Activity 10

The phrase “drug dealer” comes with a strong negative connotation, both to myself and the majority of society. The stereotypical “drug dealer” would look something like a large, imposing male individual, mid-30s, with muscles, tattoos, scars, and, of course, guns. He would also have plenty of henchman that work for him, like his own Secret Service. His background would probably be that of an underprivileged, lower class family, which is what would have gotten him into the business to begin with, because the monetary benefits would have been too great to pass up.

This image, however, is nothing like the subjects of Dorm Room Dealers. The dealers in the book are college students, ranging from eighteen to twenty-four years of age. Three of the 50  subjects were even women. Another surprising factor was that 44 of the 50 subjects interviewed were Caucasian. The authors went as far as to say that they “simply did not encounter many who were nonwhite.” The authors also made a statement about how all but one of the dealers (49 out of 50) came from either “middle-upper class or affluent/upper class”, which further disproves my stereotypical drug dealer. I understand that there are college drug dealers that are normal kids, but you always have the feeling that they’re the exception to the rule, and that belief that those that are students and whatnot are more likely to do it because of a necessity for the financial benefit. However, based on the information the authors provided, these are easily the most prevalent types of dealers, while the prototypical Hollywood drug dealer is a rarity. 

Mohammad and Fritsvold used the same research method in Dorm Room Dealers as the author of Cocaine Kids, ethnographic investigations. This involved them developing relationships over a period of months to “secure key dealer interviews and otherwise gain the access necessary to physically observe drug transactions and the day-to-day activities of the dealers.” The goal of such a method was to “evaluate people in terms of what they actually do.” This would ultimately provide the most accurate material for their study, allowing the dealers to deal and the consumers to consume. When dealing with a subject shrouded in mystery such as the drug trade, ethnography is probably the most effective manner in which to obtain critical details about everyone involved in the system.

Comparative Policy

I chose to do my comparative policy paper on the country that boasts Candice Swanepoel, Nelson Mandela, and the 2010 World Cup, none other than South Africa. While the beaches and local accents are at an all-time high, the state of the South African drug culture could be at an all-time low. Amid the political unrest, statistics are showing that drug use is growing amongst teenagers, use of cocaine, meth, heroine, and marijuana are all up, and the government in turmoil is struggling to do anything about it. How bad is the problem? Studies by the Anti-Drug Alliance of South Africa are now circling that claim as many as one out of three adults in South Africa is a regular drug user (Rademeyer, p. 1). Obviously these numbers are hard to confirm and bring skepticism due to the fact that the sample of about 57,000 comes from a population of roughly 53 million (roughly 0.1%), but regardless, this survey certainly raises an eyebrow about the potential of a prominent problem A more representative study by the same institution found that 13% of South Africans have a drug or alcohol disorder. Regardless of which survey is closer to the real number, it’s still obvious that there is a problem with substance abuse in South Africa.

One element of South African drug culture that isn’t disputed is the rapidly rising popularity of Nyaope. Nyaope, which is also referred to as whoonga, is currently the most problematic drug in South Africa. It is a powdered cocktail of various ingredients, including low-grade heroin, rat poison, sometimes cleaning detergents, and HIV medication, all of which is sprinkled over a joint, usually containing marijuana or dagga (Ross, p. 1). The real kicker is that, even though the base of the cocktail is heroin, which is illegal in South Africa, Nyaope is not illegal. The reason being is because, if heroin can somehow be substituted, someone cannot be arrested for smoking a concoction of legal substances (Mceachran, p. 1).

An area in which South Africa finds similarity to the United States is the in how each country deals with marijuana. Cannabis is considered illegal in South Africa, just as it is in the United States, and is classified as a Schedule 1 drug; however, those laws are rarely enforced due to the enormity of the industry in the country combined with the high levels of corruption within the police force. This is similar to the United States, where marijuana is beginning to be decriminalized by the federal government in certain states that elected to issue written legislation to legalize the drug. However, the difference is the way that the code of law is written to deal with marijuana possession in each country. In South Africa, penalties for drug possession are written as the following: a Class A charge warrants a maximum sentence of 7 years’ imprisonment or a fine or both. A Class B charge warrants a maximum sentence of 5 years’ imprisonment or a fine or both. A Class C charge warrants a maximum sentence of 2 years’ imprisonment or a fine or both (Drug Info, p. 1). In United States, on the other hand, a first offense of marijuana possession carries a maximum sentence of one year and a maximum fine of $1,000. A second offense for marijuana possession includes a minimum 15 day sentence and a maximum fine of $2,500. A third offense for marijuana possession in the United States includes a minimum 90 day sentence and a maximum fine of $5,000 (NORML, p. 1).

