Drugs, Jails, Community Service, and Why Measure 11 Is Okay

A Rogerian Argument About Drugs and Jails, by Ronald Borst

Why Drugs Should Be Legal,

Why Community Service Is Mandatory,

and Why Oregon's Measure 11 Is Good For Sentencing Law

I believe that some drugs should be legal. And I believe the solutions to American crime, especially petty crime, lie in the way we “sentence” these “criminal” acts. Legalizing drugs and integrating civic chores into our judicial system will relieve the burden on our jails and our economy.

“De-criminalizing drugs,” may be a better description.
 

Both anti-drug advocates, as well as civil rights champions and rehab folks, have persuasive points about their ideologies, and by bringing the best of both worlds, to the discussion, will only help to create a solution for America's overcrowded jails, while keeping our future safe and robust.

Anti-drug initiatives ranging from law enforcement's D.A.R.E. programs, to Mothers Against Drunk Drivers'(MADD) awareness campaigns, are a good start in the way of social education. Anti-tobacco programs in schools, and in advertising aimed at curbing youth smoking(and chewing), have made a positive impact, even if small.

In America's “War On Drugs,” much has been said about the cost-effectiveness of the assault on drug use. Many say it is working, and the U.S. Department of Justice(DOJ) says that “Both males and females that committed burglary crimes, tested drug positive in high numbers.” This statement is based on data combed from incarceration drug tests and surveys.(NIJ Drug Use Forecast 1991)

The DOJ is partly correct, in linking drugs and crime, but the DOJ oversteps ideology in its pursuit of “justice.” Federal laws that run directly across the grain, in contrast to state voters, as well as harsh sentencing laws(Measure 11 in Oregon) that have more negatives than positives, means the system(s) is failing. Municipal jails are known as money court jails in my home state, and minorish civil rights violations are commonplace. Representation can be suspect, and courts have a “bulldog” attitude towards defendants, making for a roll-of-the-dice gamble, if you are “in the crosshairs.”

This way of thinking has permeated the roots of America's judicial branch, especially at the local levels, County and Municipal governments. Plea bargains are forced, and many cases have sentences that have little positive outcome, outside of revenue for the state.

Measure 11 in Oregon has been both good and bad. “It's doing what it was meant to do,” says Jonathan Crow, Linn County District Attorney, and Crow also cited a Willamette Week article as saying precisely that, “that it is in fact, putting the right people in prison.”

Measure 11 was a politically lauded legislation, and was also easily won in public opinion. Voters welcomed the law as a tool to fight crime and keep Oregon “progressive.” The common misconception was that the new law would lock up problem criminals. It did that, at a price.

“The world would be a better place without Measure 11,” a local defense attorney told me, which tells me that simply, the law has its problems.

Measure 11 restricts judicial flexibility, and leaves little room for rehabilitation or even an incentive for recovery. The law is structured rigidly, leaving no compromise for non-jail sentences. It clearly requires jail, and has no rehabilitation objectives. Retaining the best parts of Measure 11, and integrating more efficient use of the process, such as rehab objective sentencing, will bring Measure 11 up to standards that exist today. Violent, repeat offenders, and high-crime offenders(and reoffenders), also should have access to rehabilitation resources. However, that access should happen within the confines of lock-up.

Similar to Measure 11, crack-cocaine laws of the 1990s show a disparity in arrest, with more black arrests than white, but also a disparity in sentencing, as crack dealers were punished more harshly than powder cocaine dealers. The crack epidemic brought a panicked response from law enforcement, and from lawmakers. It was not uncommon(during this period) for small-time crack dealers to receive longer sentences than large scale cocaine traffickers.

At the lowest levels of the American court system, community service is often part of sentencing. In the wake of an economic catastrophe, high unemployment, and struggling government service sectors, community service is an option for our judicial sentencing like never before. The stimulus packages of the past, should now start to focus on community work, such as cleaning and painting bike-lanes, litter-patrols, kitchen duties at local soup kitchens, painting local businesses, etc.

In Albany, last November's election, a failed emergency services bond, caused a local spat between factions in government and amongst voters. The message is clear, and keeping citizen costs down, when it comes to governing, should be of utmost importance to government officials.

