So what ever happened to the war on drugs? Obviously after 9/11 our law enforcement priorities took a sharp turn in a different direction. But now, 11 years later, though there is still a pressing need to remain vigilant against terrorist threats, we should be able to re-focus some attention on combating drug trafficking. The drug trafficking industry remains as viable as ever and in many instances more violent. Thoughtful arguments rage on concerning the impact of legalizing drugs or at least decriminalizing personal use amounts. This is not intended to take a position in that argument; rather to refocus our attention to impacting drug traffickers responsible for the scourge created in many of our communities by the physical, social and emotional impact left in the wake of hard core drug addiction.
The fundamental question every front line law enforcement officer must ask themselves is why do we lose this war? I propose two answers for this question. First, drug traffickers are more innovative and versatile than law enforcement. Second, they want to win more than we do.
Those of us in law enforcement tend to be type "A" personalities with great confidence in our skills and abilities and often an unrealistic sense of our effectiveness. But at the same time we sell ourselves short by succumbing to attitudes such as "we only catch the dumb ones." Is that what we aspire to do? How can a war be won if we only catch the dumb ones? Are we conceding that the smart ones are smarter than us? In my estimation it is not that they are smarter than us, it is that they are more innovative, creative and flexible in their methods of operation than we are. A drug trafficker is only limited by their imagination in coming up with methods to communicate with co-conspirators, transport their product to areas of demand, distribute the product to customers, and manage the substantial financial aspect of the business without being detected. With these four key elements of drug trafficking in mind (communication, transportation, distribution, finances) it may be a useful exercise to ask yourself, "How would I do it?" Or better yet, "If the consequences of failing included losing my livelihood and freedom how would I do it?" If we want to catch the smart ones, we must think like the smart ones. When you have developed ideas that answer the question of how you would do it if losing your livelihood and freedom were at stake then focus your enforcement efforts in those areas. For instance, maybe you decided you would only text message your associates rather than speak on the phone and risk possibly being intercepted by a wiretap. With that in mind, are you routinely seizing cellphones from those you arrest for drug violations and legally searching the contents (particularly text messages) to gain potentially invaluable intelligence and evidence? Or, maybe you decided you would send your product in parcels through the mail to minimize your physical handling and involvement in transporting the product. If so, are you routinely patrolling and conducting surveillance on the parcel shipment businesses in your community? Are you cultivating informants from the employees at these businesses? You see, it does not take rocket science to win this, just good old fashioned and innovative police work.
As for who wants to win more..it may come down to understanding who has more to lose. The drug trafficker is at risk of losing their livelihood and freedom. It is difficult to come up with a pair of motivators greater than this. However, what do we stand to lose? Is our world going to drastically change if we choose to apply marginal if any effort towards proactive drug enforcement? In the short term probably not. But viewed in a broader sense we potentially have so much more to lose. First and foremost, we could lose our life by not being as well trained and sharp with our observation skills and knowledge of drug trafficking methods of operations. The failure to recognize clues related to drug trafficking could mean the failure to survive when unwittingly confronting an individual conducting an act that could cost them their livelihood and freedom if they fail. Perhaps taking deadly action against an officer who threatens this is their only perceived way of survival. In addition, we are each impacted at a personal level by the fallout of drug abuse in our communities. Most recently for me this has come with the news that a friend and colleague in the law enforcement community lost a son to a heroin overdose after many years of struggling with addiction, stints in prison, and leaving a family in constant despair. My friend, who is a retired officer, will now not only deal with the grief of losing a child, but also the stress of raising his two grandchildren that were left behind. This is certainly not the retirement life my friend envision. I submit, that we indeed should want to win the war as much as our opponents and should be even more diligent and aggressive in locating, investigating and prosecuting drug traffickers.
No comments:
Post a Comment