In dealing with alcohol, South Africa has some disparities between their policies and that of the United States. In South Africa, the legal drinking age is 18, while in the United States, it is 21 years of age. However, despite being more lenient in terms of the drinking age, South Africa is tougher than the United States when it comes to drinking and driving. In the United States, it is well-known that the legal driving limit is a 0.08g per 100mL blood-alcohol content. In South Africa, though, the legal blood-alcohol content for driving is 0.05g per 100mL, and the legal breath alcohol limit is 0.24mg per 1000mL (Drunk Driving laws, p. 1).

The war on drugs is one that every country attacks with methods they believe to be most effective. However, in countries in which the hierarchal power structure is losing credibility, such as South Africa, this war looks more and more like a losing effort due to the lack of enforcement and transparency. One can only hope South Africa corrects their issue of being the largest drug trafficker in all of Africa soon. 

Mceachran, R. (2013, August 27). In South Africa, a Deadly New Drug Is Made With HIV Medications. Retrieved April 5, 2015, from http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/08/in-south-africa-a-deadly-new-drug-is-made-with-hiv-medications/278865/

Rademeyer, J. (2013, March 28). Claim that 1 in 3 South Africans are drug users based on flawed survey - Africa Check. Retrieved April 5, 2015, from http://africacheck.org/reports/flawed-survey-claims-a-third-of-south-africans-are-drug-users/

Ross, W. (2013, September 18). South Africa's craze for heroin-marijuana cocktail. Retrieved April 5, 2015, from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-24137003

Drug Info Western Cape. (n.d.). Retrieved April 5, 2015, from http://druginfo.westerncape.gov.za/legal-consequences-drug-related-offences

Drunk Driving laws in South Africa. (2012, December 24). Retrieved April 5, 2015, from http://www.news24.com/Travel/South-Africa/Drunk-Driving-laws-in-South-Africa-20121211

NORML.org - Working to Reform Marijuana Laws. (n.d.). Retrieved April 5, 2015, from http://norml.org/laws/item/federal-penalties-2#mandatory

Activity 8

As far as the “war on drugs” goes in the United States, I wouldn’t go as far as saying we’ve lost the war, but I would say we’re losing so far. In the battle against each drug, we’ve seen the following: marijuana usage has become so widely accepted that the federal government basically gave up on prosecuting recreational or medicinal use of the product; cocaine and crack has seen a huge difference in sentencing for each because of the racial stereotype to the usage of each; tobacco, despite reductions in advertising and popularity, is still the leading preventable cause of death worldwide, claiming approximately 5 million lives per year (Fast Facts). This doesn’t even include the issues with alcohol, prescription drugs, etc. 

There are multiple costs in losing the “war on drugs”, starting with the reputation of the federal government. When citizens see the federal government involved in a “war on drugs” and then see them concede on the use of marijuana, it makes citizens question the decision to declare the war in the first place. Another cost of losing the “war on drugs” is the literal cost of it. In the 44 years of the “war on drugs”, the United States government and taxpayers have spent over one trillion dollars in the fight against drugs. To see this amount of money spent while seeing no major affect on the quantity of drugs traded, sold, and used in the United States, it comes off as reckless spending by the federal government. A third cost of losing the “war on drugs” is the imprisonment rates in the United States. There have been recent issues of overcrowding in prisons nationwide, mainly due to the fact that over 30 million individuals have been arrested for drug-related crimes. That’s not saying that use of illegal drugs shouldn’t be punished, however, I still feel that violent offenders and offenders against children should be the top priority to be incarcerated. This was a cost that should have been anticipated by the federal government when declaring the “war on drugs”, forcing them to either build more prisons or clear space for future drug arrests. But instead, we’ve run into an overcrowding issue with plea deals being struck left and right to avoid jail time.

Activity 7 Post

        In the panel discussion, the six panelists and the mediator covered a great deal of information in dealing with medical marijuana, all of which had to be based on fact, evidence, first-hand experimentation, etc. One of the early arguments for legalization that was made in the discussion was comparing marijuana to Marinol. In the study, it was shown that marijuana was just as effective as Marinol in increasing appetite, which is the designed purpose for Marinol. Marinol, however, is a Schedule III drug, while Marijuana is a schedule I drug with the argument being made that the reason is the abuse potential of marijuana. However, one panelist makes the case that amphetamines, including prescription ones like Adderall, have higher abuse potential than marijuana, yet Adderall is Schedule II because of its medical benefits, while marijuana is Schedule I despite its medical use in some states.

A strong argument against legalization of marijuana is the issue of public health. One panelist made the point that studies have shown that as the danger level of a substance goes up or is played up, the usage goes down, especially for ages in which initiation usually starts (8th, 10th, 12th grade). On the contrary, it’s also been shown that as the danger level or perception is toned down, the usage goes up, especially among younger users that are trying for the first time. Another argument for the prohibition of marijuana beyond the medical level is the study that was recently done by one of the panelists that shows that states with distilleries have a direct correlation to an increase in adult recreational use. However, it should also be noted that there was no supporting evidence that showed a change for minors, so the public health issue is mainly dealing with adults.

Activity 6 Post

        The documentary we watched in class, OxyContin Express, was a real eye-opener for me. I knew prescription drug abuse was a common (and dangerous) habit in the United States, but it never occurred to me that Florida is the capital of the whole operation, in a figurative sense. The lack of regulation of prescription drugs has created a massive issue with prescription drug abuse, killing 11 people per day in Florida alone. The transportation and dealing of these drugs across state lines is also becoming very popular because of the ease with which someone can obtain a massive amount of prescription medicine in a matter of days. For those that purchase the drugs for dealing purposes, the rewards can be large in states that regulate prescription drug prescriptions. In those states, addicts will buy prescription drugs for as much as 10 times the cost of the prescription because the addiction is that strong. 

Seeing this epidemic, of sorts, going on in Florida, there are a few measures that can be taken to slow down the prescription drug problem. The first step, as was stated in the video, is the regulation of prescription drugs. There has been a policy put in place, however, it isn’t as strong as it should be. It forces doctors to enter prescriptions into a database that will keep track of patients’ records, but there is a catch: the doctors have several days of leeway to enter the prescription into the database. So in that time, someone could have obtained a large amount of prescription drugs by the time their records are red flagged. Another policy to cut down on Florida’s pill popper reputation would be the strict regulation of pain clinics, especially those that are cash only and don’t accept health insurance. Those places are a breeding ground for illegal drug trafficking, include by the prescribing doctors, who know exactly what people are doing when making purchases of the biggest quantity of the most potent pills they can obtain. Keeping these places under a close watch would make a huge difference in limiting the prescription drug trade in these places. The final initiative I would make in limiting the prescription drug problem is a relatively simple one that goes hand-in-hand with regulating the pills: limit the quantity of pills per prescription. Over-prescribing is a common problem in Florida, and I’ve seen that from personal experience. For example, they’ll give you a bottle of 60 pills and say take 1-2 per day for 2-3 weeks. Based on that, you’re going to have anywhere from roughly 20-40 pills left over, and for what? Prescriptions need to be small in quantity, and if it means making people drive an extra couple of times to pick up their meds, that’s the small cost to discourage statewide prescription drug dealing problems.

This prescription drug problem ties in well with what we’ve gone over in class because many prescription drugs are Schedule II, which means they have a high chance of abuse, but they do serve a medical purpose. We’ve also discussed the various ways in which some can take prescription drugs, including snorting, smoking, injecting, or orally. All of these methods are used for prescription drugs, however, orally is far and away the most common method for normal users. Addicts are the ones that get more into the other methods, depending on the type and onset of the high one looks to achieve.

Activity 5 Post

The author of Cocaine Kids, Terry Williams, used a research method known as ethnography. As Williams explains in the introductory pages of the book, ethnography involves gathering information about the subjects involved, information including behaviors, rituals, languages, gestures, styles, facial expressions, and more. It also involves keen observation of surroundings and social structure. His method to gather data on these particular individuals was to gain there trust, gain inside access to their operation (in this case, cocaine dealing), and using his senses to make observations while taking as few notes as possible.

In reading this book, I was able to take in a lot of new information about the drug culture. The first thing I caught on to was the vast amount of unique terminology in the drug trade. It’s not just a different word hear or there, but it’s like its own lingo that only the insiders understand. Words such as “cop”, “flake”, “rock”, “on the street”, and “comeback” are just a few of the words that have new meaning in the drug culture. “Cop” is not a reference to a police officer, but instead refers to the purchase of drugs, particularly in a “copping zone.” “Flake” and “rock” are direct references to the drugs themselves, with “flake” being the low-quality yellowish-powder that comes off of “rock”, the purest form of cocaine. “On the street” does not entail that drugs are available to the public, but instead that a certain amount is being distributed in a deal. Finally, “comeback” is a type of adulterant that, when cooked with cocaine, it mixes and takes a very similar appearance to cocaine, allowing for greater profits on the mixed product. I think the author’s observation of these terms in the book goes well with how we’ve discussed a variety of terms in class, as well, for many different drugs that would be familiar in the drug culture; terms such as “flyer’s chocolate (a type of meth), “basuco” (coco leaves mixed with gasoline), and others. In covering this terminology in class and in the book, you get a feel for how the drug culture goes beyond the recreational user, and how it has layers that include becoming a lifestyle and occupation for some people.

