CHAPTER I
I. INTRODUCTION A. Conflict Theory and Racial Profiling in Drug Related Cases
The problem of racially biased arrest is getting more serious. According to the New York Times Editorial Board (2013), updated federal data show that this problem “is far more extensive that was previously known — and is getting worse.” On a national average, the Blacks are nearly four times as likely to be arrested for possession of marijuana as compared to the Whites. This disparity is even more pronounced in Illinois, Iowa and Minnesota, states where Blacks are eight times as likely to be arrested compared to other U.S. states. More so, this trend is evident across all types of demographics.
Basically, this paper shall apply conflict theory to the problem of racial discrimination in drug related cases in the U.S. Specifically, this paper shall compare the admissions of drug addicts by their gender and their race as classified according to their different states to show the disparity between racial identity and drug imprisonment. Conflict theory states that law and its systems of enforcement are applied by dominant groups in society to minimize threats to their interests as posed by those whom they outcast and consider dangerous, particularly ethnic minorities and the poor (Kent, 2003). As indicated, it is usually identified as racial profiling, where the race is stereotyped in certain crimes such as drugs possession and use.
B. Statement of the Problem
The main problem which this study will answer is the direct relationship between the prevalence of racial identities with the cases of arrests and incarceration. Hence, it shall compare the arrests and incarcerations and the overall statistics relating the discrepancy as per one’s race and his/her drug related cases in the U.S. as compared between various states.
C. Significance and the Need for the Study
The significance of this study can be depicted by the deepening problems of drug dependence and crimes in the American society. The list of penalties for drug use and its deterrence must be properly evaluated against the criminalization of most ethnic minorities linked with the use of these drugs.
D. Research Purpose
This study intends to explore the features and the characteristics of racial profiling in the drug problems of the U.S. It also aims to present the deeper problem of incriminating the minorities as against the majority population (the Whites). The identified variables are the following: drug suspects (independent variable), age (independent variable), gender (independent variable), location (independent variable), and racial identity (dependent variable). The unit of analysis is the different states in the U.S.
E. Definition of Terms.
The key terms for this research are as follows: Include of your discipline used within the paper (10-20 terms required).1 page
- Drug suspects – a person who is under suspicion for the sale or use of drugs.
- Age – the period of time that an individual has lived or a thing has existed.
- Gender – the state of being male or female (often used with reference to social and cultural differences as against the biological ones).
- Race - is a classification system used to classify humans into big and distinct populations or groups by physical, cultural, ethnic, genetic, historical, geographical, linguistics, religious, or social affiliation (Cole, 2001).
- Racial identity – as "a sense of group or collective identity based on one's perception that he or she shares a common heritage with a particular racial group" (Gabbidon, 2003).
- Ethnicity – a sizable group of people having a common and distinct racial, national, religious, linguistic, or cultural heritage (Gabbidon, 2003).
- Racial profiling - is a standard method used by the members of the law enforcement, specifically in drug enforcements. It consists of general characteristics and features that are susceptible for police checking and/or investigation (Cole, 2001).
- Drug addiction - drug addiction as “dependence on an illegal drug or a medication” (Mayo Clinic, 2011). This simply means not being able to control the intake of drugs despite its foreboding negative side effects.
- Drug abuse - is a patterned use of a drug or substance wherein the user consumes the substance in amounts or with ways neither approved nor supervised by medical professionals (Mayo Clinic, 2011).
Chapter 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
- Pertinent literature related to racial profiling and drug related cases
Race has been inextricably involved in drug law enforcement. It forms the external environment’s public perception of and response to the drug problem. Various studies point to the “racially disproportionate” drug arrests result from the police department's pursuit of the outdoor drug market in the racially diverse areas, where predominantly the minority population is being tracked. The researchers could not find a "racially neutral" explanation for the criminal enforcement’s prioritization of the drug markets (Fellner, 2009). Figures from the drug law enforcement efforts indicate implicit racial bias: the unconscious impact of race on official perceptions of what and who constitutes a state’s drug problem (Fellner, 2009).
