Mark Kleiman notes that the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) program has been killed. This was a useful dataset on patterns of drug-use amongst criminals. In his post, Mark quotes John Coleman, a former bigwig at the DEA, who says
The importance of ADAM always has been its stark statistics showing the large percentage of criminals high on drugs and alcohol at the time of their crimes. ADAM surveyed arrested felons and then drug-tested them to confirm their statements about drug use. It was all voluntary but showed, nonetheless, extraordinary levels in some cases of drug use by criminals.
This confirms my non-expert belief that there’s a great deal of evidence telling us that a big chunk of violent crime happens when the perpetrators have been using alcohol or some other drug. People under the influence of drugs tend to have a diminished capacity for rational decision-making. This makes me skeptical about, e.g., fiendishly clever analyses of the rational deterrent effect of prison sentences on crime rates. It’s not that there’s anything wrong with the detail of such analyses per se, it’s that they throw away reliable knowledge before they begin. Ignoring information of the sort that ADAM provides may make an elegant theory of crime more tractable, but it makes a true theory of crime less likely.
Right-wingers need crime to assert their hold on the rest of peoples. Then reducing the number and seriousness of crimes runs counter to their interest.
DSW
Uh, if harsh sentences don’t deter crime because crime is largely a product of drug-induced diminished capacity, then wouldn’t harsh sentences for drug users and drug dealers deter crime by locking up all those folks busy inducing diminished capacity in themselves or others?
Gosh, Kieran, I’d never have pegged you as a War-on-Drugs hawk. But welcome aboard anyway….
The question is, are they committing crimes because they’re high, or are they getting high because they want to “psych up” for the crime?
I imagine some various crimes of passion (especially things like bar fights) and/or stupidity are the former, and drug use by “career criminals” mainly the latter. (Or simply that someone who commits crimes as a way of making a living is certainly going to have easy access to illegal drugs, generally won’t care about penalties for them, and often has no care for either social norms or self-preservation in the long term.)
Getting a grip on which drugs are most directly associated with crime might help the Drug War fine tune what it’s doing, not that they want to. My guess is that alcohol and amphetamine are at the top, with heroin pretty close (making allowances for the fact that junkies commit crimes when they aren’t high, rather than when they are). I don’t know where cocaine would be, perhaps up with the others, but marijuana, hallucigens, and designer drugs would be at the bottom.
To make sense of this you’d have to distinguish between crimes committed by people when they used drugs, and crimes which were crimes simply because drugs were involved (i.e. possession and sale).
The categorization of drugs in American law is a godawful mess, with alcohol almost unrestricted, morphine, amphetamine and cocaine medically legal, and heroin, marijuana, the designer drugs and hallucigens always illegal. There’s no rhyme or reason to it.
Joke: in what sense are heroin and cocaine controlled substances. Don’t they seem out of control to you?
And of course, medically tobacco kills more people than all the others put together.
People are tired of hearing this shit and they tune out (Truth Fatigue), but it’s all true.
Legalize and tax marijuana, cocaine, and one or two of the lower-level opiates (but probably not heroin). Enforce ‘driving while high’ laws very publically and forcefully. The Drug Wars have been too damaging to our civil liberties with not enough up-side.
Dan, that effect isn’t called “deterrence”; deterrence is getting an agent to refrain from doing something because he is afraid of the consequences.
Anyway, I don’t think it’s controversial that, because much crime is committed by repeaters, that we could lower the incidence of crime by locking up all offenders forever. It doesn’t follow that it would be worth it. I don’t speak for Kieran as to war-on-drugs hawkery, of course.
Zizka—Mark Kleiman quotes John Coleman as saying, “I recall several years ago reading that more than half the juveniles arrested for homicide in Washington DC tested positive for pot.” Doesn’t sound like marijuana necessarily belongs at the bottom of your list….
Matt: I believe repeat offenders do usually receive substantially stiffer sentences than first-timers. Are you saying you disapprove of that policy?
What proportion of all the juveniles in Washington test positive for pot? What proportion of the juveniles arrested for murder test positive for coffee and nicotine?
For metabolic reasons, marijuana stays in the system for weeks, so a test tells you whether the person has used the drug in the recent past, not whether they’re under the influence at the time. Whereas if someone tests positive for alcohol or most of the other drugs, it means that they’re drunk or under the influence.
Policeman here in Portland (OR, USA) prefer to do marijuana busts because stoners submit quietly. Drunks and amphetamine users tend to be violent while under the influence (as well as users of “angel dust”, which is a legal drug illegally used).
Professional criminals dealing in any drug can be extremely violent, of course, but that’s a function of illegality.
There’s a simpler explanation for these figures.
