Copinthehood.com has moved to qualitypolicing.com

  • The President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing

    It’s out. You can download the 115 page PDF here. I haven’t read it yet. I’d be happy to hear any comments from those have about what in it is relevant/important/surprising.

  • If only our cities were more like Amsterdam!

    If only our cities were more like Amsterdam!

    This comes from the The Netherlands Embassy in Washington, D.C.:

    Initiative 71 became law today, legalizing marijuana in Washington, D.C. under certain circumstances. Mayor Muriel Bowser said this week that the District will not become “like Amsterdam,” as though being “like Amsterdam” would be a bad thing. City Hall even refers to Amsterdam in their official Q&A. To give the people of Washington, D.C. an educated view of how D.C. compares to Amsterdam, the Netherlands Embassy in Washington offers this Q&A about Dutch marijuana laws and policies and an infographic.

    Click through for the Q & A. Here’s the infographic. It’s odd, our American tendency, to take something that works well enough in other countries — be it drug policy or health care — and simple assert that it’s a horrible system best avoided.

  • Policing in California, post Prop. 47

    Being in NYC, I miss a lot of what happens west of the Mississippi (and sometimes even west of the Hudson). So I haven’t really been following California’s Proposition 47.

    Recently I posted about a minor increase in property crime in LA, which was both news to me and made intuitive sense. Sure, it sounds logical to focus law enforcement on drug dealers rather than drug addicts. And who can be against “treatment” (whatever that means). But a block full of east coast heroin junkies or west coast meth heads is not a good block.

    Very much in the spirit of Broken Windows, police need to maintain order. And the threat of arrest is key. It’s not that you can or should arrest every drug addict, but sometimes somebody needs to spend a night in jail. I couldn’t easily build drug distribution cases for prosecution, but if I guy wouldn’t close up shop when asked repeatedly, I could use my discretionary power to make a street-corner drug dealer spend a night in jail. On paper it was just a bullshit small-scale drug possession arrest. But the actual crime was more serious.

    Or take stolen goods. One could argue, for instance, that possession of a few scavenged copper pipes or wires isn’t that big of a deal. But that drug-addict “recycler” is systematically destroying the housing stock of an entire neighborhood. The odds that somebody in possession of stolen goods is doing it for the first and last time is pretty slim. So the hammer of punishment may need to be disproportionate to the individual crime.

    In general, I support any attempt to reduce our prison population and also to move towards a more rational and less criminal drug policy. Prop 47 was supposed to do that. I probably would have voted for it. And it may work in the end. But there are problems now. And it certainly is in the best interests of those who advocate for drug and prison reform to follow through and fix what is broken. Without focusing on behavior and drug distribution, simply decriminalizing hard-drug possession can be the worst of all possible worlds. (I’m reminded of how Kurt Schmoke set the logical policy of “harm reduction” back by a decade with a failed attempt at “drug decriminalization” in 1990s Baltimore.)

    So what’s going on in California? I asked a cop friend out west about the impact of Prop. 47 on policing. His reply is very insightful:

    I do think there has been a noticeable change in terms of diminished felony arrests, although the long-ranging impact of prop 47 may be more problematic. While it may have been structured to simply reduce penalties in order to alleviate prison crowding, I think there will be a negative outcome in terms of how low-level crimes affect communities.

    Basically, I don’t think the public realized the full extent of property and theft crimes which they were voting to essentially decriminalize. For instance, felony “wobblers” such as forgery and fraud where the values don’t exceed $950 have been dropped to misdemeanors, as well as shoplifting or theft charges where the values of the stolen property don’t exceed $950.

    If I’m not mistaken, possession of any controlled substance (for personal use) is now a misdemeanor. For me I see a problematic thread, in that where I work (and live) there is a distinct nexus between methamphetamine use, and theft, and particularly multiple incidents of forgery and check fraud. There is a distinct link between methamphetamine use and theft — at least from what I have observed where I work.

    And I deal with a lot of “speeders” (for lack of a better word) who, if taken into custody, typically have a ton of stolen property in their possession, a violation which has also been dropped down to a misdemeanor. There is a factual interrelation between methamphetamine and organized theft rings in the area I work, and I just don’t think these people are going to show up for court dates on citations. I think they will continue doing what they are doing, which is ripping people off over and over as opportunities arise.

    I do not think that all drugs are the same, and I am a big believer in rehabilitation, but methamphetamine wreaks exponential havoc on people who use it. I haven’t seen too many meth users successfully “bounce back” from meth addiction — and I have seen a lot of extremely damaged people, spiritually eviscerated by this drug, who are now zombies, lurching through town, resorting to scrappy thefts and break-ins and strange, convoluted schemes of identity theft (which are HARD to investigate and prove) and which often involve elements of forgery and fraud.

