News (Media Awareness Project) - US DC: OPED: How Real Is 'Traffic'? |
Title: | US DC: OPED: How Real Is 'Traffic'? |
Published On: | 2001-04-21 |
Source: | Washington Post (DC) |
Fetched On: | 2008-01-26 18:02:01 |
HOW REAL IS 'TRAFFIC'?
The movie "Traffic" is the most realistic portrayal of drug law enforcement
and the ravages of drugs on American families that I've ever seen. It
accurately shows the complexity of the drug trade -- from its origins in
foreign countries to its terminal point on our streets -- and how predatory
drug traffickers victimize young, weak and vulnerable people in our society.
But I'm afraid those who have seen the movie may have come to two
conclusions that appear to provide simple answers to some not-so-simple
problems having to do with our nation's recurring drug problem.
The first conclusion can be drawn from the Michael Douglas character, the
new government drug czar, who declares: "If this is a war on drugs, then
many of our family members are the enemy." Himself the father of an
addicted daughter, he steps down from his post, presumably because he
cannot support policies that target users.
While this scene is dramatically effective, it is factually inaccurate to
say that the U.S. government targets users. In fact, it is well-organized
international criminal organizations that are actively targeting American
families and American users, without whom they would be out of business.
One common misperception is that the American demand for drugs drives the
supply; in fact, the opposite is true. Without a steady, well-marketed
source of supply, users like Caroline in "Traffic" would not specifically
demand crack or heroin.
The high-school-age users in the film were bored, affluent kids whose
parents had no clue about who their friends were, or how they spent their
time after school. The availability of these drugs on the streets of
Caroline's home town was a significant factor in her decline.
The vast majority of offenders in prison are there not for possession, or
because they are users, but for serious trafficking offenses. A 1997
Justice Department survey found that only 5 percent of the drug offenders
in federal prison, and 27 percent in state prison, were there on possession
charges -- and many of those charges represent the results of plea
bargains. There simply is no reason to believe that drug users are the
"enemy" in any government policies.
Caroline's parents were able to find and afford good treatment for their
daughter and, as the film shows, treatment works for some people. For many
individuals, success comes only after repeated stays at drug clinics and
after too many productive years of life are dedicated to the pursuit of a
cure. I am a strong advocate of treatment, and believe it must be widely
available to everyone who needs it. Yet, I also believe that drug
prevention, along with effective law enforcement, must be a critical
component in all of our drug strategies.
Which leads me to the second erroneous conclusion some may take from the
film: that our country's efforts to solve the drug problem are futile.
While "Traffic" correctly suggests that law enforcement has enormous odds
to overcome, it also respects the talents, courage and dedication that DEA
and Customs agents bring to their task -- talents I see every day. The film
shows how difficult it is for law enforcement to work in an environment of
corruption and frustration, and yet the DEA characters continue to pursue
their targets -- the real enemy -- despite the odds.
Fighting the drug problem is not futile. Despite the uphill battle we face,
there have been victories. The enforcement of strict laws, coupled with
social disapproval, led to the reduction of drug use during the last
epidemic at the turn of the century. By the early 1960s only 2 percent of
the American people had ever tried drugs, compared with 28 percent today.
If Americans could live without drugs 40 years ago, there is no reason we
cannot now.
Despite a perception that the fight against drugs is lost, today's level of
drug use is less than half what it was two decades ago. This progress was
made during a time when people thought casual drug use was socially
acceptable. But slowly we learned that the consequences and risks of using
drugs were severe. Through a balanced approach of law enforcement,
prevention and treatment, our nation has made a positive impact on the
levels of drug trafficking and use. For the sake of our sons and daughters,
the potential Carolines of the world, we need to persevere, with courage
and determination.
The writer is administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration.
The movie "Traffic" is the most realistic portrayal of drug law enforcement
and the ravages of drugs on American families that I've ever seen. It
accurately shows the complexity of the drug trade -- from its origins in
foreign countries to its terminal point on our streets -- and how predatory
drug traffickers victimize young, weak and vulnerable people in our society.
But I'm afraid those who have seen the movie may have come to two
conclusions that appear to provide simple answers to some not-so-simple
problems having to do with our nation's recurring drug problem.
The first conclusion can be drawn from the Michael Douglas character, the
new government drug czar, who declares: "If this is a war on drugs, then
many of our family members are the enemy." Himself the father of an
addicted daughter, he steps down from his post, presumably because he
cannot support policies that target users.
While this scene is dramatically effective, it is factually inaccurate to
say that the U.S. government targets users. In fact, it is well-organized
international criminal organizations that are actively targeting American
families and American users, without whom they would be out of business.
One common misperception is that the American demand for drugs drives the
supply; in fact, the opposite is true. Without a steady, well-marketed
source of supply, users like Caroline in "Traffic" would not specifically
demand crack or heroin.
The high-school-age users in the film were bored, affluent kids whose
parents had no clue about who their friends were, or how they spent their
time after school. The availability of these drugs on the streets of
Caroline's home town was a significant factor in her decline.
The vast majority of offenders in prison are there not for possession, or
because they are users, but for serious trafficking offenses. A 1997
Justice Department survey found that only 5 percent of the drug offenders
in federal prison, and 27 percent in state prison, were there on possession
charges -- and many of those charges represent the results of plea
bargains. There simply is no reason to believe that drug users are the
"enemy" in any government policies.
Caroline's parents were able to find and afford good treatment for their
daughter and, as the film shows, treatment works for some people. For many
individuals, success comes only after repeated stays at drug clinics and
after too many productive years of life are dedicated to the pursuit of a
cure. I am a strong advocate of treatment, and believe it must be widely
available to everyone who needs it. Yet, I also believe that drug
prevention, along with effective law enforcement, must be a critical
component in all of our drug strategies.
Which leads me to the second erroneous conclusion some may take from the
film: that our country's efforts to solve the drug problem are futile.
While "Traffic" correctly suggests that law enforcement has enormous odds
to overcome, it also respects the talents, courage and dedication that DEA
and Customs agents bring to their task -- talents I see every day. The film
shows how difficult it is for law enforcement to work in an environment of
corruption and frustration, and yet the DEA characters continue to pursue
their targets -- the real enemy -- despite the odds.
Fighting the drug problem is not futile. Despite the uphill battle we face,
there have been victories. The enforcement of strict laws, coupled with
social disapproval, led to the reduction of drug use during the last
epidemic at the turn of the century. By the early 1960s only 2 percent of
the American people had ever tried drugs, compared with 28 percent today.
If Americans could live without drugs 40 years ago, there is no reason we
cannot now.
Despite a perception that the fight against drugs is lost, today's level of
drug use is less than half what it was two decades ago. This progress was
made during a time when people thought casual drug use was socially
acceptable. But slowly we learned that the consequences and risks of using
drugs were severe. Through a balanced approach of law enforcement,
prevention and treatment, our nation has made a positive impact on the
levels of drug trafficking and use. For the sake of our sons and daughters,
the potential Carolines of the world, we need to persevere, with courage
and determination.
The writer is administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration.
Member Comments |
No member comments available...