DRUG ADDICTION IN RELATION TO CRIME
One of the compelling reasons why more rational methods of dealing with drug
addicts must be devised is the close relationship between drug addiction and
crime. The compulsion for the drug makes every drug addict a law violator and a
criminal. Mere possession of a narcotic drug which the addict must have to ward
off withdrawal distress is a violation of the narcotic laws. Thus, every drug
addict is subject to arrest by the police, and as we have seen, the arrests of
addicts and of narcotic law violators have gone up by leaps and bounds. Addicts
guilty of no other crime than illegal possession of narcotics are filling the
jails, prisons and penitentiaries of the country.
However, this is only a part of the distressing picture of the relationship
between narcotic addiction and criminality. For most narcotic addicts,
predatory crime (larceny, shoplifting, sneak thievery, burglary, embezzlement,
robbery, etc.), is a necessary way of life. This was clearly recognized by the
law enforcement officials who appeared before the Congressional Committees and
gave testimony concerning the close relationship between property crime and
drug addiction in their communities. These officials were convinced that
property crimes could be reduced materially if all drug addicts could be
incarcerated.
The
New York University
and the
Chicago
studies on drug addiction support the notion that drug addiction necessarily
leads to predatory crime as a way of life. For example, Chein and Rosenfeld
make the following comments based on their studies of juvenile addicts:
"Drug use leads to a criminal way of life. The illegality of purchase and
possession of opiates and similar drugs makes a drug user a delinquent ipso
facto. The high cost of heroin, the drug generally used by juvenile users, also
forces specific delinquency against property for cash returns. The average
addicted youngster spends almost forty dollars a week on drugs, often as much
as seventy dollars. He is too young and unskilled to be able to support his
habit by his earnings. The connection between drug use and delinquency for
profit has been established beyond any doubt."56 A
Chicago study comes to a similar conclusion:
"...Almost without exception addicts resort to theft to obtain money for
the purchase of the drugs. The compulsion of the addiction itself coupled with
the astronomically high cost of heroin leads the addict inescapably to crime.
For the addict there is very simply no alternative."57 There has been
considerable debate as to whether the criminality of the addict preceded or is
merely a consequence of the drug addiction. Studies like those of Pescor can be
cited for the proposition that most narcotic addicts became delinquents and
criminals after the onset of their addiction. Pescor found in 1943. that of the
1,036 patients at Lexington, studied by him, 75.3% had no history of
delinquency prior to addiction.58 Anslinger, however, has the always taken the
view that the drug addict was usually a criminal first before becoming
addicted.59 The answer to the question of whether the addict was a delinquent
or criminal prior to addiction largely depends upon the particular groups of
addicts studied. For example, Kolb60, in 1928, studied a group of 119 so called
"medical addicts", persons who became addicted to drugs as a result
of the prescription of narcotics for ailments other than addiction. Kolb found
that of these 119 addicts, 90 had never previously been arrested. However, the
studies conducted in
New York and
Chicago present a
different picture. These studies of drug addiction were conducted in areas with
high rates of delinquency and crime. They were also concerned with youthful and
adolescent offenders. The conclusion from the
Chicago
and
New York
studies is inescapable that "delinquency both preceded and followed addiction
to heroin."61 "Persons who became users," stated the
Chicago report,
"were found to have engaged in delinquency in a group habitual form either
prior to their use of drugs or simultaneously with their developing interest in
drugs. There was little evidence of a consistent sequence from drug use without
delinquency to drug use with delinquency."62 Nevertheless, even in the
delinquency areas of our large cities, there are persons who become addicted to
drugs without a prior career of delinquency and crime. After addiction,
however, they will usually turn to delinquency and crime "often after
overcoming severe psychological conflict occasioned by their repugnance to
theft."63 Moreover, the addict who had previously been a delinquent loses
all chance of shaking off habits of delinquency and crime as he grows older.
Not all non addicted delinquents and adolescent offenders living in the
delinquency areas of our large cities grow up to be habitual and professional
criminals. Many abandon their delinquent and criminal pursuits when they reach
early adulthood. They find jobs, marry and settle down to productive lives. But
if the delinquent or adolescent offender adds narcotic addiction to his
patterns of behavior, ". ..All possible future retreat from a delinquent
mode of life is cut off regardless of whatever later impulses they may have to
reject a criminal career in favor of a conventional one. They are constrained
by their unremitting need and the high cost of heroin to continue in crime.
This interpretation supports the conclusion that drug addiction results in a
large and permanent increase in the volume of crime."64 Thus, the
realities of the relationship between narcotic addiction and crime appear to be
much more somber than the romantic myth, "that hold-up men, murderers,
rapists and other violent criminals take drugs to give them courage or stamina
to go through with acts which they might not commit when not drugged."65
Dr. Kolb has labeled this notion an "absurd fallacy." The crimes committed
by opiate addicts are generally of a parasitic, predatory nonviolent character.
Drug addicts may, on occasion, commit violent crimes. This is hardly surprising
since so many are classified as psychopaths. A psychopath tends towards serious
criminality with or without drug addiction. Generally, however, the use of
opiate drugs (whatever may be the case with marihuana and cocaine) tends to
discourage violent crime. As Maurer and Vogel point out: "The sense of
well-being and satisfaction with the world are so strong that, coupled with the
depressant action of the drug, the individual is unlikely to commit aggressive
or violent crime after he is addicted, even though he habitually or
professionally did so previous to addiction. In the words of Kolb, 'Both heroin
and morphine in large doses change drunken fighting psychopaths into sober,
cowardly, non-aggressive idlers ...' "...To date, there has been no
evidence collected to show that any significant percentage of opiate addicts
commit violent crimes either professionally or casually while under the
influence of these drugs ... the reduction or elimination of sexual desire
tends to remove the opiate addict from the category of psychopathic sex
offenders, even though he might have a tendency to commit sex crimes when not
addicted ..."66 Since opiate drugs do not act as a stimulant for the
commission of violent crime, should not confirmed addicts have a means of
obtaining such drugs legally, so that they will not have to engage in crime in
order to raise the money necessary for their needs? This basic question goes to
the heart of our present policy in dealing with drugs addiction.
No comments:
Post a Comment