Vice Squad
Friday, June 11, 2004
Please, Fumigate Our National Parks
This is the request, apparently, of Colombia's Vice President. Why does he want parkland to be sprayed with chemicals? Oh, it's just the logical next step in the war against cocaine. First you criminalize users and sellers; then you criminalize materials that can be employed in the production or consumption of cocaine: of course this criminalization applies to coca plant cultivation. Then you use aerial spraying on the farms of those poor peasants who ignore your prohibition on cultivation. They respond by planting cocoa not on their own land, but on national park land, which so far is exempt from your fumigation program. So by this obvious route, you come to the conclusion that the parks must be sprayed.
The national park problem is noted in this article (registration required) in today's Chicago Tribune, though the main thrust of the story concerns how opium production in Colombia has been able to withstand the anti-cocaine efforts. In another victory in the War on Drugs, however, many Colombian farmers are abandoning opium production -- because the price has fallen substantially (through increased supply and not, it seems, decreased demand.)
Labels: coca, cocaine, opium, policing
Wednesday, June 09, 2004
Colombia Adjusts to Coca Crop Eradication
You know that things are not going well for your administration when you start pointing to the war on drugs as one of your success stories -- but that is what the Bush administration is doing, according to this article in today's New York Times. The "good news" is that the attempted eradication of coca production in Colombia is being claimed to be "working," sort of: "In March, after a string of setbacks that saw Colombia's coca crop expand threefold to more than 400,000 acres from 1995 to 2001, authorities said new estimates showed a startling 21 percent decrease in the cultivation of coca in 2003. Coming on top of a more modest decline in 2002, the development validated for American authorities the $3.2 billion spent here since 2000, mostly for crop eradication." I always enjoy the precision in such estimates: 21 percent, not 20 or 22 percent! "All one knew was that every quarter astronomical numbers of boots were produced on paper, while perhaps half the population of Oceania went barefoot."
As for eradication, well, even after the recent proclaimed success...
The amount of cocaine produced here is, in fact, more than enough to satisfy demand in the United States, estimated at 250 to 300 metric tons annually, and in the rest of the world, for that matter. One result is that on American streets, the price of cocaine remains low - just $20,000 in New York for a kilogram, 2.2 pounds - and the purity level remains high, what drug experts say are indicators of a perfectly healthy business.The Times goes on to talk about how the eradication program has led to smaller, more isolated coca plots (even of the eco-friendly shade-grown variety!) and the development of coca plant varieties with higher concentrations of cocaine.
Have qualms about the morality of dumping tons of poison on the crops of poor peasants? Obviously you don't understand that this is an evil plant, and any and all measures that can eradicate it are not only acceptable but desirable. So you shouldn't worry about the impending death by firing squad of this cocaine smuggler, either. His death surely will make society better off -- at least if society can survive being mired, defiled, in such filth, such an abuse of "justice."
Labels: coca, cocaine, drugs, sentencing
Sunday, January 18, 2004
Recent Drug War Stuff on the Web
A couple days ago I updated the potential Venezuelan drug decriminalization story thanks to a link to this week's Drug War Chronicle. The same issue contains a few other stories that are worthy of mention:
(1) The country with the highest rate of executions (in per capita terms) is Singapore. The majority of those executed have been convicted of drug offenses. Singapore hangs people who are caught with quantities of drugs that are sufficient to generate a legal presumption that the possessors are traffickers, though the amounts that trigger that presumption are not huge. Amnesty International has issued a report critical of the workings of the Singapore justice system. (Incidentally, Saudi Arabia is second in per capita (bad terminology in this case) executions.)
(2) The chewing of coca leaves is traditional in parts of South America. Bolivia allows limited amounts of coca to be grown legally to provide a supply for this traditional practice. Now the legal coca farmers are attempting to have those "limited amounts" increased.
(3) Salvia, "a Mexican herb with weird psychedelic properties," is apparently popular at a US Air Force base in Oklahoma. The herb is not illegal in the US, it seems -- funny that the expectation is that a psychoactive plant is illegal! The Air Force base is unhappy, though, and is now threatening to punish military personnel who use salvia. The linked article from Drug War Chronicle provides the Air Force's definition of a drug: 'any intoxicating substance, other than alcohol, that is inhaled, injected, consumed or introduced into the body in any manner for purposes of altering mood or function.' You mean they let folks in the military drink?
Drug WarRant points to a few excellent stories, too. First, there's this LA Times article (registration required) on industrial hemp. Here's a sample: "Among the world's major industrial democracies, only the United States still forbids hemp farming. If an American farmer were to fill a field with this drugless crop, the government would consider him a felon. For selling his harvest he would be guilty of trafficking and would face a fine of as much as $4 million and a prison sentence of 10 years to life. Provided, of course, it is his first offense."
Two other stories that Drug WarRant highlights are drawn from Left Flank Shooters. One is an update on the safe injection site for intravenous drug addicts that was opened in Vancouver in September; a second is an academic paper that looks at the relationship between drug law enforcement and crime using data from counties in New York state. (An exaggerated version of the bottom line would be, More Drug War, More Crime.)