Another area of drug culture I found interesting was the purity of drugs. Before reading this book and taking ADS, I’d always thought of the purity of a drug as the best coming from the highest quality, healthiest plants, and so on and so forth. I didn’t realize that dealers could mix different substances in with drugs to create a greater profit for themselves by selling less of the actual product. For example, in Cocaine Kids, Max would mix 125 grams of cocaine with 60 grams of baking soda and 40 grams of “comeback.” This formula for his crack cocaine helped him make twice as much money on crack as he would have made making “pure” crack. We further covered this in class discussing the purity and production of a variety of drugs, including cocaine, marijuana, meth, etc. All of them follow the same ideology of looking for ways to provide less of the real product and instead providing a mixture that the user can’t tell the difference in. This is an area we’ve covered class a good bit, including recently talking about how “blue sky”, which is simply meth that is dyed blue, is mistaken as the most pure form of methamphetamine. This is another area in which the author made important observations about the purity of the cocaine in the drug ring he observed, something that ties in well with our course.

A third aspect of drug culture that played a much larger role than I’d imagined was race and ethnicity. Terry Williams refers to the fact that “Dominicans were in charge of 50 of the 53 coke and crack houses” he visited in New York City while conducting his research. This fact stands out because it seems that in our culture, certain races get stereotyped with certain drugs. For example, whites are generally thought of as users (and arrestees) of cocaine and meth. We just recently discussed in class how 71% of meth arrestees are white. African-Americans are more generally associated with (and arrested) with substances like crack and marijuana. It’s strange to think that drugs can be stereotyped to certain races and ethnicities, but there are usually statistics to support those claims, which is why I found it interesting that the author took note of who the leaders of the crack and coke houses were in NYC. This is yet again an area that ties into what we’ve gone over in class, discussing how different races are arrested more for different drugs.

Activity 4 Post

War is a dangerous game. It turns men into pawns with weapons, looking to kill anyone for the other team. It’s an environment that only the bravest of men enter, which is why I’m  not opposed to the use of amphetamines by fighter pilots in the U.S. military. If they want to take the pills, whose to say they shouldn’t be able to? These men risk their lives to protect millions of people they don’t know, so if taking drugs helps keep them alive by preventing fatigue, then take those drugs. Obviously, there can be side affects down the line, but there are side affects from being at war completely sober, I don’t think 5-10 mg of Dexedrine is going to make things much worse. What it can do is prevent those 100+ deaths of fighter pilots who crashed due to fatigue. I believe the military is using every bit of ethics they can in providing these pills. The most ethical thing to do is to provide your pilots with every opportunity to do their job at the highest level, and by beating fatigue, Dexedrine assists in that regard. On top of that, the military takes strict count of how many pills were consumed on the mission and takes back whatever should be leftover from the amount given out preflight. 

When talking about whether or not a pilot’s career will suffer if they do not take amphetamines, it’s really impossible to determine because it’s completely objective. It’s like asking if a baseball player’s career will suffer if they don't take steroids? First off, is “suffer” just saying that they won’t be as accurate in dropping bombs or is saying they’ll give in to fatigue and potentially crash? I think every individual would be affected in their career differently, with those who tire more easily being much more likely to be prone to accident, thus having the greater need for Dexedrine. The consequences of taking Dexedrine in this line of work are directly tied to the side effects, which can include anxiousness, hypertension, elevated blood pressure, restlessness, and nervousness. Obviously these affects can affect someone’s ability to function, as well, but that’s where it needs to be determined which affect can cause greater harm to the pilot and others, the fatigue factor that the amphetamine prevents or the side effects it creates? In the tests with helicopters where pilots were sleep deprived and then asked to do certain aerial tasks, those that took Dexedrine performed better than those that did not, so perhaps that provides an answer. Some strategies to reduce the consequences of amphetamines would include taking the recommended dose, as well as allowing pilots to fly short missions in between those that require drugs to prevent a dependance between flying and a need for the drug.

As we discussed in class, a Schedule 2 drug is one with high levels of abuse potential, but also serves some form of a medical purpose, as is the case for these fighter pilots. The military’s prescriptions for Dexedrine allow them to provide the “go-pills” to fighter pilots to help them stay awake. We also talked about how this type of use is classified as illegal-instrumental, where even though it’s illegal, it’s for a socially accepted reasons. College students are also known for using amphetamines to focus, as is seen with Adderall. Despite the strong chance of abuse with amphetamines, I think they serve an important use for fighter pilots that ultimately need every advantage possible when going into these life-or-death situations.