Crack cocaine in the Dublin region - Health Research Board

More documents

Recommendations

Info

In the UK, there is a strong consensus that police crackdowns or targeted enforcementinitiatives that are deployed over a short period of time and focus on specific drugdealingareas have only limited success. Dealers often return and continue to distributeillicit drugs when police resources are directed elsewhere (Burgess 2003). The mobilephone has greatly increased the capacity of closed markets to operate withoutdetection. In addition to this, crack houses are considered to be a response to theincreased policing of open markets. Wilson and Stevens (2008: 9) conclude: ‘Whenviewed in the context of a market, preventing the buying and selling of all illegal drugsis not an achievable goal of law enforcement.’ The ability of crack markets to adapt tolaw-enforcement activities has also been identified in the US. An ethnographic studyin New York described how the process of crack distribution has adapted and changedin response to law-enforcement policies and competition (Johnson et al. 2000). In thelate 1980s and early 1990s crack cocaine was primarily sold in the street and washighly visible. In response to law-enforcement policies, crack selling moved indoorsto crack houses or was sold out of what appeared to be legitimate businesses suchas laundromats and pool halls. Crack sellers also became more cautious about whothey sold to in response to ‘buy-bust’ techniques used by the police. These operationsinvolve undercover police purchasing drugs and then immediately arresting the selleronce the transaction is made. The situation in Ireland is similar to that in the UK,where the advent of mobile phones has made the operation of closed markets easier.Effective intervention strategies may be those that combine attempts to disrupt localmarkets, thus rendering them less predictable to both buyers and sellers, with attemptsto divert drug offenders into treatment services (EMCDDA 2005). In the UK, arrestreferral schemes offer the opportunity for drug-using offenders detained by the policeto meet with an arrest referral worker in police custody and to be referred to drugservices (Burgess 2003). However, evaluations of this scheme suggest that crack usersare the least likely to take advantage of these schemes. Reasons for this include thelack of availability of immediate help, the volatility of users and a lack of faith in whattreatment services can offer. Another strategy is to frustrate the operation of drugmarkets by placing obstacles in the way of the buying process. The regular patrollingof drug hotspots and intensive policing of new ‘open drug scenes’ can facilitate this.While such an approach is unlikely to deter regular drug users, it may serve to detercasual users.In recent years we have witnessed throughout Europe a greater level of debate aboutthe most appropriate way to intervene in, and respond to, local drug markets andrelated problems (Connolly 2006b). Strategic thinking, in-depth problem analysis, longtermplanning and partnership between agencies and stakeholders are characteristicof this new development. Such partnership approaches often involve collaborationbetween law-enforcement, social and health services, and other stakeholders, includingCrack cocaine in the Dublin region: an evidence base for a crack cocaine strategy101
local communities. There is growing evidence that partnership working offers the mostsustainable method of responding to street-level drug markets (Mazerolle et al. 2006;Appendix B). Such responses typically involve a combination of law enforcement andharm reduction (Connolly 2006b; Scottish Executive 2004).It has been argued that enforcement’s effectiveness at suppressing drug use declinesas the size of the market grows (Tragler et al. 2001; Kleiman 1993). This highlights theimportant role of law enforcement when it comes to addressing new emerging drugmarkets. Caulkins (2007) argues that, unlike prevention programmes, law enforcementcan concentrate its efforts on specific locations at particular times and consequently itis uniquely placed to prevent or disrupt emerging drug markets.10.2 An Garda Síochána: supply control activitySince 1997, a number of operations have been undertaken by An Garda Síochánato disrupt street level drug supply (GNDU, personal communication, 19 May 2006).Operation Clean Street, which targeted on-street drug dealing, ran from 1997 to 2005.This involved undercover gardaí entering specific drug ‘hotspots’ and monitoringsuspected drug activity. Parallel to Operation Clean Street, Operation Nightcap cameinto existence; this targeted pubs and clubs, mainly for drugs associated with thenightclub scene such as ecstasy and heroin. Operation Clean Street was regardedas a success from a law-enforcement point of