Law enforcement rebuffs drug wars study

Researchers found it tough to draw conclusions linking violent and property crime rates with drug crackdowns. But they suggested the war on drugs is most effective when the targets are major makers and dealers, rather than small-time users and pushers, saying counties that aggressively pursue lower-level offenders have not seen correlated drops in crime.

"The war on drugs has never been oriented toward producing practical results," said Mike Males, the primary author of the report. "A practical person would say, 'Show us reductions in drug use and crime that result from spending millions and millions of dollars and incarcerating thousands of people."'

But critics questioned the logic behind the study and the timing of its release, coming just weeks before California voters will be asked to decide on Proposition 36. If passed, the measure would mandate treatment instead of incarceration for anyone convicted of possession or use of drugs for personal use.

"The premise that vigorous enforcement leads to greater criminality defies common sense," said Larry Brown, executive director of the California District Attorneys' Association. "It is better fiction than Harry Potter."

Brown said the counties that were singled out as having a disproportionate volume of low-level arrests -- Sacramento, Fresno, San Bernardino and Riverside -- are those hardest hit by California's epidemic of methamphetamine use.

"California has nothing to be ashamed of in its enforcement practices," he said. "The fact of the matter is we have enjoyed a 50 percent reduction in the crime rate since 1994, far outpacing the national average."

Brown also questioned the motivation of the institute, which is funded in part by at least one key backer of Proposition 36. The institute's vice president, Dan Macallair, countered that while a small proportion of the study's funding may have come from a Prop 36 backer, it had no influence.

"This information is important for people to have," he said. "And as a public policy agency, I certainly hope it contributes to the debate."

Nathan Barankin, spokesman for state Attorney General Bill Lockyer, said most law enforcers across California are quick to acknowledge there are too far few options for drug addicts, and that a resolution would involve providing more intervention services as supplements to police and prosecutors.

"It is a false choice to suggest that law enforcement ought not to prosecute serious drug users because it doesn't have an effect on the crime rate," he said.