News (Media Awareness Project) - CN ON: Editorial: Trying To End The Next Fix |
Title: | CN ON: Editorial: Trying To End The Next Fix |
Published On: | 2007-12-19 |
Source: | Ottawa Citizen (CN ON) |
Fetched On: | 2008-08-16 10:24:10 |
TRYING TO END THE NEXT FIX
Ottawa's new street crime unit can squeeze the supply of drugs all it
likes, but that won't solve the city's substance-abuse problems.
Operation "Street Sweep" picked up 65 suspects on the weekend, laying
a few hundred charges. The idea was to put the fear of the law into
the dealers, to show them they don't operate with impunity.
That's a worthwhile goal, although its worth shouldn't be overstated.
Trafficking in drugs is illegal and the police have a duty to enforce
that law. It's possible that a strong police presence could deter some
would-be users and dealers from operating in plain view on the
streets, to the horror of tourists and Christmas shoppers. It can also
keep them out of the vicinity of shelters, where they prey on
vulnerable people.
But rounding up the usual suspects can only ever be a surface
activity. It can affect the habits of users and dealers, affect their
choice of neighbourhood, maybe even affect the difficulty of the their
lives and the price of certain drugs. It can't go any deeper than that.
It's a little like the concerned spouse who throws away his wife's
cigarettes. Maybe she'll be shamed into quitting temporarily, perhaps
over the holidays. Or maybe she'll just start hiding her habit from
her husband. Or maybe her anger at being treated like a child will
make her dig in her heels against the very idea of quitting. In any
case, it's unlikely that removing the immediate supply of cigarettes
will give an addict the fortitude, will and emotional grounding she
needs to quit for good.
Cutting off the immediate supply of crack (or clean crack pipes) won't
do much good for those addicts, either. In a city without crack,
addicts might turn to pills. In a city without dealers, addicts might
turn to solvents. As Staff Sgt. Samir Bhatnagar told the Citizen, we
don't know what happens to crack addicts once the dealers are rounded
up: "That's the million-dollar question." Indeed.
Of course the supply affects demand, just as demand affects supply:
the drugs themselves affect the minds and lives of users, and it
really does matter which drug a person uses. So the surface changes do
matter. They will never matter as much, though, as that million-dollar
question.
When the dealers get thin on the ground, do the customers switch to
something else to get them through the day? Do they become erratic or
aggressive? Do they leave their neighbourhoods in search of hits? Do
they go to shelters and seek counselling? Or are there other petty
criminals who keep the supply chain operating?
The answers to those questions are far more important than the number
of dealers rounded up or the number of charges they face. Yes, the
police must keep enforcing the law. But they shouldn't let their pride
and self-congratulation blind them to the limits of enforcement.
Ottawa's new street crime unit can squeeze the supply of drugs all it
likes, but that won't solve the city's substance-abuse problems.
Operation "Street Sweep" picked up 65 suspects on the weekend, laying
a few hundred charges. The idea was to put the fear of the law into
the dealers, to show them they don't operate with impunity.
That's a worthwhile goal, although its worth shouldn't be overstated.
Trafficking in drugs is illegal and the police have a duty to enforce
that law. It's possible that a strong police presence could deter some
would-be users and dealers from operating in plain view on the
streets, to the horror of tourists and Christmas shoppers. It can also
keep them out of the vicinity of shelters, where they prey on
vulnerable people.
But rounding up the usual suspects can only ever be a surface
activity. It can affect the habits of users and dealers, affect their
choice of neighbourhood, maybe even affect the difficulty of the their
lives and the price of certain drugs. It can't go any deeper than that.
It's a little like the concerned spouse who throws away his wife's
cigarettes. Maybe she'll be shamed into quitting temporarily, perhaps
over the holidays. Or maybe she'll just start hiding her habit from
her husband. Or maybe her anger at being treated like a child will
make her dig in her heels against the very idea of quitting. In any
case, it's unlikely that removing the immediate supply of cigarettes
will give an addict the fortitude, will and emotional grounding she
needs to quit for good.
Cutting off the immediate supply of crack (or clean crack pipes) won't
do much good for those addicts, either. In a city without crack,
addicts might turn to pills. In a city without dealers, addicts might
turn to solvents. As Staff Sgt. Samir Bhatnagar told the Citizen, we
don't know what happens to crack addicts once the dealers are rounded
up: "That's the million-dollar question." Indeed.
Of course the supply affects demand, just as demand affects supply:
the drugs themselves affect the minds and lives of users, and it
really does matter which drug a person uses. So the surface changes do
matter. They will never matter as much, though, as that million-dollar
question.
When the dealers get thin on the ground, do the customers switch to
something else to get them through the day? Do they become erratic or
aggressive? Do they leave their neighbourhoods in search of hits? Do
they go to shelters and seek counselling? Or are there other petty
criminals who keep the supply chain operating?
The answers to those questions are far more important than the number
of dealers rounded up or the number of charges they face. Yes, the
police must keep enforcing the law. But they shouldn't let their pride
and self-congratulation blind them to the limits of enforcement.
Member Comments |
No member comments available...