    There are lots of victims of these property crimes who are very disheartened when they get ripped off — it is a big deal for them. On a more practical note, Merchants (often small businesses) cannot believe I just “cite and release” the people who steal hundreds of dollars of worth of merchandise from their stores. I should also clarify that people who are arrested for most “misdemeanors” are typically issued a citation and are released at the scene (with proper ID), but it requires a felony charge or outstanding warrants for a suspect to go to jail. Receiving a paper citation and being released at the scene does not seem to have the same “heft” as sitting behind bars (usually for a few hours or a day or night) before you see a judge.

    While this may seem simplistic, I do think that jail, in the most basic sense, can be an effective “time out” for folks who have actually been “bad.” I don’t mean to sound reductive, but I do feel it’s beneficial for criminals to face an immediate consequence for some of the nasty stuff they do, so they will at least consider that they should stop doing it. At the very least, getting booked, losing some personal freedom, and spending some time behind bars is an immediate consequence for wrong-doing.

    I do see that prop 47 does essentially “streamline” the process of arraignments and preliminary hearings, in that the DA usually drops a lot of felonies to misdemeanors anyway, BUT I still don’t think that voters realized what they were voting for.

    I also feel if they are going to reduce penalties for all drugs, it would be beneficial to beef up various resources and rehab services for people who are struggling with their addictions. The transient population I deal with struggles with many substance issues, and I don’t judge them for their coping strategies, but I would posit that their addictions are not “helping” them out of despair, but further manifesting it. There are a LOT of people who go to jail, maybe for petty stuff, who spend a little time indoors and out of their routines of self-destruction, whose lives are actually saved and possibly extended because of the forced “time-outs.”

    I am not saying that jail time is a vacation or that it is a permanent corrective measure, but I do think it has some rehabilitative value. I am open-minded but I don’t think prop 47 is a good model.

  • We Got Another Kingpin! (15)

    It’s amazing there are any drug kingpins left since we’ve gotten so many of them.

    It seems there was one last to get: “La Tuta.” Now he’s history. (I’m a bit disappointed in the monicker. “The teacher” is a pretty lame nickname by drug lord standards, I have to say. We may not be running out of kingpins, but they may be running out of good nicknames.)

    “The most wanted drug lord in the country,” according to the NYT.

    I guess Mexico is now safe. Surely this marks the end of the drug war. What a relief.

  • Fight Police Brutality

    Fight Police Brutality

    No point here. I just like old pictures. From Shorpy.com.

    Caption:

    Washington, D.C., circa 1925. “Protesters” is all it says on the caption card for this National Photo glass negative showing what seems to be a meeting of the “Communist Party Young Communist League.”

  • Body Cams and the mean streats of Basingstoke

    Body Cams and the mean streats of Basingstoke

    The BBC has a short (2 min) and surprisingly informative clip on body cameras. But the real reason I’m posting this is because this attack on a police officer took place in Basingstoke, England. Now you may know Basingstoke for its roundabouts (traffic circles)… actually you probably have never heard of Basingstoke. And that’s OK. But I know Basingstoke because the wonderful people of the Hampshire Constabulary let me walk and bike around with them in the fall (autumn) of 2011. I was at Bramshill, the National Policing College. Good times. (Bramshill was recently and shamefully sold to save money.)

    Sgt. Kerry Lawrence was attacked last July. According to the BBC, she has since resumed full duties. I wish her the best.

    For what it’s worth, I remember asking a police officer in Hampshire, “when was the last time a Hampshire officer was killed on duty?” Whomever I asked pondered for a moment (and asked if car crashes counted. I said no) and then, taking a sip from his cuppa, replied, “I don’t think ever.” That is pretty typical for over there. It’s not that there’s no crime or violence in Basingstoke, but on Halloween, one big worry is the illegal sale of flour or eggs to people under 16.

    For what it’s worth, the unprovoked and near fatal attack on Sgt Lawrence received a sentence of three years. That low (for America) sentence length is also pretty typical over there.

    The quoted reaction by Hampshire police officers:

    “I know it was an extremely traumatic experience for Sgt Lawrence and her family and it also had a significant impact on her team and others at Basingstoke Police Station.

    “I am pleased that the courts have recognised the seriousness of this offence in the sentence passed today.”

    “Police officers accept that they perform a dangerous and unpredictable job.

    “I am pleased that the judge has given an appropriate sentence for this vicious and unprovoked attack on PS Lawrence.”

    Things are different in foreign lands, I tell you.

    Here are few pics I took back in 2011. Only the bikes are in Basingstoke. The others are in the surrounding rural area, which looks like a friggin’ magical kids’ story book!




  • Prop. 47’s effect on jail time

    From LA, where Proposition 47 reclassified many crimes as misdemeanors. Drug arrests are down by about one-third. Property crimes are up nearly 10 percent. The problem seems to be this: “The new law specifies that the financial savings on the incarceration side be reinvested in truancy, drug treatment and mental health programs. But that provision does not take effect until mid-2016.”

