A study conducted by Butters, Hallgren and McGillicuddy (1997) looked at the central issues that female crack users face in Toronto. The women involved in this study responded that they had increasing involvement in the sex trade industry in order to pay for their drug use. Close to 90% had worked or were currently working in the sex trade. Seventy three percent of the women surveyed indicated they spent the majority of their income on drugs. Out of the 30 women interviewed, 93% admitted to engaging in illegal activities to obtain drugs: prostitution, theft, and drug trafficking. All but one woman reported being arrested at least once for these activities. The three most common offences were possession, theft, and prostitution. A majority of these women (79%) thought they would stop committing other illegal activities if they had access to free drugs and 41% said they would stop if they could access drugs for less money. Close to two thirds (62%) thought they would use less crack if they had a steady supply of drugs. Also, 62% thought they would try a substitute for crack (like methadone) if one were available.

Numerous studies in the United States have documented a correlation between addiction and crime (Anglin and Speckart 1988, Ball et al. 1981). For example, a study done by Johnson et al. (1985) found that 40% of the revenues of heroin users came from illegal activity. In addition, a study conducted by Deschesne, Anglin and Speckart (1991) found that over a period of two years, property crimes generated a large sum of money for the 279 heroin users in their sample. "While addicted Chicanos reported over $11 million in property crime income and almost $1.5 million in drug income: whites reported $9 million and over $1.5 million, respectively. In comparison, employment income was $4.6 million for Chicanos and $3.7 million for whites" (Deschesne, Anglin and Speckart 1991:399).

All of these examples support part of Goldstein's economic compulsive model. However, these findings differ in that the evidence suggests that most drug-related gainful crimes are non violent in nature. Even Goldstein states that "while research does indicate that most of the crimes committed by most of the drug users are of the nonviolent variety, e.g., shoplifting, prostitution, drug selling, there are little data that indicate what proportion of violent economic crimes are committed for drug related reasons" (Goldstein 1985:146). What is clear is that if Canada adopted more liberal drug laws, drug prices would decrease significantly, drug potency could be more closely monitored and if we chose to administer some illicit drugs freely, gainful crimes would be greatly reduced. Drug users may be less likely to commit property crimes due to the fact that they could access drugs and services easier. This statement can be backed up through examining the experiences of countries such as Switzerland, Netherlands and the United Kingdom who have implemented harm reduction strategies. These data are presented later in this article.

The Systemic Link

Goldstein’s third model linking drugs and crime relates to what he called systemic violence. He states "violence is intrinsic to involvement with any illicit substance. Systemic violence refers to the traditionally aggressive patterns of interaction within the system of drug distribution and use" (Goldstein 1985:148). Goldstein gives many examples of this including disputes over territory, assaults and homicides dealing with drug disputes, robberies of drug dealers, elimination of informers, punishment for selling “bad” or “phony” drugs, failing to pay debts, etc. (Goldstein 1985:148). In his research on violence associated with the illicit drug trade in New York City, he and his colleagues found that 80% of crime was systemic in nature (Goldstein et al. 1989:651 687). From this evidence, it appears as though the majority of crime associated with drugs is not caused by the drugs themselves, but by their criminalization.