Posted: September 18th, 2017

Drug and property crime

Reply individualy to both classmates, Micah Nissly and Drew Maples. Each reply must be at least 200 words with at least 1 citation. Responding to a classmate’s post requires both the addition of new ideas and analysis. A particular point made by the classmate must be addressed and built upon by your analysis in order to move the conversation forward.

Micah Nissly

I believe along with other non-law enforcement participants that, since police have had their resources taken away from property crime enforcement and have had to have them given to drug enforcement they have negated deterrence for property crime. Also that property crime while it can be related to drug crime is not directly a because of it. According to Bureau of Justice Statistics, “in 2004, 17% of state prisoners and 18% of federal inmates said they committed their current offense to obtain money for drugs”( Dorsey,  (n.d.).I do believe that the lack of manpower and funding to police departments programs to combat property crime is the cause. Drug related crimes are on a rise. “Law enforcement resources are scarce, and as efforts to combat drug crime increase the amount of these resources allocated to property crime is reduced. This reallocation of police resources results in reduced deterrence for property crime and, as a result an increase in these crimes. The evidence presented suggests that rising property crimes in Florida are at least partially the result of drug enforcement policy” (Benson, Kim, Rasmussen, Zhehlke (1992). Those who have successfully been able to get away with property crime are much more likely to repeat that action. They feel that they got away with it once and that they are more likely to again. Sadly as I shared due to lack of manpower to thoroughly investigate small incidences such as some property crimes they get away with those crimes.

With such an influx of drug crime police departments are having to focus heavily on combatting that rather than have the resources to focus on property crime. I do not believe this to be the fault of the police departments but that of the legislation creating budgets and allocating funds. According to the FBI, “the 2-year trend showed that property crime decreased 2.7 percent in 2010 compared with the 2009 estimate. The 5-year trend, comparing 2010 data with that of 2006, showed a 9.3 percent drop in property crime” Now while this decrease is great there are still the results from 2010 stating that “there were an estimated 9,082,887 property crime offenses in the Nation” 
This number is rather large still and these “property crimes in 2010 resulted in losses estimated at 15.7 billion dollars” (FBI, 2011). Property crime needs to be something that departments have the resources to handle. These types of crimes greatly impact the average citizens and those are the ones who believe most in our departments. Drug crime is important but so aren’t the crimes being waged on the everyday person.

Benson, B., Kim, I., Rasmussen, D., & Zhehlke, T. (1992). Is property crime caused by             drug use or by drug enforcement policy? Applied Economics, 24(7), 679-692.       Retrieved August 7, 2015, from    http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/000368492000        00036

Dorsey, T. (Ed.). (n.d.). Drugs and Crime Facts. Retrieved August 7, 2015, from http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/dcf.pdf

Property Crime. (2011, July 26). Retrieved August 7, 2015, from      /cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-“>https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-         2010/property-crime

Drew Maples

Distributing resources and efforts between property crime and drugs is no quick and easy choice to make.  Both sides of the debate bring up valid points about how both property crime and drugs affect one another.  Motivation is the big key factor here between drugs and property crime.  In order to purchase illicit contraband as such as drugs requires money.  When money is not readably available then people tend to result stealing as an alternate source of “fast” income (Schmalleger, 2014, p.186).  This behavior can be integrated into a lifestyle and be a means of survival of addiction or simply living on the street (Schmalleger, 2014, p.185).  In a study conducted by University of North Carolina, it was found that out of 88% of respondents the top reason for committing burglaries was either for drugs or getting money (Blevins, Kuhns, & Lee, 2012, p. 26).  Those that obtained money from these burglaries, 63% responded that they would use it in order to purchase drugs (Blevins, Kuhns, & Lee, 2012, p. 27).  Based on this study alone there is an absolutely strong connection between burglaries and drugs.

With the point made on increasing drug prices then there may be more pressure to obtain more money for individuals who are addicts.  This in turn could lead to more burglaries being committed.  However, there is a valid point that could be made about property crime being tried back to drugs.  Hypothetically, if drugs on the streets and drug organized crime is completely eliminated or crippled to the point of having no solid presence then property crime could hypothetically decrease since drug availability has completely diminished.  If there is no drugs to purchase in the area then the connection of burglarizing for drugs could be eliminated.  This stance however is a perfect world scenario and complete eradication of illicit drugs could be incredibly difficult.  For this debate my stance would be to recognize that both drugs and property crime are inherently connected.  This connection is not 100% between each other but absolutely strong enough to conclude that distributing resources to one side or the other may have unbalancing consequences.  Perhaps attacking both property crime and drugs with equal resources and effort may yield the best results.

There is an interesting connection that could be tied biblically between drugs and property crime.  In 1 Peter 2, Saint Peter talks about how people who walk with the Lord should walk by example in order for others to follow.  Out of this understanding there is one bit of truth that makes a connection to the soul and falling victim to passion of the flesh.

“Beloved, I urge you as sojourners and exiles to abstain from the passions of the flesh, which wage war against your soul.  Keep your conduct among the Gentiles honorable, so that when they speak against you as evildoers, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day of visitation” (1 Peter 2: 11-12 ESV).

Now with the term flesh could mean both intimately or simply just physically in nature.  Historically, passion of the flesh likely meant by being consumed by intimacy.  Modern day application could theologically be a broad application of all excessive physical passions.  The point being here though is that of the waging war of ones’ soul.  Regardless whether someone is a believer of the Lord or not, addiction could be attributed to mental and physical havoc of one’s soul.  Those who are addicted now are suffering internally and by obtaining money by any means necessary, including burglary, may seem like the only way to calm the pain.

References

Blevins, K. R., Kuhns, J. B., & Lee, S. Z. (2012). Understanding Decisions to Burglarize from the Offender’s Perspective.  University of North Carolina.  Retrieved from http://airef.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/BurglarSurveyStudyFinalReport.pdf

Schmalleger, F. (2014). Criminology (2nd ed.).  Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc.