|
The Drug War in
Jefferson County Kentucky
by Michael Waddell
It isn't always easy to see the effects of the drug
war here in Jefferson County. Officials rarely talk
about how the Drug War is going unless they are trying
to use tough language as a way of getting votes. The
media also seems strangely mute on the subject. The
Snitch, a new periodical that lists weekly crime for
each zip code, typically doesn't list drug crime at
all. This makes it too easy to believe that only a few
people are arrested on harmless possession charges.
But the reality for many in Louisville, especially for
minorities and the poor, is that the enforcement of
drug law is a constant, punishing reminder of
government's power over our ability to make our own
decisions.
I recently had an opportunity to read the Louisville
and Jefferson County Twelfth Annual Drug, Alcohol, and
Violent Crime Database Report, published by the
Louisville Crime Commission. This public document
tells the current state of the drug war in blunt,
factual terms. Even a casual perusal should be enough
to alarm us of how badly the war on drugs has failed
us here at home. Below are a few choice statistics
that may surprise you.
* The thought of harmful drugs being sold to children
is certainly distressing, and is often used in Drug
War propaganda. But only one person was charged with
selling drugs to minors last year, and his case was
dismissed. Certainly this indicates that protecting
minors is not a relevant part of the Drug War.
* Many people think that more dangerous drugs like
crack and PCP are the focus of drug law enforcement,
but drug war resources are being used overwhelmingly
to punish simple marijuana users. Of the 17,000 drug
arrests in District Court for the year 2000, 6,000
were for marijuana possession, and 5,000 were for
marijuana paraphernalia.
* More people were arrested for marijuana possession
than were arrested for homicide, rape, burglary, and
robbery combined. This is shocking to me. Can anyone
truly claim marijuana use is more of a problem than
those other crimes combined? Then how can we justify
the astonishing expenditures in prosecuting these
generally harmless criminals?
* Last year, 8,600 pounds of marijuana was seized. To
put this into perspective, from 1989 to 1996, less
than 800 pounds of marijuana was seized annually. This
ten-fold increase has occurred largely without public
awareness.
* There were less than 1,000 arrests for trafficking
in cocaine or heroin, and only 3 convictions were
given. That's a conviction rate of less than 1
percent. Simply having an effectiveness rate this low
should be enough to call the program's existence into
question.
* The average prison terms for most drugs have gone
up. Prison terms for possession of marijuana, for
example, have gone up 73%; for drug paraphernalia, up
21%; and for trafficking in LSD, up 60%.
* Average prison terms for violent crime have gone
down. Prison terms for homicide have decreased 17%;
rape, down 27%; robbery, down 13%. Any rational
person, upon seeing these facts, would have to suspect
that we are punishing the wrong people.
* There were 429 drug-related emergency-room incidents
last year where drugs were the primary cause. Of
those, 33 were caused by marijuana. In that same time
period, there 3,000 alcohol-related emergency room
incidents. As a public health issue, drugs are barely
a blip on the radar screen.
* Asset seizures and forfeitures accounted for over 3
million dollars Jefferson County received last year.
If this, roughly 95% was simply cash taken by police
officers from suspects. (The report is quite blunt and
unapologetic on this point. "Federal and state laws
allow for the seizure and forfeiture of assets
directly or indirectly involved with illegal drug
activities. An example of this would be the seizure of
a vehicle that was involved in an illegal drug
transaction. Even if the vehicle was only used to
transport the drugs, the vehicle can be seized. . .
Once forfeited, the vehicle can be either sold at
auction, or used by law enforcement to continue drug
enforcement-related activities." In the majority of
cases, the victim of asset forfeiture is not ever
convicted of a crime, but his property is never
returned to him. This practice, though
unconstitutional on its face, has been upheld by the
courts as a necessary way to prosecute drug users.
I believe our local government's resources are being
wasted. An informed analysis of the facts has led me
to believe that radical changes in our drug policy are
needed. I believe any impartial reader will come to
the same conclusion. In the coming local elections, I
hope Louisvillians will press candidates to commit to
change in this area.
|
