Skip to main content

Crime & Violence

Drug Czar Tells Cartels to Surrender or Die

If the traffickers don’t surrender soon, drug czar John Walters will kill them with his bare hands:

U.S. drug czar John P. Walters, in Mexico City to reassure officials that aid to fight drug gangs is in the pipeline, said traffickers resort to "fear and horror" in their campaign to take over government institutions but will ultimately fail.
…
Ultimately, he said, the drug lords will face a stark choice: "They surrender, or they die." [LA Times]

Walters then pulled a hand grenade from his vest and destroyed a speeding SUV from 100 yards away.

More Drug War = More Violence

Look how AFP frames the spike in drug trade violence plaguing Mexico:

MEXICO CITY (AFP) — Almost 400 people have died in the past two weeks in an intensifying drugs war in Mexico despite a government crackdown on cartels, trafficking and related violence.

Very obviously, none of this is happening despite Calderon’s crackdown. The violence is caused by the crackdown, directly and unambiguously, in every imaginable sense. When Calderon pledged to increase drug enforcement efforts, the violence increased dramatically. That’s not an opinion, it’s what’s happened right before our eyes.

AFP sees irony in the fact that the violence has increased during a drug war crackdown, as though the logical assumption is that an aggressive drug war would reduce violence. It won’t, it never has, and it never will no matter what. The drug war will not make peace. It won’t change the weather, either. And it won’t make you a sandwich. All it will ever do is cause violence. Just watch.

Further Evidence That the Drug War Doesn't Protect Children

If our drug policy made sense, 6-year-old children wouldn’t be kidnapped in blackmarket business disputes:

Cole was snatched Wednesday in what police are calling a drug-related kidnapping. Three armed men tied up his mother and her fiance and ransacked the home, taking the boy when no money was found, police said.

A nationwide Amber Alert was canceled because police believed it had "run its course," Cannito said Saturday.

Police say Cole's grandfather, Clemons F. Tinnemeyer, 51, had been involved in "significant drug dealing" and may have taken millions of dollars from drug dealers. Authorities say the kidnapping may have been in retaliation for the theft. [CNN]

Cole is safe now, thankfully. But as long as the drug war continues, these kinds of things will never stop happening and they won’t always end peacefully. There’s a reason Anheuser-Busch and R.J. Reynolds don’t kidnap children when a retailer is late on a payment.

Any measure of the drug war’s costs and benefits is incomplete unless it accounts for the role of drug prohibition in motivating horrible crimes like this.

Obama's Contradictory Position on the Drug War

At a campaign appearance in Jacksonville, FL, Barack Obama proposed federal drug war funding as a solution to the city’s problems with violent crime:


I will ensure that we fund the Byrne Justice Assistance Grant program, which has been critical to creating the anti-gang and anti-drug task forces our communities need. And I will make sure our federal law enforcement agencies are equipped to fight terrorism and crime by ensuring that the FBI and DEA are appropriately staffed and that federal-local law enforcement task forces have the support they need. [Florida Times-Union]

He said the same thing in New Orleans, thus it’s becoming increasingly clear that Obama really does believe that aggressive drug enforcement can function as a crime control mechanism. For a quick tutorial on how absurd that is, I’d refer him to Mexico, where President Calderon’s attempted crackdown has escalated violence throughout the country with no end in sight.

Moreover, Obama’s praise for the Byrne Justice Assistance Grants ignores that program’s role in producing some of the most egregious civil rights catastrophes in modern drug war history. Byrne funding was responsible for the notorious fiascos in Tulia and Hearne, TX, in which large numbers of innocent African-Americans were rounded up and framed for drug crimes. Overwhelming abuse of the program led Texas to ban multi-jurisdictional drug task forces entirely.

Obama’s remarks yesterday are therefore simply impossible to reconcile with his calls for "shifting the paradigm" in the war on drugs. He has frequently called attention to the over-incarceration of non-violent drug offenders, yet now pledges to continue the exact tactics that have played such a prominent role in producing our alarming prison population. As Radley Balko explains:

Because most Byrne grants are also tied directly to drug arrests, they encourage local police departments to use their manpower and resources on nonviolent drug offenses instead of more serious crimes like rape, robbery, or murder.

