The extent to which the stance of police towards drug use has changed the general public’s perception of the police force in the United Kingdom
Literature review
Introduction
Over the past 40 years, the attitude of the public towards cannabis and cocaine has become far more relaxed. Therefore casual use of these drugs, particularly cannabis, is far more widespread. From the British Crime Survey, it is established that 9.5 million individuals in the age bracket of 16 and 59 years have ever used cannabis, and this figure has been growing yearly since the survey was introduced in 1981 (MacDonald, 1999). After the enactment of the Misuse of Drugs Act in 1971, the total number of people convicted for illegal drug use has increased, and 1998 recorded a figure of 84300. This number had, however, been declining in the subsequent years with a massive drop to 50,000 in 2004. This decline, therefore, raises the question of whether the police leniency in the treatment of those dealing or taking class A and class B drugs has contributed to this situation (Barclay, Tavares, and Siddique, 2000). Most often, the media highlights some instances of leniency portrayed by the police with regards to recreational drugs, although it fails to delve on the causal factors for these leniencies. Even though the police are central to the changing attitude towards drug abuse, the fact remains that the police are not mandated for these policy decisions (Bone, Potter, and Klein, 2018). According to Taylor (2008), Don't use plagiarised sources.Get your custom essay just from $11/page
Many recent studies have concentrated on the policy activity in Class A, B, and C drugs. Still, little literature exists for about the change in the perception of the general public towards the police force position in the casual drug used within the context of the United Kingdom. This research pertains to the perceived police leniency in handling individuals involve in class A and B drugs with a quest to identify the reasons behind media portrayal of police leniency and the factors that influence such decisions by the police.
Methods of searching
A thorough search was conducted for the relevant literature that was reviewed in this study. Both recent and relevant studies were accessed via the Google Scholar and through other different criminal justice, human resource, medical, and police databases. The main phrases and keywords utilized to search for the literature that pertains to this topic included casual drug use, recreational cannabis, police officer decisions, paradigm shift theory, societal attitudes towards cannabis, class A drugs cocaine, and class B drug cannabis, and police leniency on drugs.
The theoretical orientation of the study
This research investigation is an indication of whether the change in the general public perception is a consequence of how the media portrays the policy activities with regards to the prohibited drugs. There was no theory created by the researcher. However, the research broadened on the social theory by highlighting the rationale behind the police leniency with casual drug users. Also, the research expands the social norm theory by focusing on the issues that relate to the recreational cannabis within the police and police attitudes context toward the government policies that dictate their actions.
There has been a paradigm shift among police officers’ attitudes regarding drugs and drug use in the United Kingdom (Englund, Freeman, Murray, and McGuire, 2017). The police officers are the key law enforcers, and it thus makes much sense to investigate how they perceive such offenses. The depenalization of cannabis for recreational reasons in the UK was the epitome of the shift of how the media portrays the police and, thus, the societal perception of the general public (Adda, McConnell, and Rasul, 2014). However, there is a lack of consistency of the change in attitudes among the law enforcers as well as the police officers about the drug misuse. The study by Shiner and Winstock (2015), social norm theory, concurs with the contention that there is a likelihood for the change in the police activities towards the individuals who use cannabis in light of the acceptance of recreational marijuana. According to Arboleda-Flórez (2008), the theory postulates that the changing social norms resulted in the leniency of cannabis by the ever-changing standards of the social norms. Therefore, for this particular reason, the attitude of the policy officer toward users of class A and B drugs is likely to change, given the rise in the use of these substances. The aim of this research is to unleash the leniency in policing about recreational drugs.
Adda, McConnell, and Rasul, (2014), investigates the potential impact of depenalization and acceptance of cannabis on the crime rates. They recommend a need to research the potential impacts of decriminalizing as well as the acceptance of class B drugs in other fields. Despite the researchers not focusing particularly on law enforcers, the study of the impact of depenalization of cannabis on law enforcement, especially the attitudes of the police officers is necessary.
