Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Drug transactions : the social organizaiton of a deviant activity. Stoddart, Kenneth Wayne 1968

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1968_A8 S76.pdf [ 7.14MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0104550.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0104550-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0104550-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0104550-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0104550-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0104550-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0104550-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0104550-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0104550.ris

Full Text

DRUG TRANSACTIONS : THE SOCIAL ORGANIZATION OF A DEVIANT ACTIVITY by KENNETH WAYNE STODDART B.A., University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1965 A Thesis Submitted i n P a r t i a l Fulfilment of the Requirements f o r the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS i n the Department of ANTHROPOLOGY AND SOCIOLOGY We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard. THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA May 1968 In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an a d v a n c e d d e g r e e a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , I a g r e e t h a t t h e L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and S t u d y . I f u r t h e r a g r e e t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y p u r p o s e s may be g r a n t e d b y t h e Head o f my D e p a r t m e n t o r b y h i!s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l n o t be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . D e p a r t m e n t The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a V a n c o u v e r 8, C a n a d a D a t e yju/r<2- £ ( T & g i i ABSTRACT Most investigations into the use of l e g a l l y unavailable narcotics has been conducted by psychiatrists or p s y c h i a t r i c a l l y oriented researchers. Consequently, there i s l i t t l e available data on the s o c i a l aspects of the use of such drugs. The majority of this study reports on some of the s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s performed by drug users and focuses i n particular on those a c t i v i t i e s related to the buying and s e l l i n g of drugs, i . e . , drug transactions. The observable features of these transactions are seen as being shaped by the drug user's folk or commonsense knowledge of the law and the methods the police employ to enforce i t . A section of this study deals with the meaning of the term "drug addict 1 1. It i s suggested that the answer to the question "What i s a drug addict?" must consult the practices of those who are involved i n a c t i v i t i e s related to "defining drug addicts", This study i s based mainly on observations made i n a setting where heroin, a l e g a l l y unavailable narcotic, could be purchased. Other observations were made of the work routines of the members of a police drug squad and the s t a f f members of a narcotic addiction treatment center. As an adjunct to the observational data, interviews were held with drug users, drug policemen, and drug treatment o f f i c i a l s . i i i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page no. CHAPTER 1 Introduction . . . . . 1 Footnotes . . . . . . . . . . . 11 CHAPTER 2 The Family Cafes a setting for drug transactions . . . . . . . . . . 15 The setting and some observable scenes„ - Normal participants; insider's and outsider's views, CHAPTER 3 What i s a drug addict? Procedural def i n i t i o n s It enforcement and treatment o f f i c i a l s 35 The policet assembling o f f i c i a l s t a t i s t i c s . - A narcotic addiction treatment center. Footnotes . . . . . . . . . . . 65 CHAPTER 4 What i s a drug addict? Procedural def i n i t i o n s l i t drug users and drug peddlers , 67 - Access to drugs. On being known. Footnotes 83 CHAPTER 5 Normal drug arrestst commonsense knowledge of police procedures . 85 Footnotes 92 CHAPTER 6 Methods i n use f o r minimizing the r i s k of arrest: possession of narcotics 93 The p r a c t i c a l techniques. Footnotes 101 CHAPTER 7 Orientations to arrests 102 Preparing f o r arrests: o f f i c i a l s . Drug arrests: - normal biographical experiences; - routine, always-possible events. "Pinched": i t s intended meaning. Footnotes 120 CHAPTER 8 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . 121 BIBLIOGRAPHY ' 125 i v LIST OF TABLES Page no. TABLE I Arrests for possession of narcotics (heroin) by manner i n which police received i n i t i a l information . . . . . . . . 6 TABLE II Arrests for possession of narcotics (heroin) by c i t y or municipality of occurrence . . . . . . . 44 TABLE III Arrests f o r possession of narcotics (heroin) i n Western City by census tract of occurrence '44 V ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would l i k e to take t h i s opportunity to express my thanks to Roy Turner f o r introducing me to thi s f i e l d of study and f o r providing me with much help-f u l c r i t i c i s m during the research and writing of this report. CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION The use of l e g a l l y unavailable narcotics i s very much a s o c i a l a c t i v i t y . While i t may be argued that t h i s i s obvious, i t i s obvious as w e l l that e x i s t i n g s o c i o l o g i c a l and psychia-t r i c " theories or explanations" of drug use are not structured to deal with i t as one. For example, p s y c h i a t r i c research into drug use has proceeded on the assumption that i t i s to be