It seems Obama is trying to have it both ways, scoring points for forward-thinking ideas on incarceration at the national level, while simultaneously promising more policing and drug enforcement to audiences that are concerned about crime. I’d still prefer to think he’s serious about working to reduce our prison population, but he won’t get far without looking at the way our drug laws are enforced. If he plans to dangle federal drug war dollars in front of bloodthirsty local narcotics task forces, you can bet those guys will do what they do best: fill our prisons as fast as they can with anyone they can get their hands on.

That’s just how the drug war works. Politicians fund prohibition. Prohibition funds violence. Politicians feel pressured and fund more prohibition. If Obama wants to change the outcome, he’ll have to change the process.

(This blog post was published by StoptheDrugWar.org's lobbying arm, the Drug Reform Coordination Network, which also shares the cost of maintaining this web site. DRCNet Foundation takes no positions on candidates for public office, in compliance with section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, and does not pay for reporting that could be interpreted or misinterpreted as doing so.)

Bloody Culiacan

As we reported on Friday, Culiacan, the capital of the northwestern Mexican state of Sinaloa, was the scene of a two-day forum last week, the International Forum on Illicit Drugs, where there was much criticism of the Mexican drug war and the planned escalation of it envisaged by Plan Merida, the $1.4 anti-drug aid package cooked up by the Bush and Calderon administrations. The so-called "narco-violence," which might more accurately be called "prohibition-related violence," was, unsurprisingly, a central concern of presenters at the forum. In the year and a half since President Calderon took office and unleashed the Mexican military on the narcos, some 4,000 people have been killed. As if to punctuate that concern, just as the conference was wrapping up Wednesday, a series of armed confrontations broke out in central Culiacan. Sparked by a joint military-federal police sweep that was attacked by AK-47-wielding narcos in a Chevy Tahoe, gun battles broke out across the city as narcos swooped in to lend aid to their colleagues being harassed and captured by the law and other, rival narcos intervened. In one shoot-out between rival narco factions, two men were killed. In another shoot-out, between narcos and state police, two cops were killed. The military and police arrested 13 presumed cartel gun-men and seized a huge arsenal of heavy weapons, cash, and drugs. Thursday morning, military pick-ups and Hummers were cruising the streets of Culiacan, soldiers at their posts in back with heavy machine guns. Military helicopters buzzed over the city, although it was unclear whether they were supporting urban ground operations or were on their way to search for marijuana and poppy fields in the nearby mountains. (I apologize for not having any photos of this stuff. My camera battery went dead Tuesday morning, and having brought with me the wrong bag of electronic stuff, I couldn't recharge it. I went to five different camera stores in Culiacan looking for either a new battery or a charger, to no avail. I finally found a store in Mexico City Friday that charged it for me, so I have lots of photos of Saturday's Global Marijuana March in Mexico City. They will show up in a blog post later today.) The heavy military and law enforcement presence didn’t do much good. Friday night, the narcos struck back, ambushing a federal police patrol in the heart of Culican, killing four officers and leaving three other seriously wounded. But it wasn't just narcos vs. cops and soldiers Friday night. As reported by the Mexican news agency Notimex, a little after 11 Friday night, at least 60 armed men broke into three houses in a city neighborhood and seized five men, then took off in a 15-vehicle convoy, which was in turn attacked, leaving one man dead at that scene. At the same time, two other shoot-outs erupted in different neighborhoods of the city, while simultaneously, on the outskirts of town, presumed narcos shot and killed two Culiacan city police. It's not always easy to figure out who is killing whom. There are local, state, and federal police, any one of whom could be working for the cartels. There's the army. Then there are the competing cartels themselves. In Culiacan, long controlled by Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman and his Sinaloa cartel, Guzman and his group are being challenged by the Arrellano Felix Juarez cartel, which wants to take over "la plaza," or the franchise, as the local drug connection is known. Just to complicate things further, the Juarez cartel is allegedly being aided by the Zetas, the former elite anti-drug soldiers turned cartel hit-men, who usually work for the Gulf cartel. And this is just in Culiacan. There are other prohibition-related killings every day, soldiers and police being assassinated every day. On Saturday, the Mexican secretary of public security held a ceremony to honor the nine federal police killed by the narcos in the last few days. Another was gunned down in the Mexico City suburb of Coyoacan Friday night, too. All of this pathology, of course, is a direct result of prohibitionist drug polices aggressively pursued by Washington and Mexico City. And what is their response? Let's have more of the same, only more so.