So should those same citizens' safety, be equally important. Laws like Measure 11 were designed to keep violent and repeat offenders, off the streets. And that is good. In Steven Pinker's book, Better Angels Of Our Nature, Pinker refers to government as Leviathan, and leads the reader to government's influence on violence. If it wasn't for government, the book summarizes, violence might be much more an everyday/everywhere occurrence, than it is today.(Pinker,summary) 

Governments have diffused arguments and made violence accountable(jails), while generally and paternally providing rational thinking in regard to violent behavior. It simply isn't moral, nor is it worth going to jail, is the message concerning violent activity.

Or it should be. But jail is easy and angering. Sitting in a cell, reading week-old newspapers, really doesn't punish the offender, and in reality, jail just makes the so-called criminal angry. There is no payoff for citizens either, as this person comes out of jail essentially forced back into drug addiction and petty crime.

Re-assessing sentencing laws would provide opportunity to “fine tune” Measure 11, and incorporate community service into sentencing laws. Even the United Nations(UN) is holding a “special session” in 2016 to analyze global sentencing laws. It is time to take the best of both worlds, prosecuting crime and community service, and mold them into a mechanical model for future ideologies of law enforcement.

There is plenty of opportunity, says Dan Redfeather, owner of Big Dan's Sports Cards in Gladstone, Oregon. “I see all sorts of clean-up jobs out there, from parking lots to river fronts, the work is there.” In Oregon, where unemployment has ran especially high, living wage “jobs” are few and far between. Big Dan's has no employees other than its owner, and could use the occasional volunteer. “I would welcome the help,” he said.

What Redfeather is implying, is that community service is community pride, and a way to show that pride, is to clean up roads and neighborhoods. The “Adopt-A-Road” programs are a good example of this civic-minded agenda. In a 2013 opinion piece about volunteering, that ran in the Chicago Tribune, Bill and Chelsea Clinton wrote, “It will take partners of all kinds to make this commitment a reality.” What they were talking about was volunteerism, and the way America tackles “civic” activities. What I am talking about is a group-sourced effort to cut judicial costs(to taxpayers) while creating civic rehabilitation. Not only would this strategy improve the aesthetics of where we live, it would improve the quality of life as well. Rehabilitated law-breakers may not re-offend, making our neighborhoods safer, and less prone to drugs and violence.

Decriminalizing not only marijuana, but also cocaine, heroin, and others, will lead to lower numbers of “possession” incarcerated crime and at the same time provide civic remedy for trafficking and other crime related to drugs. Theft, selling stolen goods, drug-dealing, etc., should now be sentenced with not only jail terms, but also “community service” sentencing. It is time to go to work, essentially.

The idea of any of these folks not being able to work, is not a true statement, as anybody can pick up the parking lot at say, The Senior Center of Albany. Trash and litter-patrols, business window washing, landscaping, kitchen help at community dinners, are just a few of the opportunities that the government has for civic rehabilitation. Advanced projects would include painting businesses and local homes, mowing yards and business landscaping, and road crew work.

At present, some resources exist for drug addicts, in the form of groups like Al-Anon and Narcotics Anonymous. Rehabilitation services are available locally(Albany, Oregon) at Linn County Mental Health and at community houses like Oxford. But generally, little professional help is available to the poor.

In Norway, where addiction treatment reform started around the year 2000, the progressive country has seen small but steady increases in “beginner” clients, first-time rehabilitation patients. According to the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Addiction(EMCDDA), more than 30% of those patients were opiate addicts. Surprisingly, only 1% of Norway's drug rehabilitation efforts have been for cocaine addiction. The U.S.A. May show different stats in that regard. The Norwegian reforms were a change in approaching in addiction, and Norway's motto is that everyone “has access to all treatment options.”(www.emcdda.europe.eu) Treatment is funded largely with public funds.

In a report from Stanford EDU, the three main ways addicts are classified is looked at from a spending perspective. “The Moral view is that drugs are sinful, the Temperance view considers the drug a problem and its access unacceptable, and the final view, Disease, treats the addict medically.”(Stanford, Poverty and Prejudice)

In that same report from Stanford, the billions spent so far on law enforcement's “no tolerance” approach to drugs, is weighed against spending that money on rehabilitation and community improvements. The report states that America “spent almost 8 billion dollars on drug related law enforcement and just 2.5 billion on rehabilitation.”(1993 stats, Poverty and Prejudice)

Law enforcement says it needs arbitrary power. It does not. Addicts need medical attention, not courtrooms. Local businesses say they need help. And they do. Finding some middle ground, will lead to more efficient police and courts, and will also lead to less addiction and more volunteers in our communities. Efficient policing can and will maintain healthy levels of safety in communities, efficient courts can help rehab criminal behavior, and citizens can demand that government also act as efficiently, by writing laws that encourage communities to sustain positive growth.

Jails alone, do not work. Nor does rampant drug use. Attacking both simultaneously will help solve society's problems with minorish drug use and the accompanying crime. In the end, lower numbers of drug addicts and less occupied jail space, should be the goals we strive for.

In early February of 2014, The Guardian reporter Nick Clegg ventured to Columbia, to tour the “drug country” and talk with Columbia's new leader, President Juan Manuel Santos, about reforming the drug-gang social and economic landscape of his country. “We agreed,” Clegg said, “that neither rapid legalization or military crackdown, can solve the drug problem.” (The Guardian, Feb 8, 2014)

Policies and successes worldwide, lend valuable talking points when it comes to discussing American drug solutions. In the Netherlands, where marijuana is completely decriminalized, government focus is directed at prevention and treatment of drug addiction. In Australia, where laws are similar to the U.S., more avenues exist for “care” programs such as needle exchanges. In Britain, drug use is considered non-criminal, but selling drugs is a different matter, and can lead to lengthy prison stays. 

Even Germany, which is considered “strict” when it comes to drug law, has approached drug use as non-criminal.(drugabuse.net, Drug Laws Around the World)

Drug use and drug abuse has been around as long as America has been around. In the 1800s, addiction to amphetamines and cocaine, as well as heroin and morphine, was commonplace. In the 1930s, amphetamines were sold over-the-counter as a product called Benzedrine. In the 1990s, a smokable form of amphetamine, crystal meth, showed up in the drug market. In 1884, Sigmund Freud praised cocaine as a “wonder drug,” capable of enhanced mood and prolonged energy. In the 1950s, after Swiss chemist Albert Hoffman discovered LSD, the American CIA tested it for its “truth” qualities. Today, LSD is generally made in home labs, mostly in California, and is 90% weaker than the LSD of the 1960s.

Marijuana, on the other hand, is up to five times as potent as the weed from yesteryear. Today, marijuana is a hot-topic social debate, as a half-dozen states have legalized the weed.

Heroin has seen a resurgence in America, especially since purer forms arrived in the 1990s, allowing the drug to be smoked and snorted.

Yes, drugs are dangerous. Yes, drugs do lead to crime, but not exclusively. Distinguishing the two activities, drug use and crime, will lead America to a social status that is both sober and alive. Spending the billions spent on jail sentences, on prevention and intervention instead, will help America cosmetically and financially. Spending money on prevention tactics and education, as well as aggressively prosecuting "problem" criminals, can bring America's justice system into the 21st century. All we need are the different sides to come to the discussion.

In much the same way we target tobacco, especially in schools, we can target drug abuse. If both sides want American youth to succeed, then reaching middle ground about drugs and jails, is a positive step in the right direction.

Prioritizing goals, such as getting the worst offenders off city streets and rehabilitating adicts into sustainable sober citizens, is the creed of this article. Civic pride is just a by-product.

Works Cited:

Personal Interviews w/ local business owners, law enforcement, and government officials, 2013-14

Chicago Tribune, Great Americans, Bill and Chelsea Clinton, 2013

PBS Frontline, pbs.org, A Social History of America's Most Popular Drugs, 2013

Stanford EDU, stanford.edu, Poverty and Prejudice

Drug Abuse.net, drugabuse.net, Drug Abuse Around the World, 2014

European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, emcdda.europa.eu, Norway Overview

Better Angels of Our Nature, Steven Pinker, 2012

Willamette Week, The Hard Truth, Nigel Jaquiss, 2012

Personal Opinion