Individualists state that it is unfair to force non-drug users to pay to try and stop drug users doing what they want to do in their own home.
Many do not accept this and cite crime as a major externality with drug use.
In a recent debate I was told that "17% of violent crime is caused by drugs".
As it turns out the only statistic I could find using Google was that 17% of victims of violent crime "believed the offender to be under the influence of drugs". This was dismissed as being irrelevant and that the original statistic was still true. This was not just a random crazy member of the public; a few searches on Google show this kind of thinking is endemic in the media and government.
There is indeed correlation between drug use and crime. But correlation isn't causation.
The Australian Institute of Criminology explains the problem: "Research suggests that drug use and crime involvement have common origins. Factors such as poor social support systems, difficulty in school, membership of deviant peer groups, early contact with government services and a lack of access to economic support systems are common in the backgrounds of both drug users and criminals."
Drugs and Violence: Causes, Correlates, and Consequences by the US government's National Institute on Drug Use is the most detailed study I could find. It is clear that drug use does not cause crime.
Independent Policy Report: Illicit Drugs and Crime is also clear about it's data and methods to conclude drugs do not cause crime.
I then had a more recent UK related statistic quoted back at me.
"...a massive 90% of all Young Offenders are on cannabis"
I research and found a newspaper article in The Mirror quoting this fact. "Cannabis is fuelling a youth crime wave - with 90 per cent of teen offenders using it."
I still found it unbelievable so I kept searching.
A Daily Mail article from the same time states something completely different: "In some parts of the country that means nine out of ten teenage criminals have been using the drug."
Some parts of the country? What does that mean? It isn't explained.
A Youth Justice Board report from a few months earlier states "90% of young people in custody had used an illegal drug at some point in their life"
Three completely different statistics. I concede that if the Mirror's version is true it doesn't invalidate the other two but I find that unlikely.
Another US government body, the Drug Enforcement Agency, has a very strong quote to prove that drugs do cause crime which was used to counter my argument.
"Crime, violence and drug use go hand in hand. Six times as many homicides are committed by people under the influence of drugs, as by those who are looking for money to buy drugs. Most drug crimes aren't committed by people trying to pay for drugs; they're committed by people on drugs."
No references or studies are given on their fact page containing this quote.
Homicide is the most serious crime and it wouldn't suprise me if many were also drug users. "Six times" sounds like a huge number but it's compared to "homicides committed by...those who are looking for money to buy drugs" which is a very specific claim. Perhaps homicide for money is not so common let alone specifically to buy drugs. More details are needed which the DEA do not give.
Rearranging the last sentence for clarity gives us "Most drug crimes...[are]...committed by people on drugs"
That has to be one of the strangest sentences I have ever read since it switches to talking about "drug crime" and not any type of violent crime. People on drugs are almost certainly committing drug crimes. It's hard to know if it's a mistake or intentionally disceptive and certainly doesn't give me any confidence in the DEA's claims.
0 comments:
Post a Comment