Review of the Literature
Legal and illegal drugs
The laws that control the use of drugs in the United Kingdom are complicated. However, Shiner and Winstock (2015) state that three primary statues regulate the availability of drugs in these regions, including The Misuse of Drugs Act (1971), The Psychoactive Substances Act, (2016), and The Medicines Act (19968). In particular, the Misuse of drug Act was aimed at preventing the non-medical use of various drugs and thus controls drugs of both medical and non-medical use (Bone, Potter, and Klein, 2018). This law prohibits possession of drugs unlawfully and categorizes the drugs into three classes, namely Class A, which include cocaine. Heroin, and methamphetamine, Class B drugs, which include cannabis, codeine, and amphetamine, and Class C that include anabolic steroids and benzodiazepines. According to Monaghan (2014), these three classes are groups of illegal drugs, and therefore production and supply are punishable. Under current UK laws, a particular drug substance is only illegal if it is specifically banned. In contrast, legal substances are unbanned drugs despite having effects related to those of illegal substances such as cannabis and cocaine.
In the past decade, Austen, (2016), asserts that the police officers have been expected to take a pivotal role in the delivery of the UK drug strategy. Part of their role is to reduce the drug supply by targeting their efforts and resources, particularly on Class A drugs. Similarly, Taylor (2008) highlights that police are the key gatekeepers to the criminal justice systems, and they are therefore responsible for channeling users of illegal drugs into the treatment after their apprehension. However, the police officers, according to Arboleda-Flórez (2008), play a contradictory role, which entails law enforcement as well as the provision of support to the issues of drug users. Consequently, tensions are likely to emerge concerning the routine policing of the issue of drug users.
According to Flynn (2019), there have been long-running attempts by law enforcement agencies to restrict the use of illicit drugs. Various policy approaches have been tried across the globe ranging from punitive approaches to more liberal law enforcement approaches such as those in Portugal and Holland that result in the depenalization or decriminalization of the possession of some types of illicit drugs, including cannabis. According to Hughes (2003), only 15,120 individuals in Wales and Europe were prosecuted for possessing cannabis, a 19% drop since 2015. In 2017, police issued cautions to over 6.524 people, which is equivalent to a 34% decrease compared to the previous two years. Similarly, Sabet, (2007), reveals that such figures are a reflection of the nearly every police officer pursuing fewer prosecutions and giving fewer cautions for the possession of cannabis. The study by Monaghan, and Bewley-Taylor (2013), suggests that the decision by Britain to reduce the legal punishment for recreational users of cannabis has backfired, resulting in serious psychological side effects and increased crime rates. Monaghan, (2014), asserts that the law prohibiting cannabis use was relaxed by the U.K government in 2004 backed up by British law enforcement. As a result of this cannabis, the drug was shifted from class B to the class C category, which shared with some painkillers (Warburton, May, and Hough, 2005). Although the possession of this substance is punishable for a maximum of two years imprisonment, Simatupang (2016), a rise in use of this drug was exhibited, followed by a drop in the number of arrests made.
Depenalization of possession of small amounts of marijuana in the London borough of Lambeth has a positive correlation with hospital admission related to the use of illicit drugs. According to Kelly and Rasul (2014), the depenalization of cannabis has exhibited long term influence on the hospital admissions associated with the use of hard drugs, increasing the rates of hospital admission for men to between 40% and 100%. Among this population, young men are more affected.
Drugs for personal or business use
All countries provide the legal distinction to graduate the magnitude of drug possession offenses and other related activities, including storage and acquisition. According to Monaghan and Bewley-Taylor (2013), this offer is often made with reference to the amounts of drugs, and a certain amount can be set to as the threshold between different levels of punishment or offense. Across the European Union, the real emphasis is placed more on the intent rather than the quantity of cannabis possessed by an individual. The UK has guidelines and legislations that allow a more lenient outcome in instances where the amount of cannabis possessed by a person is for his/her own use. In the UK, the British drug law differentiates between possession of the prohibited drugs and possession of these substances with the aim of supplying. Also, sentencing varies with the classification of these drugs where Class A, B, and C drugs are classified as most dangerous, dangerous, and less dangerous, respectively (Turnbull, 2009). The sentences imposed tend to become more lenient in instances where the law enforcers are convinced that a person is not involved in any activity of selling and the drugs in possession, imported or produce is just meant for personal consumption. Similarly, Austen, (2016), points out that quantity is the primary criteria utilized by the procession service and the police in the investigation and prosecution of offenses although specificities quantitative limits and guidelines are yet to be reported.