If you’re already risking jail by doing other criminal activities, you’re already not properly deterred by jail, so there’s really nothing to stop you from indulging in recreational pharmaceuticals as well. So you’ll have a higher probability of partaking than the rest of the population.
In order to properly evaluate the criminality caused by drug use, we have to find the complimentary figure; i.e., what percentage of drug users commit real crimes?
Of course, finding that number requires us to determine how many drug users are not coming to the attention of the police. And as long as drug use remains illegal, that number will be kind of hard to determine with any level of accuracy; such drugs users avoid coming to the attention of the police by successfully hiding their drug use. In fact, any attempt to find the percentage of drug users that commit real crimes will tend to overestimate that percentage, since non (real) crime-committing drug users will be undercounted.
As an aside, criminologists to this day aren’t fully sure, wether the large incidence of arrestees on drugs (incl. prescription drugs and alcohol) is cause for the assumption that drugs are complimentary to crime.
In arguing with Merton and Durkheim, these numbers are also influenced by the very reason, that drugs diminish an individuals capacity to rational and self-protective actions. A stone-cold sober arrestee might not make the same mistakes, give the same clues, or permissions, that will lead to his or her conviction. He might slam the door in the face of cops without a warrant, refuse to speak or consent to a search, and argue his position more effectively than an incapacitated offender.
Merton has raised this question repeatedly concerning lower and upper-class criminals. Does lower income and education really create a higher susceptibility to anomal and dysfunctional behavior, or are the means of defense against detection and assessment simply better?
Dan—
If that had a deterrent effect, there would be no repeat crime. There is, so it doesn’t.
As for my ideas, I refer you to Mark Kleiman, who knows what he’s talking about.
À Gauche
Jeremy Alder
Amaravati
Anggarrgoon
Audhumlan Conspiracy
H.E. Baber
Philip Blosser
Paul Broderick
Matt Brown
Diana Buccafurni
Brandon Butler
Keith Burgess-Jackson
Certain Doubts
David Chalmers
Noam Chomsky
The Conservative Philosopher
Desert Landscapes
Denis Dutton
David Efird
Karl Elliott
David Estlund
Experimental Philosophy
Fake Barn County
Kai von Fintel
Russell Arben Fox
Garden of Forking Paths
Roger Gathman
Michael Green
Scott Hagaman
Helen Habermann
David Hildebrand
John Holbo
Christopher Grau
Jonathan Ichikawa
Tom Irish
Michelle Jenkins
Adam Kotsko
Barry Lam
Language Hat
Language Log
Christian Lee
Brian Leiter
Stephen Lenhart
Clayton Littlejohn
Roderick T. Long
Joshua Macy
Mad Grad
Jonathan Martin
Matthew McGrattan
Marc Moffett
Geoffrey Nunberg
Orange Philosophy
Philosophy Carnival
Philosophy, et cetera
Philosophy of Art
Douglas Portmore
Philosophy from the 617 (moribund)
Jeremy Pierce
Punishment Theory
Geoff Pynn
Timothy Quigley (moribund?)
Conor Roddy
Sappho's Breathing
Anders Schoubye
Wolfgang Schwartz
Scribo
Michael Sevel
Tom Stoneham (moribund)
Adam Swenson
Peter Suber
Eddie Thomas
Joe Ulatowski
Bruce Umbaugh
What is the name ...
Matt Weiner
Will Wilkinson
Jessica Wilson
Young Hegelian
Richard Zach
Psychology
Donyell Coleman
Deborah Frisch
Milt Rosenberg
Tom Stafford
Law
Ann Althouse
Stephen Bainbridge
Jack Balkin
Douglass A. Berman
Francesca Bignami
BlunkettWatch
Jack Bogdanski
Paul L. Caron
Conglomerate
Jeff Cooper
Disability Law
Displacement of Concepts
Wayne Eastman
Eric Fink
Victor Fleischer (on hiatus)
Peter Friedman
Michael Froomkin
Bernard Hibbitts
Walter Hutchens
InstaPundit
Andis Kaulins
Lawmeme
Edward Lee
Karl-Friedrich Lenz
Larry Lessig
Mirror of Justice
Eric Muller
Nathan Oman
Opinio Juris
John Palfrey
Ken Parish
Punishment Theory
Larry Ribstein
The Right Coast
D. Gordon Smith
Lawrence Solum
Peter Tillers
Transatlantic Assembly
Lawrence Velvel
David Wagner
Kim Weatherall
Yale Constitution Society
Tun Yin
History
Blogenspiel
Timothy Burke
Rebunk
Naomi Chana
Chapati Mystery
Cliopatria
Juan Cole
Cranky Professor
Greg Daly
James Davila
Sherman Dorn
Michael Drout
Frog in a Well
Frogs and Ravens
Early Modern Notes
Evan Garcia
George Mason History bloggers
Ghost in the Machine
Rebecca Goetz
Invisible Adjunct (inactive)
Jason Kuznicki
Konrad Mitchell Lawson
Danny Loss
Liberty and Power
Danny Loss
Ether MacAllum Stewart
Pam Mack
Heather Mathews
James Meadway
Medieval Studies
H.D. Miller
Caleb McDaniel
Marc Mulholland
Received Ideas
Renaissance Weblog
Nathaniel Robinson
Jacob Remes (moribund?)
