Drug trafficking offense is also referred to as drug distribution, and is a crime that entails sales, transportation as well as illegal importation of unlawful controlled substances. Among the most commonly trafficked drugs are heroin, cocaine, marijuana and other non-prescribed drugs. According to the United Nations Office on drugs and Crime (UNODC) (2018), drug trafficking is worldwide unlawful trade that encompass “cultivation, manufacture, distribution and sale of substances which are subject to drug prohibition laws.” In Australia, several Laws are enacted to sanction drug trafficking offenders, with most jurisdictions also having several laws to deal with such offenders. According to Australia’s Federal prosecution service, a person is deemed to have committed a trafficking offense if he or she sell a controlled drug, prepare it with the intent of selling, transport it with the aim of selling it, guard of conceal it or possess it with the aim of selling. Assisting another person to sell such a substance also constitute trafficking offence. The drug trafficking crime in Australia and the world over can be attributed to factors such as poverty, inequality, or being a member of inferior race. One theory that can best explain the trafficking of drugs in Australia is the Conflict theory.
Conflict Theory and Drug Trafficking
The conflict theory was developed by Karl Marx and is of the view that society is on a state of perpetual conflict as a result of competition of the inadequate resources. As per the theory, the social order is maintained through domination and power as opposed to consensus and conformity. The member of the society who possess wealth and power are in constant bid to hold on to it using any means within their ability, and majorly through undermining the poor and powerless. With regard to drug trafficking, the theory use three aspects in explaining the rationale for the criminal behavior.
According to the conflict theory, much drug trafficking is in poor urban areas and this is attributable to poverty racial inequality in addition to other conditions impacting upon the residents in such locations (Wortley 349). Accordingly, these people turn to the illegal substances in a bid to feel better about their situation and also due to the fact that illegal drug trafficking market provide them with potential to earn income that does not require a lot of academic credentials. In Australia, the drug trafficking can be associated with such reasons, described by conflict theory including inequalities, poverty and conditions affecting residents in some locations. According to Fact sheet 33 published on June 2015 on illicit drug use in Australia, homosexual and bisexual were among the highest involved in drug offences at 34.7 percent. Other sub-groups included unemployed at 24.5 percent, and indigenous Australians at 22.8 percent (National Rural health Alliance 2). Such statistics supports the conflict theory that poverty, inequality and other specific conditions can lead to people engaging in drug trafficking.
Homosexuals in Australia are minority and faces some discrimination. As a result, they are prone to seek refuge in abusing and trafficking drugs (Lea, et al. 1571). Similarly, the high rate of drug trafficking among the unemployed is supported by the conflict theory. The unemployed people and especially the youths in Australia, attempts to improve their economic status through trafficking of illicit drugs. According to the illicit drugs fact sheet (2015), people aged between 20 and 29 years are 27.3 percent likely to be involved in drugs use and trafficking. The age group constitutes of majorly unemployed youths and the rationale for drug trafficking is to get some form of income. The indigenous Australians are disadvantaged and there exist numerous disparities between them and non-indigenous Australians. There exist vast health and life-expectancy inequality among these Australians groups. Some form in which these inequalities are displayed include the indigenous Australians having shorter life expectancy, higher levels of infant mortality, poorer in terms of health in addition to lower levels of education and employment (Mitrou, et al. 201). Such inequalities according to the conflict theory explains why the indigenous populations are more prone to drug trafficking. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders engages in drug trafficking and abuse offences in a bid to feel better about their situations and also to earn some income with high level of unemployment among them.
