Patterns of Crime in the Illegal Drug Market

Evidence suggests that one of the strongest links of drugs to crime stems from the criminalization of certain drugs. Just as prohibition of alcohol led to the strengthening of organized crime and a dramatic increase in violence, it seems that the prohibition of certain drugs has created a venue for certain offenders to make large amounts of money through illegal activities where violence is a the preferred method of control and regulation.

Chaiken and Chaiken (1990) point out that the correlation between drug selling and criminality is substantially stronger than the relationship between drug use and criminality. Pernanen et al. (2002) report that inmates who are drug traffickers report one of the smallest addictions rates of all inmates. Chaiken and Chaiken (1990) found that “adult robbers who sell drugs on average report committing more robberies and burglaries than robbers who do not sell drugs” (p. 211). In other words, many studies have shown that the systemic aspects of the drug trade seem to greatly enhance criminality due to the non-regulation of this industry where violence and theft are often used to weaken the competition and protect supplies and income. This market attracts those who engage in criminal behavior on a regular basis as employees and owners. Those who use or abuse the drugs make up the consumer base of this industry.

Two interesting questions arise from this analysis: Do people who are involved in a criminal lifestyle take advantage of the illegal status of certain substances to make profit, and what would occur if prohibition ended? Further, are we enhancing the conditions for crime by establishing prohibitionist policies and practices that, in turn, enable the illegal drug trade?

ARE WE USING EVIDENCE TO GUIDE POLICY?

Canada’s drug laws, and even our correctional policies, still appear to be at least partially driven by a belief that substance use/abuse causes crime. This is evident in our enforcement-dominated approach to drug control, and in our efforts in corrections to reduce crime by treating offenders for drug and alcohol problems. Experts in policy development know that effective policy is based on evidence. If the assumption that drug and alcohol use cause crime is not supported by available evidence, it seems logical to expect that policy based on this assumption would be ineffective at best and harmful to society at worst.

Have Our Prohibitionist Drug Policies Been Effective at Reducing Crime?

There are numerous studies and data that point out the failure of drug prohibition to significantly lower drug use. The evidence that will be presented in this section indicate that Canada’s drug laws and correctional drug policies have been ineffective in lowering crime rates and may have played a role in enhancing crime. It also seems logical to expect that if drug policies were based on evidence, we would not have laws that contribute to increased crime and we would have corrections policy that would focus on more effective means of reducing recidivism.