Christopher Sheil
Red Ted
Time Travelling Is Easy
Brian Ulrich
Shana Worthen
Computers/media/communication
Lauren Andreacchi (moribund)
Eric Behrens
Joseph Bosco
Danah Boyd
David Brake
Collin Brooke
Maximilian Dornseif (moribund)
Jeff Erickson
Ed Felten
Lance Fortnow
Louise Ferguson
Anne Galloway
Jason Gallo
Josh Greenberg
Alex Halavais
Sariel Har-Peled
Tracy Kennedy
Tim Lambert
Liz Lawley
Michael O'Foghlu
Jose Luis Orihuela (moribund)
Alex Pang
Sebastian Paquet
Fernando Pereira
Pink Bunny of Battle
Ranting Professors
Jay Rosen
Ken Rufo
Douglas Rushkoff
Vika Safrin
Rob Schaap (Blogorrhoea)
Frank Schaap
Robert A. Stewart
Suresh Venkatasubramanian
Ray Trygstad
Jill Walker
Phil Windley
Siva Vaidahyanathan
Anthropology
Kerim Friedman
Alex Golub
Martijn de Koning
Nicholas Packwood
Geography
Stentor Danielson
Benjamin Heumann
Scott Whitlock
Education
Edward Bilodeau
Jenny D.
Richard Kahn
Progressive Teachers
Kelvin Thompson (defunct?)
Mark Byron
Business administration
Michael Watkins (moribund)
Literature, language, culture
Mike Arnzen
Brandon Barr
Michael Berube
The Blogora
Colin Brayton
John Bruce
Miriam Burstein
Chris Cagle
Jean Chu
Hans Coppens
Tyler Curtain
Cultural Revolution
Terry Dean
Joseph Duemer
Flaschenpost
Kathleen Fitzpatrick
Jonathan Goodwin
Rachael Groner
Alison Hale
Household Opera
Dennis Jerz
Jason Jones
Miriam Jones
Matthew Kirschenbaum
Steven Krause
Lilliputian Lilith
Catherine Liu
John Lovas
Gerald Lucas
Making Contact
Barry Mauer
Erin O'Connor
Print Culture
Clancy Ratcliff
Matthias Rip
A.G. Rud
Amardeep Singh
Steve Shaviro
Thanks ... Zombie
Vera Tobin
Chuck Tryon
University Diaries
Classics
Michael Hendry
David Meadows
Religion
AKM Adam
Ryan Overbey
Telford Work (moribund)
Library Science
Norma Bruce
Music
Kyle Gann
ionarts
Tim Rutherford-Johnson
Greg Sandow
Scott Spiegelberg
Biology/Medicine
Pradeep Atluri
Bloviator
Anthony Cox
Susan Ferrari (moribund)
Amy Greenwood
La Di Da
John M. Lynch
Charles Murtaugh (moribund)
Paul Z. Myers
Respectful of Otters
Josh Rosenau
Universal Acid
Amity Wilczek (moribund)
Theodore Wong (moribund)
Physics/Applied Physics
Trish Amuntrud
Sean Carroll
Jacques Distler
Stephen Hsu
Irascible Professor
Andrew Jaffe
Michael Nielsen
Chad Orzel
String Coffee Table
Math/Statistics
Dead Parrots
Andrew Gelman
Christopher Genovese
Moment, Linger on
Jason Rosenhouse
Vlorbik
Peter Woit
Complex Systems
Petter Holme
Luis Rocha
Cosma Shalizi
Bill Tozier
Chemistry
"Keneth Miles"
Engineering
Zack Amjal
Chris Hall
University Administration
Frank Admissions (moribund?)
Architecture/Urban development
City Comforts (urban planning)
Unfolio
Panchromatica
Earth Sciences
Our Take
Who Knows?
Bitch Ph.D.
Just Tenured
Playing School
Professor Goose
This Academic Life
Other sources of information
Arts and Letters Daily
Boston Review
Imprints
Political Theory Daily Review
Science and Technology Daily Review