    I’d be curious how much and how they determine how much money is being saved by fewer arrests (in court, corrections, and police).

  • This is what rational drug policy looks like

    This is what rational drug policy looks like

    The other day my wife and I visited a friend from way back who now works in a coffee shop. Actually a famous one, the Bulldog, which is soon to celebrate it’s 40th anniversary.

    Mostly I just love how a legal and regulated drug trade becomes, well, boring.

    There actually is a worker on duty who is registered by the city as a drug dealer. Along with having to get a standard cafe operator’s license, the city A) checked his criminal background and B) made sure his money is legit. That’s it. They also gave tips in the standard cafe license class (along with, you know, the usual: keep hot, hot, and cold, cold, and don’t cross-contaminate) on how to run a business and keep accounts and deal with labor issues. Here, as long as you play their game, they actually want you to succeed.

    What’s odd about the coffee shop business is that the business is legal, the drugs they sell are legal in all but name, but the store is only allowed to have 500 grams (1 lb) of weed in stock at any given time (that’s strange, but whatever). So they constantly get re-upped. And at that point in the supply trade, from the guy supplying the coffee shop and up the wholesale ladder, the drugs are illegal. Odd. Also, I think, now there has to be a dedicated drug dealer. Years ago you could order coffee and a joint from the same guy. Now, or at least here, one employee makes the coffees and handles all the business except the drugs. The other sells the drugs. Whatev… It works for the Netherlands. And yes, no tobacco smoking inside a business. That’s illegal.







    This looks a lot better than prohibition, even Dutch prohibition.

  • Don’t snort the white heroin!

    Don’t snort the white heroin!

    So a few months ago in Amsterdam, a couple British tourists died from a drug overdose. The Brits are kind of like the canaries in a coal mine of tourists. Brits are usually the first to somehow kill themselves, if given the opportunity. (It has to do with alcohol.)

    Anyway, they did die. It turned out that some guy on the street was selling heroin as cocaine. This is odd mostly because heroin is more expensive than cocaine, so the drug dealer probably didn’t know what he was selling. But the end result is people snorted heroin, many went the hospital, and a few died.

    So what do you as a tourist city do? Well most places would cover it up. Or make ads showing happy people having fun in the sun. Well there isn’t much sun here, but jokes aside, what they did in Amsterdam is very impressive. It’s what a rational drug policy looks like.

    First of all, hard drugs (heroin and cocaine) are illegal here. So you can’t go into a coffee shop and buy them. But as this city is a bit of a drug tourist destination, people come here wanting to do drugs. So like anywhere, they find a way to buy them.

    As I have written, police spend effort cracking down on fake drug sellers. But these real drugs. Prohibition deaths. Because both the buyer and seller thought they were buying and selling something else.

    So the city but up signs to warn tourists. It may seem like common sense, but what American city would do this? And it was an issue here too. I mean, who wants to see such signs in their beautiful city?




    Of course the campaign to warn tourist more than the actual deaths became international news. Is this good for the city’s image? Well, actually, probably, yes.

    And nobody else died. That’s kind of important.

    Here’s what the Mayor Van der Laan wrote on December 3, 2014. It’s very rational. It’s very Dutch:

    Cocaine alert and reputation

    For the past two months, seventeen predominantly young tourists fell victim to so-called ‘white heroin’. Heroin, sold as cocaine on the streets, that is much more dangerous and therefore potentially deadly. Three young Brits died. An indescribable loss to their family members and friends.

    People who say it is not allowed to use hard drugs are, of course, correct. Reality is, unfortunately, unruly. Many people do something illegal now and again. Even nice people, even people who could be our own family and friends. We cannot ignore that reality, and this is the foundation for our drug policy, which, at its core, takes drug usage as a health problem. Not criminalising it (as opposed to many other countries) makes room for education, safety testing and prevention. And this makes people who unexpectedly use too many or contaminated drugs, be able to apply for first aid, without worrying about being prosecuted.

    We hope the police will find the perpetrator soon. In the meantime, our campaign will continue. There are 35 matrix signs with warnings to tourists. We know most young weekend tourists often arrive on Thursdays or Fridays. Special teams distribute flyers at Amstel bus station, Central Station, Schiphol Airport, and in the city centre.

    In addition, we recommend the exclusion tests available at smartshops. They demonstrate whether or not you are dealing with heroin, but should not offer a false sense of security. This is why we are telling users very clearly that the test does not guarantee the drugs are safe to use.

    Tourists have let us know they appreciate these efforts. Many are surprised we openly warn them of the dangers these drugs entail. I get a lot of questions about that. Don’t you think it is bad for the city’s reputation, all those warning signs and (inter)national media attention? people want to know. The answer to that question is ‘no.’ I would find it bad for the city if we did not do this. Amsterdam wants to do everything to prevent new victims. That is the least we can do.