According to Moeller (2012), there is little information about the supply-side of the distribution of cannabis despite its wider usage in western countries because most transactions are handled indoors among their peers. The leniency towards possession of cannabis can be likened to the development of the cannabis market in Copenhagen. Normally, it is expected that that drug marketing should not be conducted as an open-air street-level market. This market is expected to exhibit disruptions by police officers and thus hindering the distribution. Moeller, (2012), employs the transaction cost reasoning to examine and compare costs, revenues, and governance structures that exist in tow cannabis markets in Copenhagen. The leniency on the crackdown of cannabis can be linked to the possession of high quantities of cannabis, as demonstrated in the Moeller’s finding. He establishes that a quantifiable net revenue for selling drugs in the two markets was substantial with similar trends with regards to the scope and scale. The leniency exhibited in these operations has caused the individuals possessing cannabis for commercial purposes to even reduce costs as a strategy to lower the costs of transactions and attracting more buyers and thus reproducing the economies of scale.
Under the Misuse of Drugs Act of 1971, the penalties imposed varies with the category of the substance in possession. Class A drugs, including heroin and crack cocaine, attract more severe penalties compared to Class C drugs such as anabolic and steroids (Monaghan, 2014). A person who supplies or produces Class A drugs risks the punishment of life imprisonment while supply and production of Class B and C drugs can attract a maximum of 14-year imprisonment. Possession of these illegal drugs is, however, treated with less severity with possession of Class A, B, and C drugs, attracting a maximum sentence of 7, 5, and 2 years respectively. The police officers have however concentrated more
Police and the media
A significant aspect to take into consideration while investigating the impact of media on the general public perception of the police is the relationship between the police and media. This particular relationship may affect the coverage provided by the media. From the examination of the relationship between police and media by Franklin, Perkins, Kirby, and Richmond (2019), the police media relationship is generally fairly cooperative, accommodating, and mutually supportive. Marsh and Melville, (2019), describes the media and police as having a healthy attitude towards each other. Most often, the police use media to demonstrate the hardships in policing as well as the nature of the crime which they handle and media, on the other hand, uses the media to provide them with scripts that maximize their audiences.
According to Simatupang (2016), a significant percentage of citizens majorly encounter law enforcers indirectly via the media, and the media, therefore, serve a dominant purpose in the creation of the citizen’s evaluation of the police. The media coverage of the police officers directly impacts the public support of the police practices. Similar sentiments are echoed by Marsh and Melville (2019), stating that the coverage can be influenced by locale due to the differences in the news coverage of the law enforcement officers with regards to the small town and big city. Networks.
Police turn on a Blind eye on cannabis
The action of the police against marijuana users has declined over the past seven years, which has prompted the societal claims that this particular substance is getting decriminalized by Stealth. According to Austen (2016), there has been cut in manpower as a result of the slum in the enforcement of the laws related to cannabis, causing the police to shift to drugs that are likely to cause more serious harm instead of cannabis. Similarly, Adda, McConnell, and Rasul (2014) allude that most forces no longer focus on individuals for handling or possessing smaller quantities of cannabis meant for personal consumptions, which has been followed by some police commissioners calling for drug decriminalization. From Warburton, May, and Hough, (2005) assertions, the opposers to the relaxation of marijuana laws claim that the absence of police action to deal with its use is resulting in back door decriminalization.
