Drug Law Enforcement Revisited: The “War” Against the War on Drugs

Abstract

From the closure of London's nightclub Fabric to Duterte's drug war, law enforcement has become the policy choice par excellence for drug control by stakeholders around the globe, creating a rift between theory and practice, the former vehemently dismissing most of its alleged benefits. This paper provides a fresh look on the said regime, through examining its implications in the key areas of illicit drug markets, public health and broader society. Instead of adopting a critical stance from the start, as much of the literature does, the issue is evaluated from the perspective of a focus on the logic and rationality of drug law enforcement approaches, in order to showcase from within how problematic the latter are. The paper concludes by suggesting at least a re-conceptualisation of the concept, to give way to more sophisticated policies for finally tackling the issue of illegal drugs effectively.

Assessing factors associated with discharge from opioid agonist therapy due to incarceration in the United States

“…A growing number of studies suggest that the criminal justice policy approach criminalizing drug use in the United States failed to reduce substance use in local communities. [15][16][17][18] Prior studies suggest that criminalizing drug use results in interruptions in access to services, and increased risk of relapse and overdose upon release into the community. [19][20][21] Several studies point to arrest for possession and distribution of drugs as the primary reason for incarceration of people with substance use disorders which is a major driver of racial and ethnic disparities in criminal justice involvement.…”

“…Nearly half of the discharges were of patients reporting daily drug use at admission (48.22%, n = 31,020) and 55.89% reported intravenous drug use (n = 33,955). Nearly 40% of the discharges were of patients reporting one or more substance at admission (39.29%, n = 25,277), 36.69% (n = 23,669) used more than used 2 substances and 23.92% (15,385) used three or more substances.…”

Mechanisms for Expanding Harm Reduction for Opioid Use in Suburban and Rural U.S. Settings

“…In the late 1980s, a ban prevented the use of federal funding to support SSPs, and it was renewed each year through a law called the Public Health and Welfare Act until it was overturned by Congress in 2009 (Armstrong-Mensah, Dada, Rupasinghe, & Whately, 2021). Many states filled the gap by funding SSPs at the state and local level (Des Jarlais, 2004); however, local laws and enforcement practices created additional barriers which hindered implementation of SSPs (Polomarkakis, 2017) and harm reduction across the country (Green, Martin, Bowman, Mann, & Beletsky, 2012). For reasons such as the rise in HIV cases in rural communities due to needle sharing among people who inject drugs (Weinmeyer, 2016), the federal ban was partially lifted in 2015 to allow federal funds to support all SSP activities, except for the purchase of clean injection supplies (Showalter, 2018).…”