Thursday, 30 April 2009
Money for drugs
There is an interesting coronial inquiry going on at present where I live. A 21 year old woman died from an ecstacy overdose. This is being followed closely by the press. Today it was reported that her boyfriend was dealing drugs and he would give her the drugs for free. He allegedly supplied her with the drugs that she overdosed on.
I can see where this is heading and the boyfriend is going to be cast as the evil cad who led the poor innocent girl astray. How ever it does raise an interesting point about the drug scene and drug counselling. One question which I always sooner or latter ask the drug user and it is usually sooner than later, is, where do you get your money(drugs) from? Surprisingly there are a considerable number of drug counsellors who never ask such a question. To me it is pivotal in understanding how this person runs their day to day life.
This question is far less important to ask the recreational user than the regular user. One asks it of the person who spends quite a bit of money on drugs on a regular basis. There are a number of solutions to the money problem that I have heard over the years.
Grow your own
Some regular heavy marijuana users can supply their habit by growing their own. This is probably one of the ‘safest’ ways to get a supply as it can keep the person out of the dealing side of the drug scene. They are not selling, so the police have little interest in them and they are not having to score from other dealers who will inevitably rip them off at some point When this happens there can be very bad consequences. However one can only really do this with cannabis and cannot do it with opiates, amphetamines, hallucinogens and so forth.
There are others who can use drugs in a regular heavy way and still maintain a job. You would be surprised at the people I have counselled who are in high powered, responsible jobs and have a fairly sizeable drug habit. These people can persist like this for long periods of time because they spend 70% of their income on drugs and survive on the 30% left. This also is a ‘safe’ way to get supplies as they are not doing anything illegal to obtain money. Thus they are just a user and the police have little interest in them.
Most however engage in some kind of illegal activity to get the money for the drugs. This can range from petty crime, to prostitution, to much more serious crimes. These are much more perilous ways to get the money as the police are watching closely and the consequences are more severe.
Of course another common solution to feed a drug habit is to deal in drugs. Not only does one get the money from the deal but every time drugs pass through your hands a bit disappears here and there. This method can provide quite a good supply of drugs but the consequences are dire if one gets caught. And those who are dealing drugs to feed their own habit are usually the ones who get caught. Not the bigger fish higher up the chain who have money as the main motive rather than to feed a personal drug habit.
There is however one other way to get a good supply of drugs that actually breaks the sexual discrimination laws of this country. Females can not really be drug dealers. If they try they wont last very long. In the words of the great Chopper Read, any criminal organisation that does not have physical might and physical intimidation to back it up is a paper tiger. It will collapse very quickly.
Chopper Read. Do see the movie, "Chopper" it is very good.
One thing I learnt early on in my time in prison (as an employee!). The sword is much mightier than the pen. Its all about physical strength and the ability to physically fight. If one is a good fighter and strong then you are at the top of the pile. If one is not physically strong then one is at the bottom of the pile. There are some men who are not physically strong but they have the organisational skills to get some other person to do the physical intimidation for them. These people are also at the top of the pile.
Females do not posses the physical strength and just don’t seem to have that innate aggressiveness to be able to intimidate and threaten other males when necessary. Thus one finds very few female drug dealers. However women do have other wily ways to make an impact.
In order to get a regular drug supply some women will become partners of men who deal drugs. They will support them in their dealing but tend to sit on the sidelines of the criminal organisation. To a female regular drug user a male who is a dealer is very attractive for the reasons I just cited. I am not suggesting that she purposely sets out to ‘trap’ him but she will be attracted to him and thus the relationship can develop from that basis.
She also is in a ‘safer’ position when the inevitable drug bust happens because she is on the sidelines of the organisation. When questioned she can say that she was not directly involved and just a passive observer from the sidelines. Not uncommonly the man who loves her will support her in this claim to the police.
So back to the coronial inquiry of the 21 year old woman who was supplied with drugs by her boyfriend. If he did supply them how active was she involved in that process and how actively was she involved in his alleged drug dealing from the sidelines? We will never know I would say.
Graffiti
20:53 Permalink | Comments (13) | Email this
Comments
Interesting. I never thought of the role gender plays in drug dealing. My initial reaction was to reject it and be all 'Women can do anything men can!' (My women's studies class is really pushing it's way into my thought processes. It's ruining television and disney movies for me.). But then I thought about it and realized I could only think of male drug dealers I'd met, never female ones. And I've known quite a number of females who dated their drug dealer. So I guess you're onto something.
I'd be an awful drug dealer. I've been an anxious mess on the few occasions I tagged along with a friend while they went to buy pot.
Posted by: Lee | Thursday, 30 April 2009
Hello Lee,
Yes I am afraid women's liberation is yet to reach the criminal world.
In the state where I live prostitution is legal in brothels. The law also states that the brothel has to be run by a female. This of course is well meaning but ridiculous.
If one is in the sex industry one thus operates in the criminal world. Brothels can make a lot of money which means that sooner or later some very large ugly man is going to approach the madam and say "give me your money".
She cannot go to the police and complain about this threat so she has to deal with it herself. She has to have male muscle to back her up. This muscle obviously does not come for free and thus she will be indebted to it in some way. Hence the law falls over about no men allowed in the prostitution industry.
When I worked in drug rehab I knew some women who dealt drugs but they were in the same position. They have to have the male muscle to back them up and of course they are then indebted to that muscle in some way. A man can use his own and therefore is not in the same position.
Graffiti
Tony
Posted by: Tony | Friday, 01 May 2009
I loved that movie! 'Lady in the water'. Oh my goodness - so nice. Did you watch it?