It has been said that the widespread racial classification of drug offenders as prejudiced against the “other race” or the minority race has ingrained historical roots and was strengthened by the diffusion of potent cultural images of dangerous black drug offenders (Beckett, 2006). Ideally, in a fair, equitable, and non-discriminatory criminal justice system, penalties must be equally applied on offending populations (Nunn, 2002). However, the racial patterns of individuals arrested and incarcerated on drug cases are distantly related, at best, to racial patterns of drug offending (Nunn, 2002).
The equality among all people, including among individuals of varied races, has been considered as the “most vital principle imbuing and motivating the idea of human rights" (Ikner, 2005). This is affirmed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The natural equality in all human beings is regardless of race and individuals should be protected against racial discrimination as basic human rights treaty expressed through the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. ICERD is the total expression of the international community's commitment to the principle of racial equality and the freedom from racial discrimination.
Apparently, the U. S. drug laws are race-neutral upfront. Their enforcement is also supposedly race-neutral as their law enforcement officers insist they enforce the law “without bias and just according to the concerns of the community (Gabbidon, 2003). Under historical, constitutional jurisprudence in the U.S., physically race-neutral governmental policies do not violate the guarantee of equal protection (unless there is both discriminatory effect and discriminatory intention) (Gabbidon, 2003).
According to Hughes and Stevens (2007), more research must be conducted in order to powerfully correlate the policy structure and features with its effectiveness in reducing drug harms and attaining fair and healthy policy outcome. There must also be a classification of the dangers related to drug use such as crimes, violence, intimidation, or the corruption of public officials, etc.
- Independent variables
According to Saxce, et. al. (2001), most Americans envision a drug offender or suspect as an “unkempt African-American men and women slouched in alleys or young Blacks hanging around urban street corners.” However, in the last twenty years, the Whites have engaged in drug offenses at higher rates than Blacks. Other studies also clearly and consistently demonstrate that Blacks have been and remain more likely to be arrested for drug offending behavior against the Whites, even when their percentage of committing drug offense is the same. States where there are more Blacks than Whites also show increased arrests and incarceration of Blacks against the Whites (Fellner, 2009).
- Dependent variables
Race or racial identity becomes one of the readily obvious visual clues to help identify drug suspects, the same with age, gender and location. According to Sampson and Lauritsen (1997), racial profiling is almost unavoidable. Sources point to the common notion that if one is in poor, black neighborhoods, he must be a drug dealer. It is also said that local distribution networks are usually mono racial and that downscale drug markets are usually neighborhood-based while downscale urban neighborhoods are usually segregated. Thus, the policies and practice of drug enforcement is market-specific, and the markets are divided by race and class (Sampson & Lauritsen, 1997).
D. Theory Development 1. Conflict theory and independent variable
There is a distinct relationship among inequality, race and ethnicity, and crime. It includes the inequality in the economic status of racial and ethnic minorities, inequality and crime, and the effect of civil rights movement. The concept of the “underclass” and the effects of the drugs are evident (Walker, et. al., 1996). This is because minorities (such as the Blacks) are disproportionately represented among the poor people in the U.S. The connection between inequality and criminal behavior is explained by conflict theory with the Whites as being the majority race while the Blacks are the minority race. This criminal theory predicts that there is a higher rate of criminal behavior among the poor and the racial and ethnic minorities.
2. Conflict theory, independent variable and the unit of analysis
The said theory suggests that drug abuse is an outcome of a drug-related identity change process featuring elements like ego identity discomfort, social marginalization and identification with a drug sub-cultural group, lack of economic opportunity, educational opportunity, and popular culture (Anderson, n.d.). Economic opportunities and social marginalization are usually experienced by the ethnic or racial minority as a class or sub class and it is evident in one location (the unit of analysis).
Chapter 3METHODOLOGY
A comparison of the rates as compared against the population, at which Blacks and Whites are sent to state prison for drug offenses provide the most compelling indicator of the disparate racial influence in drug related cases.
The primary purpose of this study was to find out whether race is a determinant factor in the arrest and incarceration of drug offenders. To evaluate the main research question, measures of gender, race, location, and age were included in the analysis. Gender was operationalized as a dichotomous variable, male, and was coded 0 for female and 1 for male. Race was operationalized as a dichotomous measure, Black, where White was coded 0 and Black was coded 1.