Labels: Asia, coca, drugs, hemp, salvia, Singapore
Tuesday, September 30, 2003
Loose Ends
Every now and then I have mentioned some issue, only to remark that it would undoubtedly
be discussed later on Vice Squad. As these are beginning to pile up, I thought that I would
at least make a handy list of what has been promised but not delivered. Only in one case,
though, will I begin to fulfill my obligation today, and I will save that one for the subsequent post.
On September 18 I referred to a newspaper article concerning a UN report on coca
cultivation in Colombia. I have tried, without success, to locate that report. The 2002 Coca Survey
for Colombia can be downloaded from this page, however, along with opium
and cocaine surveys for other major source countries. The UN provides a wealth of other material
related to drug control; much of it can be found here.
On September 23, I mentioned some of the controversy concerning the rationality of choices
involving potentially addictive goods. I also indicated that harm reduction would be a topic of
future Vice Squad posts. For an introduction to harm reduction with respect to drug use, see
this page.
On September 25, I introduced the topic of civil asset forfeitures, a particularly pernicious
practice that has become common in vice control in the US. Here is
the ACLU's helpful page concerning asset forfeiture with respect to drug policy.
On September 27, John Stuart Mill's "harm principle" was discussed, though many of its implications
for vice control were postponed.
I received an e-mail from my friend Dr. Christopher Young of London, UK, suggesting that I
have been remiss in not talking more about the three and one-third standard vice concerns.
I'll try to move that discussion along in the next post. In the meantime, as I have not yet put links
and other info on the side of the blog, let me note that my e-mail address is j-leitzel@uchicago.edu.
Labels: asset forfeiture, coca, drugs, harm reduction, Mill, UN
Tuesday, September 23, 2003
Colombian Plane Crash Update
It seems as if some of the information in my earlier post (from yesterday
-- can't seem to get the permalink to work) about a coca crop fumigation plane
crashing in Colombia was incorrect, according to a story (registration required) in the New York Times.
(The Chicago Tribune today carries a similar update.) The crash was not
accidental; rather the plane "was apparently shot down." Also, the earlier
post claimed that the pilot was an American, but he actually was a citizen of Costa Rica.
Here are two almost chilling paragraphs (but not the most chilling) from the Times story:
A Colombian army commander said the anti-narcotics offensive in which Alvarado was participating will continue until all drug crops in the region have been fumigated.
Operation Holocaust, being waged by U.S.-trained Colombian Army soldiers in the mountain-studded jungles of Norte de Santander state, is aimed at destroying huge cocaine-producing plantations that finance leftist insurgents, said Gen. Eduardo Morales.
Operation Holocaust?
Labels: coca, drugs, Prohibition
Monday, September 22, 2003
Coca Fumigation Tragedy
Limited but sad vice news in the Chicago Tribune today. A plane crashed in Colombia,
killing its American pilot. The plane was fumigating coca fields. The plane did not appear
to be shot down; presumably, the crash was accidental and may have been abetted
by harsh weather. [This information turned out to be incorrect -- see the update in this
post from Tuesday, September 23, 2003.]
In Chicago, a man was stomped to death early Saturday. An alleged attacker is being
held. The stomping is said to have occurred during a dispute over drug money.
One of the components of the Colombian tragedy is the rather substantial element of
futility that accompanies eradication and interdiction programs; see, e.g.,
Peter Reuter, "The Limits of Supply-Side Drug Control." The Milken Institute
Review, pp. 14-23, First Quarter, 2001. I tend to be reluctant to jump to policy
futility or perversity claims (the terminology is from Albert O. Hirschman's The Rhetoric
of Reaction: Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1991),
but in this case the arguments for futility in the medium term are pretty compelling. And
even if the flow of foreign cocaine were substantially trimmed, we would have to worry about
substitution to domestically produced methamphetamine or even increased consumption
of alcohol. And it is always useful to keep in mind that this US-led eradication program in a
distant foreign land is undertaken in the name of making it harder for some of our neighbors
and friends to pursue their personal pleasure by consuming cocaine.
The stomping death is so outrageous that it might be a bit overboard to deem it
drug-law-related. It reminds me of the case in NYC, when a bouncer was murdered by a man
who was enraged by the bouncer's attempt to enforce the then-new smoking ban. A member
of the murdered man's family blamed the killing on the ban, and indeed, that did appear to
be a proximate cause. But a person who is willing to kill someone because he is not allowed
to smoke sounds enough like a walking time bomb that he is almost bound to explode
on someone, somewhere. So while the murdered bouncer probably would be alive today if it
were not for the smoking ban, I think there is a good chance that some other unfortunate
soul might have paid a similarly heavy price from the assailant.
On the connection between alcohol and drug prohibition and homicide, see Jeffrey A. Miron,
"Violence and the U.S. Prohibitions of Drugs and Alcohol." American Law and Economics
Review 1: 78-114, Fall 1999. On my reluctance to jump to futility or perversity claims, see
Jim Leitzel, The Political Economy of Rule Evasion and Policy Reform. London: Routledge, 2003.
Finally, when people were contemplating making drugs illegal, did the sorts of deaths that
were in today's news enter into their cost-benefit analysis?
Labels: Chicago, coca, cocaine, drugs, Prohibition, smoking