On the Border in the Lower Rio Grande Valley

I'm now down in the Lower Rio Grande Valley on the border between the US and Mexico. I've been staying in a hotel on the US side in McAllen, Texas, because, somewhat surprisingly, a hotel with an internet connection in the room is cheaper on this side. But I've been crossing the river every day to scout out Reynosa, the city of about half a million, on the other side, and to talk to informed observers, as well as common folks, there, about the recent wave of drug prohibtion-related violence and what can or should be done to reduce the toll. One thing I'm finding is that people are very nervous, whether its the man in the street, human rights observers, businessmen, or even the US enforcers on the north side of the river. The human rights advocate I spoke with didn't want his picture taken ("there are several narco families on my block"), the Reynosa businessmen absolutely refuse to say anything on the record (although they complain bitterly of local corruption), people on the street look around nervously when I ask about the drug trade and the violence, and when I tried to take photos of the border crossing here, ICE agents ran up and demanded I stop. While the violence here has subsided from the violent spasms of a few weeks ago, it continues, with my human rights observer reporting that another narco killing had occurred in the city Sunday night. That makes 14 so far this year in Reynosa, out of 23 total homicides. I'll be getting into some more of the numbers in a feature article on the situation here that will appear on Friday. The poverty in Reynosa is striking. There are guys trying to sell calendars on the streets, there are guys quite eager to show me the way to "Boys Town," and there are other guys quite eager to peddle whatever drug I desire. I haven't taken them up on that, though. Meanwhile, my schedule in Mexico City next week appears to be filling nicely. I'm set to meet with Congresswoman Elsa Conde, the author of the marijuana decriminalization bill, early in the week, as well as with a bunch of Mexican reform activists. I'll also be talking to various Mexican academic experts and people working with drug users in the city. And I take advantage of being in Mexico. Yesterday, I stuck my head in the door of one of the numerous dental clinics just across from the bridge in Reynosa that cater mainly to American visitors. Before I knew it, I was in the chair and getting that crown I had long needed but could never afford. It cost $125, no appointment necessary, in and out quickly, and now I can drink cold drinks again. I'll be trying to talk to as many people as possible here between now and Friday, so stay tuned.

A Grand Total of Five Cops Died Fighting the Drug War Last Year

As the calendar flips over to a new year, law enforcement and the mass media have been trumpeting an increase in law enforcement line of duty deaths, which will doubtless be used to seek more funding for more, better-armed cops. Last year, 187 law enforcement personnel died in the line of duty, up from 145 the year before. Of those, nearly half (82) died in traffic accidents, while another 61 were shot and killed (including at least two accidentally shot by fellow officers). Another seven armed forces law enforcement personnel died in bomb attacks in Iraq, two law enforcement personnel fell to their deaths, at least two died of heart attacks during training exercises, and one died of a wasp sting. The police repeatedly warn that they face grave danger from drug dealers, necessitating the resort to SWAT-style policing on routine drug raids. But according to the Officer Down Memorial Page, the most comprehensive listing of police fatalities we know of, a grand total of five police officers died enforcing the drug laws last year: a Tennessee highway patrolman killed when he pulled over some Texas teens with a carload of marijuana; a Toledo, Ohio, detective killed when he attempted to break up a street drug deal; a Dallas cop killed in a confrontation with a suspect in a murder at a drug house; a Puerto Rico cop killed trying to make a drug arrest; and a Rialto, California, cop killed while executing a drug search warrant. Given an estimated 1.8 million drug arrests last year (that figure is actually from 2006; expect it to go slightly for 2007 as it does every year), that comes out to one police officer killed in every 360,000 drug arrests. I'll be writing a feature article this week on the dangers of drug law enforcement. Look for more details on these deaths, as well as an examination of the need for SWAT-style policing on routine drug raids.