A limitation of this study was that other ethnic minorities such as the Asians and the Hispanics measures were not adequately differentiated. This was especially problematic since it was not clear that criminal stereotypes target Black and other ethnic minorities in a similar way. Consequently, drug offenders known as part of the ethnic minorities other than Blacks were excluded from the analysis. It was explained that Asian, Pacific Islander, and Native American offenders comprised an ample, small proportion of the sample as to preclude significant analysis. Hence, they were excluded from the study.
There are extra challenges in terms of data availability and interpretation. Drug use, market developments and drug-related crimes are not purely related to the use of drugs. This is one of the limitations of this social research. The sample size was also small and various police officers were not interviewed from each country (Yin, 2003). Hence, the opinions and comments expressed by the key informants in this study serve only to supplement the available data gathered through national survey.
The researcher extolled different primary research resources such as the annual report, country evaluations, and scholarly papers and journals. These are used to study the historical performance or success of decriminalization programs and policies in each specific state being studied.
CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND RESULTS (3pages
About 111,774,000 people in the U.S. age twelve or older have used illicit drugs during their lifetime. An estimated 49% of these figures are Whites and 42.9% are Blacks. Since the White population is more than six times greater than the Black population, the absolute number of White drug offenders is far greater than that of Black drug offenders. Even among powder and crack cocaine users, which are seriously targeted by law enforcers, there are more Whites than Blacks who use them.
Analyzed as a whole, Black drug offenders represent a comparably small proportion of those who engage in non-possession drug offenses. In particular, Blacks comprised of only 13% of the total number of offenders who used an illicit drug. As shown in the table below, the Blacks comprised of a relatively small proportion of those who use drugs.
In 1991, about 0.7% of adult Whites and 1.4% of adult Blacks were reported to be selling drugs. However, in absolute numbers, there were about 939,345 Whites reported to be selling drugs as compared to just 268,170 Blacks involved in the same trade. Black drug sellers comprised 12% of the total number of self-reported sellers. In 2006, it was reduced to only 1.6% of White drug sellers and 2.8% Black sellers. Overall, the Blacks represented 14% of the total drug sellers.
All other things being equal, the data clearly showed that Blacks have been and remain more likely to be arrested for drug offending behavior against their percentage among drug offenders than Whites with the same case. From 1980 to 2007, there were more than 25 million American adults who were arrested in the U.S. for drug related cases. The percentage of Black arrests jumped from 27% in 1980 to a remarkable 40% to 42% between 1989 and 1993. It declined more or less consistently to the present percentage of 35%.
Relative to the total population, the incidences of the Blacks being arrested on drug offenses at significantly higher rates than Whites. In 1980’s, the Blacks were arrested at rates almost three times the rate of the Whites. However, between 1988 and 1993, Blacks were arrested at rates greater than five times the rate of the Whites. In the past six years, the ratio of Black to White drug arrest rates has gone between 3.5 and 3.9.
The marked difference between the proportions of Black and White drug offenders reflects the present salience of urban drug law enforcement. However, this law enforcement effort is also concentrated in Black urban neighborhoods. To show, 77% of drug arrests which took place in 2007 happened in the cities. While urban Blacks comprised for an estimated 6% of the national population, they comprised about 29.8% of all the drug arrests in 2007.
A longitudinal analysis of urban drug arrests by race shows that in the biggest American cities, drug arrests for African Americans rose at three times the rate for whites between 1980 and 2003, 225% compared to 70%. In 11 American cities, arrests of Black drug offenders increased by more than 500%. In the 75 biggest counties in the U.S., the Blacks in 2002 comprised for 46% of drug offense arrests, even though they consisted of only 15.6% of the population. To illustrate, the state of New York gave a specifically striking example. In this state, the Blacks represent 10.7% of the state population, yet accounted for 42.1% of drug arrests in all of the whole state.
The racial disparities illustrated in drug arrests grow bigger as cases find their way through the criminal justice system. Blacks comprised about 43% and Whites 55% of individuals convicted for drug felonies in state courts. Blacks also account for 53.5% of individuals admitted to state prison with new convictions for drug offenses. In 2007, the Blacks comprised 33.2% of individuals entering federal prison for drug offenses.
A comparison of the rates, relative to population, at which blacks and whites are sent to state prison for drug offenses offers what may be the most compelling evidence of the racial profling related to drug arrests and incarcerations is the statistics which showed that the Black rate (256.2 per 100,000 black adults) is ten times greater than the White rate (25.3 per 100,000 white adults).
