an example of attitudes changing, I found a case which came up out of archives after an individual was found on a failure-to-appear from several years ago. They were indicted for possession for resale of of oxymorphone and oxycodone, about 1,500 pills found on the interstate in a non-interdiction related stop. They were out on a rather low bond when they failed to appear. In a similar case today, our judges likely would have set a bond several orders of magnitude higher. I watched an individual from the same upper Midwestern city as the aforementioned defendant get popped with less than a third of that and receive a $1,000,000 bond recently. The times, they are a'changing...

There is a strong desire to prosecute pill mills in my part of the world. Certain things are in the works. How that will happen here remains to be seen. It's certainly not five years ago when DTF was roaming the hills popping meth labs. I'll leave other matters to others, as your post is vague as to whether I'm supposed to answer it and should probably be in the LE section rather than General Discussion.

[TC215]

To preface/qualify this some: I’ve been in LE 11 years, and have spent almost all of that time in drug enforcement. I’ve been an interstate drug interdiction officer, a narcotics detective, and a narcotics sergeant. I’ve also been a task force officer at various times for the DEA and FBI.

Patterns of drug use/related criminal activity: If anything, I’ve noticed an increase in the amount of associated violence, especially with the violent robberies of weed dealers. The burglaries, thefts, robberies associated with users have always been a constant thing.

Changes in drug enforcement policy:

At the department: To my department’s credit, they’ve added numerous positions to our drug unit and task forces. Everyone knows we have a big problem with drugs.

At the state-level: It’s a joke. There’s been some changes in the law, but our courts and laws (and our DA’s office) aren’t a real help.

At the federal level: We’ve always been successful in the federal system, even during the Obama years, though our federal prosecutions really ramped up when Sessions took over (though moreso with guns and not drugs- we’ve more than doubled our federal indictments this year compared to last year). The Obama administration changed several things that I didn’t like, including changing the amounts of crack to get a minimum mandatory from 5 grams to 28 grams. I’m not happy about the “criminal justice reform” that just went through, although a lot of people from both sides of the aisle are.

If I could change anything about the way society approaches the use of illegal drugs— I would change how acceptable it has become, especially with marijuana. At the risk of sounding like an after school special— marijuana is a gateway drug. It’s hard to tell people not to do it when society is so accepting.

Drug abuse as a criminal matter vs. medical concern at the user level—

We’re never going to fix addiction with incarceration. However, it’s impossible to help someone that doesn’t want help. I don’t know what the answer is.

As far as any changes I’ve seen— Since the late 80’s, crack was the main drug here. People literally came here from all over the country to sell crack. In the last 4 years, though, crystal meth has completely taken over. Used to, if we found pound/kilo-quantities of cocaine, it was a big deal. Finding pound quantities of meth have become no big deal, because it’s so cheap.

My area is also well known for pill abuse. 9 or 10 years ago, it was really common for people here and surrounding states to drive down to pill mills in Florida and bring their oxy’s back. After Florida changed their laws and shut the pill mills down, oxy’s became harder to get and it made prices go up. That’s why we’re seeing the increase in heroin/fentanyl- similar high, cheaper price (and more OD deaths).

I’ve always said that the “War on Drugs” is a misnomer. Wars are (generally) won or lost, with winners and losers. I’m not sure there are any winners here, but I still think it’s a fight worth fighting.

[Nephrology]

I'll leave other matters to others, as your post is vague as to whether I'm supposed to answer it and should probably be in the LE section rather than General Discussion.

To clarify, you and other LE posters can/should share basically anything on the topic of drugs/drug policy that you think is worth sharing, as long as you are at liberty to do so. Interested in hearing whatever strikes you as important on the topic.

Thanks for the post!

[Nephrology]

Patterns of drug use/related criminal activity: If anything, I’ve noticed an increase in the amount of associated violence, especially with the violent robberies of weed dealers. The burglaries, thefts, robberies associated with users have always been a constant thing.

Can I ask what state or region you're in? I find this especially interesting, given that I'd sort of assumed that the opposite would occur now that marijuana is more available/acceptable today (also an assumption).

As far as any changes I’ve seen— Since the late 80’s, crack was the main drug here. People literally came here from all over the country to sell crack. In the last 4 years, though, crystal meth has completely taken over. Used to, if we found pound/kilo-quantities of cocaine, it was a big deal. Finding pound quantities of meth have become no big deal, because it’s so cheap.

Is the user base for crack/meth the same? If different, how?

[ssb]

To clarify, you and other LE posters can/should share basically anything on the topic of drugs/drug policy that you think is worth sharing, as long as you are at liberty to do so. Interested in hearing whatever strikes you as important on the topic.

Thanks for the post!

In no particular order...

Our sentencing sucks, plain and simple. It's going to get worse. In my state, "smart on crime" is the phrase to use around the capitol. I sat in a room a few months back and listened to both major gubernatorial candidates talk to us about how, under their proposed administrations, they were going to be waaaaaay tougher than the other guy -- but also smarter about this whole crime thing. It's code for putting fewer people in prison and giving more second (and third and fourth...) chances. They threw in a few nice words about truth in sentencing because they had to play to their audience. What's curious about it to me is that both political sides get to the same end state on this, just for different reasons: one wants to correct what they see as a systematic injustices and disproportionate effects, and the other realized that people with felony records make for poor workforce participants.