According to Simatupang (2016), some offenders manage to get off scot-free due to the laxity of the police officers’ attitude towards the drug laws. Although a few law enforcers crackdown, a larger percentage of them have given it a soft approach, and a significant number virtually turn the blind eye. In the city of Hampshire, about 65% of individuals found in possession of cannabis end up with summons or a charge. In Devon, Staffordshire, Hertfordshire, and Cornwall, the number reduces by 16%. Bretteville-Jensen, (2006), demonstrates that such casual attitude is an indication that only an insignificant number of individuals found with class B drugs are given warnings regardless of the mental health risk of Class B drugs. This warning s however, are less serious compared to the caution and fails to provide the criminal record of a person. As a remedy to this challenge, Félix, and Portugal, (2017), proposes that rather than providing caution and prosecuting offenders, the law enforcers should exploit other options to sanction to individuals found with the drugs. For instance, official cannabis warnings can be given, which translates into a record of someone’s actions on the police database and the penalty notice for the disorder.
Leniency is a response to shrinking budgets
According to Bretteville-Jensen (2006), illicit drug policy changes were faced with high social, health, criminal justice, and economic costs of criminalization. Consequently, the UK is considering alternative strategies to the criminal sanctions for the casual use of drugs. There is a growing interest in the UK for other forms of reforms that can be utilized for simple possession of illicit drugs, including Cannabis. The decreased rates of arrest and depenalization of casual use of Class B drugs has more to do with budget cut and decreased funding. The police leniency is perceived by many forces as a money-saving measure through minimization of time spent on cannabis offenses. According to Monaghan and Bewley-Taylor (2013), the criminalization of cannabis puts a huge burden on the UK’s criminal justice system. The police, for instance, spend over a million hours on average to enforce a ban on cannabis annually. The criminalization of marijuana establishes additional pressure on the law enforcers and thus hindering attempts made towards investigating other crimes. Besides time, the prohibition of cannabis imposes a significant financial burden to the law enforcers. Félix and Portugal, (2017) it cost approximately £449 to place a drug user in the police custody for only 12 hours. There are also further costs of investigation of criminal acts such as the forensic analysis hence extending the financial burden to the government. According to Ogrodnik, Kopp, Bongaerts, and Tecco (2015), the legalization of cannabis would save an average of £12.2 million annually.
On the flip side, the Police Federation claims that the leniency of policy towards the use of Cannabis has attracted more dealers and users in the area of hard drugs. Adda, McConnell, and Rasul, (2014), in their month policing experiment, argues that decriminalizing possession of cannabis and other illegal drugs has fueled the demand for drugs. Concerning the Metropolitan Police Strategy, possession of small quantities, cannabis should be approached with caution instead of prosecution. Contrary to this view, law enforcers have failed to reduce the misuse of drugs, and most people are now smoking cannabis openly in the streets of Brixton. Also, MacDonald (1999) asserts that the change in these procedures has encouraged more individuals to get involved in the use of Cannabis, which has contributed to impaired performance both at work and school and increase in accidents as well as the escalation of different crimes.
Conclusion
In summary, much attention has been diverted by the law enforcers to cannabis use and the provision of cannabis over the past years. The media is responsible for influence how the general public perceives the police officers’ approach to the crackdown of these substances. Despite the existence of policies to govern the use and supply of cannabis, the police officers have turned a blind eye on this issue, and a section of them suggests its legalization. The shift from prosecution to depenalization is linked to the decreasing police resources and the need t focus on other serious crimes.
Consequently, the nature of action taken against the casual users of cannabis is being determined by the intent. The findings of the literature review, therefore, establish that police have taken a more liberal policy approach to individuals who use and cultivate cannabis at home and thus impacting the economic market for cannabis. The individuals seeking for the market for these substances are exploiting the increased leniency by the law enforcers to create a business. It is therefore clearly shown from these studies that war on drugs is cannot be fought by the police officers alone; instead, it should involve a multiagency team that comprises the government and policymakers as well as the citizens.
Research Gap
Basing on the above literature review, there has been no study about the policy leniency on Class A and B drugs, which has established whether this approach is a balanced reflection. Also, there is a limited demonstration of the factors that have prompted such a level of leniency by the policy. This research, therefore, seeks to bridge this gap by establishing the rationale for the leniency portrayed by law enforcers in the UK.