Chapter V
Conclusion There are various reasons for the racial disparities in drug arrests and incarcerations. These include the following: demographics, the extent of community complaints, police resource allocations, racial profiling, and the relative ease of making drug arrests in minority urban areas against the White areas. While the ratio of Black to White arrests has somewhat decreased since the mid 1990s (when it was at its highest), racial disparity in drug arrests has remained even with the ongoing developments in drug use and law enforcement agenda.
As the crack cocaine market started to be very limited in urban areas and the use of cocaine has stabilized, law enforcement changed its emphasis toward marijuana. Methamphetamine production and use emerged as law enforcement efforts strengthened in the late 1990s (Fellner, 2009). Yet, while the use of marijuana is still very rampant across races, methamphetamine is primarily used by Whites and Black drug users continue to be disproportionately arrested.
In relation to public policy, the pursuit of drug abuses and illegal sale must be aligned with the efforts and initiatives of addressing the problem of racial disparities in drug related arrests and incarcerations. There should be additional federal, state and laws which should strongly protect the ethnic minorities from the prejudice of the law enforcers and members of criminal justice system. There should also be legal agencies and resources by which the civil groups can reinforce the resolve to protect the minorities and to support them with necessary legal means to protect themselves and their rights against impartialities related to drug cases.
The profiling must also be instituted in a way that the basic constitutional and legal rights of the citizens, regardless of their races must be respected and upheld. The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to be safe from unreasonable search and seizure without probable cause (Kent, 2003). Thus, it must not be prejudicial in pinpointing which race is more likely to commit a crime. The Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution requires that all citizens be treated equally under the law. This is why the investigation based on profiling is highly controversial and the extent of its application must be very concise and just.
Bibliography:
Anderson, T. (n.d.). A Cultural Identity Theory of Drug Abuse. Retrieved on September 22, 2013 from, http://people.oregonstate.edu/~flayb/TTI%20citations/Substance%20use/Anderson%2098%20Cultural%20Identity%20Theroy%20of%20Drug%20Abuse.pdf.
Beckett, Katherine, Nyrop, Kris & Pfingst, Lori. (2006). Race, Drugs, and Policing: Understanding Disparities in Drug Delivery Arrests, Criminology 1, 105.
Cole, D. (2001). “Racial Profiling.” Encyclopedia of Drugs, Alcohol, and Addictive Behavior. Retrieved on September 22, 2013 from, http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3403100391.html.
Fellner, Jamie. (2009). Race, Drugs, and Law Enforcement in the United States. Human Rights Watch. Retrieved on September 22, 2013 from, http://www.hrw.org/news/2009/06/19/race-drugs-and-law-enforcement-united-states.
Gabbidon, Shaun L. (2003). Racial Profiling by Store Clerks and Security Personnel in Retail Establishments: An Exploration of "Shopping While Black." Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice , Vol. 19, Issue 3, p. 345 to 364.
Kent, Joselyn. (2003). Conflict Theory and Racial Profiling: An Empirical Analysis of Police Traffic Stop Data. Journal of Criminal Justice, 31 (1), p. 1-11.
Mayo Clinic Website. (2011). “Definition of Drug Abuse.” Retrieved on September 22, 2013 from, http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/drug-addiction/DS00183.
Michael A. Ikner, Janice Ahmad, Alejandro Del Carmen. (2005). Vehicle Cues and Racial Profiling: Police Officers’ Perceptions of Vehicles and Drivers, Vol. 2, The Southwest Journal of Criminal Justice.
Nunn, Kenneth B. (2002). Crime and the Pool of Surplus Criminality: Or Why the "War On Drugs" Was a "War on Blacks." Journal Gender Race & Justice, 381, p. 390.
Sampson, Robert J. & Lauritsen, Janet L. (1997). Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Crime and Criminal Justice in the United States, in Ethnicity, Crime and Immigration: Comparative and Cross-National Perspectives.
The Editorial Board. (June 15, 2013). Racially Biased Arrests for Pot. The New York Times. Retrieved on September 21, 2013 from, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/16/opinion/sunday/racially-biased-arrests-for-pot.html?_r=0.
Walker, S., et. al. (1996). Race, Ethnicity, Social Structure, and Crime. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Co.