The Drug Czar's Fair-weather Fascination With Drug War Violence

A week ago, the Drug Czar's blog announced what it calls "Another Sign of Progress in Colombia." The exciting news was that no journalists were killed in that country this year:
Now, via the Committee to Protect Journalists, comes another sign of progress. The Committee has released their annual report stating that despite a global increase in the number of reporters killed this year, there were no journalists reported killed in Colombia for the first time in more than 15 years.
My initial reaction was that the Drug Czar is setting the bar very low in his desperate quest to bring good news from the front lines of the drug war. Merely celebrating the recent lack of journalist killings in Colombia demonstrates how prevalent that phenomenon generally is, and does not really make me want to walk around Bogota with a press badge.

Then, yesterday, The Washington Post reported that pop musicians in Mexico are being killed right and left by drug cartels. It's a horrible story of murder and corruption that you won't read about at the Drug Czar's blog. As this nightmare in Mexico continues to unfold, the Drug Czar could scarcely look sillier than by boasting about the survival of Colombian journalists. It just shows once again how selective and therefore useless his statements always are.

Hopefully, once the Drug Czar is finished listing people who haven’t been killed by drug war violence, he'll get around to acknowledging how many people are dying everyday.

Prohibition Causes Violence: Medical Marijuana Murders in California and Colorado

Prohibition-generated violence tragically took the life of a medical marijuana user's immediate family member. According to AP News, Rex Farrance, a 59-year-old senior editor at PC World magazine, was killed last January by burglars attempting to steal marijuana that his son had grown at their home in Pittsburg, California, for medical use. Charged against three men were filed in the case yesterday. February also saw a prohibition-related murder in a medical marijuana situation, when Colorado activist Ken Gorman, who provided marijuana to patients under that state's MedMj law, was also killed in what appears to have been a similarly-motivated robbery. We need legalization NOW, so people won't get killed anymore over drug money or drugs that can be sold for money, and not just of medical use and not just of marijuana. In the meanwhile, if we can help this problem by making medical marijuana legal while we continue to work for full legalization, that's worth doing too. But all of this needless killing caused by drug prohibition is a real shame.

Mexico's President is Half Right

Mexican President Felipe Calderon told Deutsche Press-Agentur this weekend that America's drug habit is the cause of Mexico's drug prohibition-related violence. In Mexican President Blames US for Drugs War, Calderon said:
"Our problem is the demand for narcotics in the US market, which significantly affects Mexico," the Mexican president said. Calderon stressed that no strategy from the Mexican government against drug cartels will be sufficient unless demand is reduced. "It is evident that as long as there is a market, as long as there is drug consumption in the United States, this problem will persist in Mexico," he said.
Calderon is, of course, absolutely correct on that score. I've often noted that the prohibition-related violence plaguing our southern neighbor--there have been 1,046 killed in Mexico's drug wars so far this year--is Mexico paying the price for our war on the drugs we love to consume. Where he is wrong is his implicit assumption that the US government can meaningfully reduce demand and that the war on drugs could somehow succeed if--gosh darnit!--we Americans only tried harder. We spend about $40 billion and arrest nearly 2 million people a year in the drug war, and the drug use numbers fluctuate at the margins. The US drug market will never go away. If Calderon wants to see an end to the prohibition-related violence in Mexico, he would be much better off calling for the regulation and normalization of the illicit drug business than waiting for Americans to quit using drugs. The only thing less likely than the US government ending drug prohibition is that Americans are going to change their ways.