Bibliography
Franklin, A.S., Perkins, R.K., Kirby, M.D., and Richmond, K.P., 2019. The Influence of Police Related Media, Victimization, and Satisfaction on African American College Students’ Perceptions of Police. Frontiers in Sociology, 4, p.65.
Moeller, K., 2012. Costs and revenues in street-level cannabis dealing. Trends in Organized Crime, 15(1), pp.31-46.
Warburton, H. May, T., and Hough, M., 2005. Looking the other way: the impact of reclassifying cannabis on police warnings, arrests, and informal action in England and Wales. British Journal of Criminology, 45(2), pp.113-128.
Bone, M., Potter, G., and Klein, A., 2018. Introduction: cultivation, medication, activism, and cannabis policy. Drugs and Alcohol Today.
Turnbull, P.J., 2009. The great cannabis classification debacle: What are the likely consequences for policing cannabis possession offenses in England and Wales?. Drug and alcohol review, 28(2), pp.202-209.
Flynn, P., 2019. Why we need to legalize cannabis for medical use in the UK. Acute pain, 10, p.00.
Bretteville-Jensen, A.L., 2006. To legalize or not to legalize? Economic approaches to the decriminalization of drugs. Substance use & misuse, 41(4), pp.555-565.
Félix, S., and Portugal, P., 2017. Drug decriminalization and the price of illicit drugs. International Journal of Drug Policy, 39, pp.121-129.
Adda, J., McConnell, B., and Rasul, I., 2014. Crime and the depenalization of cannabis possession: Evidence from a policing experiment. Journal of Political Economy, 122(5), pp.1130-1202.
Ogrodnik, M., Kopp, P., Bongaerts, X. and Tecco, J.M., 2015. An economic analysis of different cannabis decriminalization scenarios. Psychiatr Danub, 27(Suppl 1), pp.S309-14.
Austen, L., 2016. Police and crime commissioners: emerging “drug policy actors”? Safer Communities.
Taylor, S., 2008. Outside the outsiders: Media representations of drug use. Probation Journal, 55(4), pp.369-387.
Monaghan, G., and Bewley-Taylor, D., 2013. Practical implications of policing alternatives to arrest and prosecution for minor cannabis offenses. International Drug Policy Consortium.
Hughes, B., 2003. The role of the quantity in the prosecution of drug offenses (ELDD comparative study). Lisbon: European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction.
Arboleda-Flórez, J., 2008. decriminalization versus criminalization of cannabis. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 21(2), pp.128-130.
Sabet, K.A., 2007. 16 The (Often Unheard) Case Against Marijuana Leniency. Pot politics: marijuana and the costs of prohibition, p.325.
Englund, A., Freeman, T.P., Murray, R.M., and McGuire, P., 2017. Can we make cannabis safer? The Lancet Psychiatry, 4(8), pp.643-648.
Kelly, E., and Rasul, I., 2014. Policing cannabis and drug-related hospital admissions: Evidence from administrative records. Journal of Public Economics, 112, pp.89-114.
Barclay, G.C., Tavares, C., and Siddique, A., 2000. International comparisons of criminal justice statistics 1999. London: Home Office.
MacDonald, Z., 1999. Illicit drug use in the UK: evidence from the British Crime Survey. British Journal of Criminology, 39(4), pp.585-608.
Shiner, M., and Winstock, A., 2015. Drug use and social control: The negotiation of moral ambivalence. Social Science & Medicine, 138, pp.248-256.
Monaghan, M., 2014. Drug Policy Governance in the UK: Lessons from changes to and debates concerning the classification of cannabis under the 1971 Misuse of Drugs Act. International Journal of Drug Policy, 25(5), pp.1025-1030.
Marsh, I. and Melville, G., 2019. Crime, justice, and the media. Routledge.
Simatupang, E., 2016. Getting out of the trap of war on drugs. Jurnal Kebijakan dan Administrasi Publik, 20(2), pp.9-23.