Had to dig up this tweet to find numbers--forgot how striking they are. Ppl often rightly say that looking at number-in-prison understates role of War on Drugs, because drug admits serve shorter terms--so fewer in on any day, but many more being admitted and churned thru.
But!
But!
2. Increased admits explain almost a majority of admit growth from 1980-1990, but actually DECLINE from 1990 onwards, while violent and public order admits take over.
That’s… really interesting:
That’s… really interesting:
3. That drugs drive admits during a period of rising violence but decline during a period of declining violence suggests that, to a degree we just can’t measure in the data, drugs cases are being used to target violence.
4. That’s not a defense of pretextual drug cases, nor an argument that we should be fine with locking ppl in prison for drugs. But it really undermines the idea that, at least for prisons, the “War on Drugs” is something distinct from responses, however misplaced, to violence.
5. And the public order part in 1990-2000 is interesting as well, because about half of public order inmates are in for weapons or DUI (not exactly non-violent), and some more for “repeat offender laws”:
6. In other words, as violent crime FELL, we see a DECLINE in admissions for drugs and an increase in admissions for VIOLENCE and violence-adjacent crimes.
I don’t have any deep takeaway from that (yet), but it’s a REALLY intriguing, complicated story.
I don’t have any deep takeaway from that (yet), but it’s a REALLY intriguing, complicated story.
