What If U.S. Cities Just Stopped Participating in the War on Drugs?

[xchrom]

http://www.citylab.com/crime/2014/05/what-if-us-cities-just-stopped-participating-in-the-war-on-drugs/370878/



Spring means budget season for local governments across the United States, and Steve Novick, a city commissioner in Portland, Oregon, has a proposal he thinks could save his city a nice chunk of change: slashing funding for the Portland Police Bureau's Drugs and Vice Division. The division, which largely targets drug dealers, costs $3.9 million annually to operate, and Novick's idea is to redirect a substantial portion of that budget to improving dangerous intersections where pedestrians are killed each year, as well as to better preparing the city for disasters—particularly the big earthquake that could strike Portland any day now.

“I noticed that we're spending about $4 million a year on the drugs and vice unit,” says Novick. “And there seems to be a lot of evidence that pursuing drug dealers is kind of a losing battle, because you arrest one and another pops up.”

Novick describes himself as “ambivalent” about drug legalization, and says his proposal is about the best use of tax dollars. “We can limit our inefficient expenditures of money without repealing drug laws,” he says. “It's up to the city to determine how much money it's going to spend chasing drugs dealers.”

The idea might sound reminiscent of the “Hamsterdam” episode of HBO's The Wire, in which a police major, tired of fighting a losing battle, designates certain areas of Baltimore as zones where drugs can be openly sold.

[RainDog]

1. If a city could create a "designated zone"

by word of mouth, nothing official, they could make neighborhoods safer for low-income residents by removing drug dealing from any street to the designated area - which would be a smaller area to police, and could focus on violent crimes - i.e. violent crimes would not be tolerated, dealing outside the area would not be tolerated...

and social services could set up near the area with needle swaps and rehab and serve as a buffer zone between low income residents and the drug culture they often have to live among.

Maybe that wouldn't work - but it seems like it might be a way to make children and the elderly safer.

The metrics for federal funding for local police could come from a decrease in violent crime, rather than arrests.

...yeah, I watched The Wire.

[oneofthe99]

2. It wouldn't work because the drug trade is controlled by violent gangs in these neighborhoods

The decent people that live in these neighborhoods want to see these gang members locked up.

[giftedgirl77]

4. He didn't say get rid of, he said slash.

They can focus on the biggest issues without worrying about the small time bullshit that takes up 90% of a vice squads time.

[oneofthe99]

6. That's not the way I read it

"pursuing drug dealers is kind of a losing battle, because you arrest one and another pops up"

[randome]

7. And it's the same with any crime.

You arrest one human trafficker, another pops up. You arrest one securities fraud trader, another pops up. And so on.

So the solution is to stop trying? I agree a middle ground can be found but 'giving up' isn't an option, IMO.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[oneofthe99]

9. I'm not disagreeing with you

that was his quote

[randome]

11. And I wasn't disagreeing with you, either.

Although I see why you might think so. I combined my agreement with you and my further point, which made for a confusing post.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[giftedgirl77]

12. Which I understood as they aren't going to pop

every kid standing on a corner peddling dime bags because it is a waste of resources. But I don't think his intention is to just allow the drug trade to over run the city.

[oneofthe99]

13. That's what would happen , set up shop outside the city and have people peddle drugs all over the

city with impunity on street corners , other gangs would want to move in doing the same thing.

If that is his intention he clearly didn't think this out before making his statement.

It starts as kilos , pounds etc... then it goes to the street level to be distributed and sold.


I'm telling you there would be turf wars like he's never seen before in his city.

[hobbit709]

5. What's the difference between the gang wars today and the gang violence in the 20s and early 30s?

When Prohibition was repealed, the mob got out of the liquor business, the profit margin drastically decreased.
the cartels got big and powerful for the same reason the mob got big and powerful.

[oneofthe99]

8. None really but it can't be just a city doing it

If dugs are declared legal it has to be nation wide.
If one city says you can peddle any type of drug you want here with impunity .
More gangs will try to set up shop , that will equal to more violence in inner cities

[Bluenorthwest]

16. Which is interesting, but he's not talking about legalization. He's talking about priorities in

spending. He's talking about waste of resources. He's saying look at the stack NYC has blown with the racist Stop and Frisk policy, look at the actual results of that policy and see if you really think it is worth the various costs, financial, social, long term and short.

[oneofthe99]

18. It doesn't matter if he said legalization , non enforcement will

bring more violence to his city

[randome]

3. Isn't that sort of what Cliven Bundy and his mentally ill ilk want?

For states to ignore the federal government? And as oneofthe99 points out, local communities are often devastated by drug gangs.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Don't ever underestimate the long-term effects of a good night's sleep.[/center][/font][hr]

[seveneyes]

10. I believe it was Major Howard (Bunny) Colvin that started Hamsterdam, not any Mayor

But yes, move the effort and money from drug enforcement to violent crime resolution.

[RKP5637]

14. Nationally, the war on pot is ridiculous and always has been. Pot should

be legal across the US. Second, the war on drugs, in general, is punitive. What needs to be changed are those behaviors that cause people to seek damaging drugs, and this combined with treatment for addictions. To me, the approach is ass backward, and is why it does not work. Typically the US, as many countries, applies punitive measures to change behavior, rather that seeking the cause. Hence, it is always a losing approach, costly, and repeats ad infinitum.

[Karma13612]

15. agree!

The reason we always have so many in jail on petty pot crimes is because the prison system is big bu$ine$$.
Money and greed always win out.
Let the pot 'criminals' out.
That frees up a LOT of space so we can keep the nasty criminals in jail.
Any money saved should go towards helping addicts clean up and lead productive lives.

[Bluenorthwest]

17. Steve Novick is a favorite of mine, he was the leading rival to Jeff Merkley for the Democratic

US Senate nomination in 2008. Portland is lucky to have him in that position and I hope to see him in higher office as the years pass.

[fredamae]

19. I met him

back then. He's a good politician. He's smart, intuitive, a realist and if you pose a question to him? He not only answers you-but engages you with more questions to better understand.

Yes, we need to get behind Novick--I can see a higher office, easily for him.
And yes, PDX is wise for having the good sense to hire him.