I knew these people who used to have a little trolley that they used to grow probably 10 plants in pots and they'd pop them on the trolley so they could bring them out during the day to get sun and put them inside at night. (Bit like the Flinstones cat. Hmm...) Anyway, every time the plants were big enough (or is it ripe enough?) someone would steal them and they'd have to start over again.
Actually - i just choose to believe their story about the plants disappearing.
Gosh they were a funny couple. I mean funny as in halarious to hang out with - we used to laugh so much!
Oh, by the way... g'day and have a lovely weekend.
Posted by: roses | Friday, 01 May 2009
Hello Roses,
yes the weekend is here and it is going to be fine over hear.
Yes one can be surprised at who has grown a few pot plants over the years.
cheers
Tony
Posted by: Tony | Friday, 01 May 2009
"Its all about physical strength and the ability to physically fight. If one is a good fighter and strong then you are at the top of the pile. If one is not physically strong then one is at the bottom of the pile. There are some men who are not physically strong but they have the organisational skills to get some other person to do the physical intimidation for them. These people are also at the top of the pile."
Its not just about physical strength. I am going to wander off at a tangent and talk about business. Men occupy far more senior positions than women. Only 22% of senior management level posts in FTSE 350 (UK) companies are occupied by women.
Now I dont believe men are far more skilled at business than women. Yet why are women so under-represented?
I think men not only have the physically strength (useful in criminal activity) but are also far superior at networking with eachother, at the exclusion (not necessarily deliberate) of women.
And sometimes the cruelist critics of women are women themselves.
Apologies for the meander. Friday night liquor!
I hope you are well Tony.
Oh and we have a bank holiday in the UK this weekend!!!
Oh and I will try and remember the medals piccie this weekend. Actually I will see if I can blank out the name and post my grand-dads military record too.
Posted by: Kahless | Saturday, 02 May 2009
Agreed Kahless it's not just about physical strength. All someone needs is a gun and suddenly physical strength plays less of a role.
I think of two drug dealers I knew in high school. Both were pretty skinny guys. Stronger than me(doesn't take much) but I know plenty of female rugby players who are stronger than them.
In the suburban drug deals it was male dominated, but violence wasn't a factor I was aware of.
There's some other factor involved causing the gender difference.
Posted by: Lee | Saturday, 02 May 2009
Also, I think that in some cases money isn't even the primary motivator for dealing drugs.
I'm sure this isn't the case everywhere or more places, but in the fairly affluent suburb I grew up in I think status/popularity was a bigger motivator.
The kid with the drugs always had people looking for him. It gave him a position of importance, because he had something people wanted.
Posted by: Lee | Saturday, 02 May 2009
Hello Kahless,
Have a good bank holiday and I look forward to the medals. I always like it when you blog under the influence.
My explanation of why women are less represented in the upper end of commerce and politics are in the post I just put up.
This may also explain a bit the question that Lee raises. The person who has more innate aggressiveness and can be more threatening will be the person who would survive in criminal pursuits.
Tony
Posted by: Tony | Saturday, 02 May 2009
When I was actively using, I always dated dealers. But then during a period when that wasn't the case, I became one, because I didn't want to pay for drugs. But I definitely experienced sexism as a female dealer. My suppliers would try and get away with things that they would never try with a man.
But anyway, to answer the question, I don't think the guy should go to jail. If the dead girl was a minor (not sure if that's an Americansim-- a minor is a child under the legal age of 18) then yes, he should. Or, if he forced her to overdose, then yes. Otherwise, she was an adult. She took the drugs. No one forced her. As sad as it is, it's either her fault, or perhaps no one's fault, that she's dead.
Posted by: annabel | Thursday, 07 May 2009
Hi Annabel,
In Australia people legally become an adult at age 18 and she was over that age.
my prediction was right and he was portrayed by the press as the evil man who led the innocent girl astray. It was never even suggested the possibility of her maneuvering herself into a position so she could get a regular supply of drugs at low cost or even free.
It was reported that he gave her drugs for free and she took them. He "gave" them? Maybe the stash was hidden in the house and she went and raided it. How much was she involved in the dealing. She certainly did not try and stop him dealing or using, did she drive him around whilst doing business, did she collect money, did she weigh deals and so forth. It was quite possibly happening right before her eyes.
How much she was involved we will never know but those bastards called coroners seem to think they can make such an assessment.
Tony
Posted by: Tony | Thursday, 07 May 2009
And all that is irrelevant, anyway, in my opinion-- whether or not she aided/enabled his dealing, or whether or not she paid for/found/was given the drugs-- unless they make it illegal to be a scumbag (which sometimes I wish they would.) Besides, in my experience, 100% happy, balanced, self-respecting girls can not be led astray by drug dealers.
Posted by: annabel | Thursday, 07 May 2009
I am not to sure what your point is Annabel.
Women are not passive bystanders in many instances. The male - female connection is about as basic as one can get.
Lets go american. Did Bill lead Monica astray?
I have heard many women have many different opinions.
Tony
Posted by: Tony | Friday, 08 May 2009
I think you're misunderstanding me, Tony, because I think we agree on this. I'm saying that this drug dealer guy should NOT be blamed. It doesn't matter what a dirtbag he is (and most drug dealers, male or female, are) or how this girl got the drugs. SHE's the one who ingested them and died.
I was also saying that there's no way she was okay on the "inside" (emotionally speaking) if she was hanging around drugs and dealers in the first place, so he could not have led her astray. I'm sure he didn't HELP the situation. However, there had to have been a long series of tragic events, conditions, and predispositions that had nothing to do with him, that led her to the day she took enough X to die.
And I think it's more likely that Monica led Bill astray lol. That was a joke. They were both at fault.
Posted by: annabel | Friday, 08 May 2009
Post a comment