Another assertion by the Conflict theory that explains the drug trafficking crime is that racial and ethnic prejudice and inequality help in determining why some drugs are illegal and prescribe criminal penalties for these drugs. According to the theory, drugs consumed by the minority races or disadvantaged section of the populations are likely to be more sanctioned than those used by the majority. In Australia strict prohibition of certain drugs have been largely done in following the footsteps of the United States and United Kingdom (Room, 3). Hence, some of these laws were as a result of racial and ethnical prejudice as the conflict theory explains. A good example is the stricter penalties for crack cocaine as compared to the powder cocaine despite the drugs having identical pharmacology. The difference in strictness was attributed to the users where the crack is consumed by poor African Americans in urban areas, while powder is chiefly consumed by the whites. The tougher punishment for crack are thus perceived to be racially biased. Other examples that support the conflict theory with regard to drug trafficking offences include the history relating to the ban of opium, cocaine and marijuana. Racial and ethnic prejudice is widely attributed to the banning of these drugs in the nineteenth century. Opium for instance was banned due to the prejudice against the Chinese immigrants, while cocaine illegalization was attributable to the cocaine. On the other hand, banning of Marijuana is believed to be as a result of prejudice against the Mexican Americans (Del 1738).
The third aspect of the conflict theory that explain the drug trafficking crimes is the major influence brought about by multinational firms through the marketing and sale of legal drugs including alcohol, tobacco as well as numerous prescription drugs, that most times have detrimental personal and societal consequences. In bid to maximize their revenues, such organizations, make strides in convincing Australians and people in other jurisdiction to use their offerings (Kilmer, and Rosalie, 1128). The firms further make major expenditures in lobbying legislature and other policy makers. Additionally, these players, such as the tobacco industry, often conceals the deadly effects brought by their products. Such efforts demonstrates the conflict theory’s critical view of the roles played by the corporations in the present society.
Comparison of Conflict theory with other theories that explain drug trafficking
There are several other theories that explains the rationale for drug trafficking. One such theories is the functionalism model (Lang and Walter 5). The theory major focus is the need for stability, the roles that various aspects of society serve for its well-being, in addition to threats or dysfunctions to society’s well-being modeled by certain facets of the society. For the people using legal and illegal drugs, drug use is functional due to the fact that it gives them the numerous positive physiological impacts that the drugs contain. For those involved in trafficking or distributing legal or illegal drugs, drugs use is functional due to the fact that it gives them a chief source of income (Akers, 125). According to this theory, illegal drug use and trafficking is functional even for the criminal justice system due to the fact that it provide various employment opportunities for people like police officers, court officials, and prison workers who handles illegal drugs (McDougall 2014). Additionally, legal and illegal drugs, provide employment opportunities to social service agencies as well as other entities whose role focuses in assisting people addicted to drug.
The functional theory despite explaining the rationale for drug trafficking differs significantly with the conflict theory. For instance while the functional theory emphasizes that people use the drugs to obtain he numerous physiological benefits contained by the drugs, the conflict theory explain that people use drugs to deal with their unfavorable circumstances such as poverty or belonging to a minority group. Additionally, while the functional theory outlines that drug trafficking is a major source of income for those involved, the conflict theory explains that those who traffic drugs do so for lack of other sources of income. Thus, income is not the chief motive, but rather the lack of other sources. In practice and in the Australian context, the conflict theory appears the more credible in explaining the drug trafficking crime as compared to the functional theory. Factor such as poverty, and inequality in the country according to available statistics causes various people to engage in drug trafficking offence, a situation that is best explained by the conflict theory. The job creation as illustrated in the functional theory does not explain rationale for drug trafficking but rather the consequences.
Another theory that explain the drug trafficking crime is the symbolic interactionism. The theory delves in the interaction of people and the way they interpret their interaction. A result of this focus, the theory perceives social problems as resulting from the interactions among individuals (Charon, 12). Hence, the theory understand drug use and trafficking as a behavior that originates from a person’s interaction with people engaging in similar practice. As a result of the social interaction, a person acquires awareness on the use and distribution of drugs as well as various attitudes that provide justification for drug use and trafficking and defines its effects as enjoyable (Vannini, 8). For instance, the theory postulate that an individual begins smoking marijuana in presence of experienced users. Such a social interaction is crucial for the new users to wish to continue using the drug. When effects of the drug such as hunger pangs, spatial distortion and memory loss are experienced, friends provides a source of encouragement.