TC215 is absolutely correct in that we're not going to incarcerate our way out of addiction. But the truth is, addicts aren't generally being incarcerated in my experience (unless it's a sentencing hearing on a violation of probation -- then the addiction stories come out, because there's always one more program in lieu of prison, so do some good in the world, Judge...) -- at least not for what I'd term as addict stuff. As a matter of fact, we pretty much can't incarcerate for the traditional manifestations of addiction (nonviolent property crime). Our sentencing laws heavily favor alternative sentencing for the vast majority of criminal conduct, and in some instances it is appropriate -- in the context of addiction, particularly in the form of recovery courts -- but at some point the ride has to end. In our current legislative climate, however, it probably will not.

On civil forfeitures, the winds have changed dramatically on that. ALJs simply aren't forfeiting property much anymore, even when we "know" exactly what it is. We're seriously considering moving to straight up judicial forfeitures (indicting the cash, car, etc.) for that reason. A consequence of that is that some DTFs in the state have been forced into layoffs. I'll stop there so as not to open up the policing for profit can of worms (though why you'd fund positions based on seizures is beyond me...), but the attitude at the capitol is driving that train.

Marijuana? My guess is that it'll be recreationally legal in my state within five years. What'll happen with the feds is anybody's guess, but my gut says they'll at least reschedule it relatively soon. It's rarely even a blip on anybody's radar on the prosecution side in my experience -- simple possession is rinse-and-repeat, perception-wise nobody's investigating weed dealers unless it falls into their lap, and even if you have a solid resale case you've basically got to have a truck full of it to actually be looking at serious consequences in court. Societal attitudes have changed on it, plain and simple -- and that's in a rather conservative state.

Our commonly abused drugs here tend to be opioids, cheap Mexican meth, and benzodiazepines. Opioids are complicated and I don't pretend to know the answer as to how to fix it, but we've got a massive problem out here. I don't think the crisis will go away unless and until we stop normalizing requiring a pill for every damn little thing. You hurt? It's normal to take a pill. Doctor doesn't think you rate it -- but hey, what does he know? After all, it's not like you're using drugs... People get dependent on it that way, and so begins the cycle. Or hey, maybe they just want to get fucked up and don't want to do "bad" drugs. Unless and until we as a society perceive crushing up an Oxy and putting it up your nose like we would view heroin or crack use, those "normal" people are going to keep doing it -- the psychological barrier to entry is low enough to overcome for most. Benzos? They're not as attention-grabbing (and thus, resource-attracting) as opioids because they don't kill as much, but I wouldn't be surprised if a quarter or more of my area's population was on alprazolam, diazepam, or clonazepam, and in my view they enter into it for the same reasons they do the opioids.

[TC215]

Can I ask what state or region you're in? I find this especially interesting, given that I'd sort of assumed that the opposite would occur now that marijuana is more available/acceptable today (also an assumption).

Southeast US.

Marijuana is where the money is. Our biggest money seizures have always come from weed dealers. Bad guys know this too, and will rob weed dealers for their product and their money.

Is the user base for crack/meth the same? If different, how?

A lot of crack users have switched to meth in recent years. Not all, but a lot of them. There is still a market for crack, but it’s not what it used to be. A lot of the dealers that have traditionally sold crack have also switched to dealing meth.

[GuanoLoco]

If I could change anything about the way society approaches the use of illegal drugs— I would change how acceptable it has become, especially with marijuana. At the risk of sounding like an after school special— marijuana is a gateway drug. It’s hard to tell people not to do it when society is so accepting.

Q from a non-LEO: With respect to experience in the field, how does the concept of ‘marijuana as a gateway drug’ and increasing legal acceptance of MJ as a recreational drug in some states correlate, or fail to correlate with an increase in the use of harder drugs in those states?

[TC215]

Q from a non-LEO: With respect to experience in the field, how does the concept of ‘marijuana as a gateway drug’ and increasing legal acceptance of MJ as a recreational drug in some states correlate, or fail to correlate with an increase in the use of harder drugs in those states?

I would have to defer to someone in a state where marijuana is legal.

I have sat through some presentations by Colorado LE/State attorney’s office, and heard them talk about the increase in crime, homelessness, etc. since it legalization went through.

[Trooper224]

TC215 said it well enough that I don't feel the need to type that out again.

Regarding the "War on Drugs": as I see it we have two sides of this issue firmly juxtaposed against each other, the moral and the legal. Those two sides are constantly at loggerheads with each other. They're also continually used by politicians as a means of political gain, often to the detriment of their constituents on both sides. Until those two sides can find some area in the middle where a compromise can be met nothing will change. There are also far too many people making money and careers fighting the "War on Drugs" who really have no interest in seeing it brought to an end.