view, leading to over 1,100 individualconvictions for supply of heroin (GNDU, personal communication, May 2006). However,the success of Operation Clean Street raised the issue of the so-called ‘Water BedEffect’ whereby drug activity was displaced to other locations around the city.Operation PlazaUsing Operation Clean Street-type tactics, Operation Plaza was initiated in April 2006in response to reports of crack cocaine dealing in the north-inner city (GNDU, personalcommunication, May 2006). During this three-month operation, gardaí established abroad picture of the distribution of crack in the Dublin region. It was found that themarket was confined to a city-centre shopping district and an area in west Dublin.Gardaí identified approximately 17 individuals dealing in crack. A number of arrestsresulted from this operation.As discussed in Section 3, crack users and drug-treatment providers consulted betweenSeptember and November 2007 stated that the same city-centre shopping districtremains one of the prime locations for purchasing prepared crack cocaine:102 Crack cocaine in the Dublin region: an evidence base for a crack cocaine strategy
Page 1 and 2:
HRB Research Series6Crack cocaine i
Page 3 and 4:
This publication should be cited as
Page 5 and 6:
HRB Research Series publicationsto
Page 8 and 9:
ContentsList of tables and figures
Page 10 and 11:
7 Social consequences of crack use
Page 12 and 13:
List of tables and figuresTablesTab
Page 14 and 15:
AbbreviationsADRUGNDUHRBISCCSGLDTFN
Page 16 and 17:
Glossary of termsBenzos: The street
Page 18 and 19:
Executive summaryBackground and stu
Page 20 and 21:
phone and buyers are directed to sp
Page 22 and 23:
Part 1IntroductionCrack cocaine in
Page 24 and 25:
In the light of these concerns, it
Page 26 and 27:
extensive reporting in the US about
Page 28 and 29:
Ten interviews were conducted with
Page 30 and 31:
also offers potential to trace supp
Page 32 and 33:
Part 2Crack cocaine in the Dublin r
Page 34 and 35:
2.2 Criminal justice data - cocaine
Page 36 and 37:
Prevalence of crack use among homel
Page 38 and 39:
Local survey dataA survey in 2006 o
Page 40 and 41:
Respondent 1: I’d say it’s stil
Page 42 and 43:
3 Dublin crack cocaine market3.0 Ov
Page 44 and 45:
sold on the street for as little as
Page 46 and 47:
Like, I was down on M… Street in
Page 48 and 49:
3.4 Marketing crackFour interviewee
Page 50 and 51:
While crack was generally bought al
Page 52 and 53: • Although a number of dealers, o
Page 54 and 55: 4.2 Crack use and genderAccording t
Page 56 and 57: From about 16 to 21 I would say - t
Page 58 and 59: Table 4.4Number of new cases who li
Page 60 and 61: 5.2 Crack and other drugsMany of th
Page 62 and 63: Whether treated cases reported crac
Page 64 and 65: cases of intravenous cocaine use, t
Page 66 and 67: Table 5.5Number (%) of new cases wh
Page 68 and 69: Part 3Consequences of crack useCrac
Page 70 and 71: etween heroin, cocaine and crime. T
Page 72 and 73: So, they would talk about the kind
Page 74 and 75: Crack and prostitutionNine services
Page 76 and 77: On the other hand, reports from two
Page 78 and 79: often with a prevalence of opiate d
Page 80 and 81: The data provided by the NDTRS in S
Page 82 and 83: But you know it would be about kind
Page 84 and 85: So, debt is another significant iss
Page 86 and 87: 7.6 Key findings• A significant p
Page 88 and 89: There are considerable long-term ps
Page 90: 8.3 Psychological consequences of c
Page 93 and 94: 9 Treating crack use9.0 OverviewIn
Page 95 and 96: Some services were in a position to
Page 97 and 98: Both opiate-dependent and non-opiat
Page 99 and 100: • more outreach work to identify
Page 101: 10 Policing crack markets10.0 Overv
Page 105 and 106: He’d know me, I’d know him, you
Page 107 and 108: Table 10.1 Number of new cases who
Page 109 and 110: 108 Crack cocaine in the Dublin reg
Page 111 and 112: 11 Discussion and research implicat
Page 113 and 114: 11.2 Responding to crack markets an
Page 115 and 116: 11.3 Reducing the harm that crack c
Page 117 and 118: Shoplifting, burglary and robbery w
Page 119 and 120: Bourgois P (2003b) Crack and the po
Page 121 and 122: Furey M and Browne C (2004) Opiate
Page 123 and 124: Loughran H and McCann ME (2006) A c
Page 125 and 126: San Diego Police Department (1998)
Page 127 and 128: Appendix A:An evidence base for tre
Page 129 and 130: note that providing information on
Page 131 and 132: MedicationsA number of studies have
Page 133 and 134: interpersonal psychotherapy. Americ
Page 135 and 136: Jurisdiction Intervention/Descripti
Page 137 and 138: Jurisdiction Intervention/Descripti
Page 139 and 140: Appendix C:Recent HRB series public
Page 141 and 142: 140 Crack cocaine in the Dublin reg
show all

Crack cocaine in the Dublin region - Health Research Board

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?