The theory despite provide explanation of the reasons people engages in trafficking crime is not as exhaustive as the conflict theory. While the symbolic interactionism theory majorly focuses on peer pressure as the chief source of drug trafficking (Weinberg, 298), conflict theory provides more motives including need for income, inequalities and the effect of multinational firms. In the Australian context, peer influence as explained by the symbolic interactionism is majorly applicable for first time users. The conflict theory wider and provides more practical reasons that lead to drug trafficking. For instance, as supported by statics where unemployed, bisexual and aboriginals are more prone to engage in trafficking, the conflict theory explains this help them bear with their situations or get a source of income.
Conclusion
In the foregoing, the conflict theory is best placed to explain the drug trafficking crime in Australia. According to the theory, there are three aspect to why people engaged in this offence. One, drug use and trafficking is more in poor urban areas due to poverty, racial inequality, among other factors affecting people in such places. Use of drugs is therefore meant to make them feel better about their situation and also as a source of income. Secondly, according to this theory, the racial and ethnic prejudice and inequality is a major determinant of what drugs are considered illegal and penalties for each. Lastly, the huge influence of multinational corporations in marketing and sales of legal drugs contributed to drug trafficking and abuse. In Australia, unemployed population, indigenous people, and homosexuals/bisexuals are more affected by the crime of drug trafficking which is in line with the conflict theory. To be able to prevent this crime, one policy response that the government can use is closing the societal gaps. For instance the vast gap in health, education, and employment between the indigenous and non-indigenous Australians need to be closed. According to the conflict theory, such gap is a key contributor to drug trafficking offences. Through provision of education and employment to even the minority including the bisexuals, drug trafficking can be minimized as with sufficient incomes, such populations will not have a motive to engage in trafficking.
Work Cited
Akers, Ronald. Social learning and social structure: A general theory of crime and deviance. Routledge, 2017.
Australia’s Federal prosecution Service. Crimes we prosecute: Drug Trafficking, Selling and Cultivation. Online June, 2018. https://www.cdpp.gov.au/crimes-we-prosecute/serious-drugs/drug-trafficking-selling-and-cultivation. Accessed, June, 7th, 2018
Charon, Joel M. Symbolic interactionism: An introduction, an interpretation, an integration. Pearson College Division, 2010.
Dell, Melissa. "Trafficking networks and the Mexican drug war." American Economic Review 105.6 (2015): 1738-79.
Kilmer, Beau, and Rosalie Liccardo Pacula. "Understanding and learning from the diversification of cannabis supply laws." Addiction 112.7 (2017): 1128-1135.
Lang, Jon, and Walter Moleski. Functionalism revisited: architectural theory and practice and the behavioral sciences. Routledge, 2016.
Lea, Toby, John de Wit, and Robert Reynolds. "Minority stress in lesbian, gay, and bisexual young adults in Australia: Associations with psychological distress, suicidality, and substance use." Archives of sexual behavior 43.8 (2014): 1571-1578.
McDougall, J. Lorne, and R. T. Naylor. Counterfeit Crime: Criminal Profits, Terror Dollars, and Nonsense. McGill-Queen's Press-MQUP, 2014.
Mitrou, Francis, et al. "Gaps in Indigenous disadvantage not closing: a census cohort study of social determinants of health in Australia, Canada, and New Zealand from 1981–2006." BMC Public Health 14.1 (2014): 201.
National Rural health Alliance. “Illicit Drug Use In Rural Australia.” Fact Sheet 33. http://ruralhealth.org.au/sites/default/files/publications/nrha-factsheet-illicit-drugs-0615.pdf. Accessed June, 6th, 2018.
Room, Robin. "The history of psychoactive substance use and problems and of social responses to them." Addiction Medicine: Principles and Practice (2015): 3-8.
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. “Drug Trafficking.” Online, June, 2018. https://www.unodc.org/unodc/index.html?ref=menutop accessed, June, 7th, 2018.
Vannini, Phillip. Body/embodiment: Symbolic interaction and the sociology of the body. Routledge, 2016.
Weinberg, Darin. "Sociological perspectives on addiction." Sociology Compass 5.4 (2011): 298-310.
Wortley, Scot. "Introduction. The immigration-crime connection: Competing theoretical perspectives." Journal of International Migration and Integration/Revue de l'integration et de la migration internationale 10.4 (2009): 349.