understood s p e c i f i c a l l y as a symptom or outward manifestation of an under-l y i n g , deeply rooted psychopathological s ta te . Consequently, research e f f o r t s have most often been directed toward the d e l i n e a t i o n of the features of t h i s state and the exposit ion of the environmental factors that can be invoked to "expla in" or i "account f o r " i t . Thus, the s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s involved i n the use of narcot ics are more or less systematical ly excluded as topics of study. S i m i l a r l y , e x i s t i n g s o c i o l o g i c a l explanations do not f a c i l i t a t e discussion of drug use as a s o c i a l a c t i v i t y . Soc io -l o g i c a l attempts to deal with the use of i l l i c i t drugs do so mainly w i t h i n the frameworks of general theories of deviant behaviour and explain the phenomenon as a means by which the actor escapes from the e x i s t e n t i a l r e a l i t i e s of h i s s o c i a l 2 s i t u a t i o n . Hence, i t appears that as a consequence of the approach taken to the study of drug use by most students, there i s 3 l i t t l e a v a i l a b l e data on i t s s o c i a l aspects . - 2 -This report deals with the manner i n which the law and i t s enforcement effects the s o c i a l organization of i l l i c i t drug use. Discussions of t h i s theme are available i n the socio-4 l o g i c a l l i t e r a t u r e related to drug use. However, those sociologists who have addressed i t have mainly done so i n a rather exhortative manner and have dealt mainly with such topics as the "unfairness" of l e g a l proscription and i t s psychological consequences f o r the in d i v i d u a l drug user. Although they have noted that l e g a l proscription has "driven" the drug user into various behaviour patterns, they have not provided any data regarding the nature of these behaviour patterns. The majority of this study reports on the a c t i v i t i e s performed by drug users and focuses i n p a r t i c u l a r on those a c t i v i t i e s related to the buying and s e l l i n g of drugs, i . e . drug transactions. The observable features of these trans-actions, the a c t i v i t i e s that drug users routinely perform immediately following a transaction, and the type of information that must be present before a person can participate i n a transaction are seen as being "shaped" by the drug user's knowledge of the law and the methods the police employ to enforce i t . The point i s that drug users see the a c t i v i t i e s of buying and s e l l i n g drugs as deviant a c t i v i t i e s and consequently attempt to "mask" or conceal them. Furthermore, t h e i r masking procedures take into account the "unmasking" procedures that the police employ. The study i s based mainly on observations made i n a setting where heroin, a l e g a l l y unavailable narcotic, could be purchased. - 3 -Other observations were made of the work routines of both the members of a police drug squad and the s t a f f of a narcotic addiction treatment center. As an adjunct to the observational data, many informal interviews and discussions were held with drug users, drug policemen, and drug treatment o f f i c i a l s . Material that appears indented and single-spaced i n the text of the report i s taken, unless otherwise indicated, from f i e l d notes that were either written i n coded form "on the spot" or a f t e r the completion of the day's observations, or from tape-recorded interviews. In the Family Cafe, a newspaper folded open to the crossword puzzle served as a field-notebook. The setting where the drug transactions were observed taking place i s an "open a l l night" cafe located near the skid road area of a major Western Canadian c i t y . Throughout the report, both the cafe and the c i t y are pseudonymously referred to as the "Family Cafe" and "Western City", respectively. The area around the Family Cafe could be call e d a "high drug use area" i n that most of Western City's drug arrests take place there. The area's many cheap "walk-up" hotels or t h e i r unlocked bathrooms are often used by drug users as a location to administer heroin. Some of those persons who work i n this area of Western City expect to routinely encounter drug users. For example, the b i l l i a r d parlour located near the cafe once displayed a sign that saids "No Dope Peddlers Allowed. Keep out". Similarly, the drug store a block away from the cafe stocks large quantities of small envelopes containing an inexpensive hypodermic needle, syringe, and a bottle cap f o r preparing heroin for i n j e c t i o n . - 4 -These items cost f i f t y - t h r e e cents and can be obtained merely by asking the clerk for an " o u t f i t " or a "machine". The cafe i t s e l f i s a sort of " s o c i a l center" f o r heroin users and a base-of-operations for many drug peddlers. This i s well-known by those who are i n the skid road area f o r purposes of employment. Por example, upon hearing that I was doing "drug research", taxi-drivers would often ask i f I had v i s i t e d the Family Cafe. Sim i l a r l y , although the cafe i s "handy" to a large o f f i c e building, those who are employed there routinely avoid i t and take t h e i r coffee breaks, lunches, etc., i n a less convenient location. Furthermore, there i s some data to indicate that new employees i n this building are s p e c i f i c a l l y instructed to practice t h i s avoidance. The following comments of a l e g a l stenographer and a probation o f f i c e r , both employed i n the building, i l l u s t r a t e t h i s ; When I f i r s t came here, Mr. Jones told me that I should get coffee at Fran's (a nearby cafe) and stay away from the Family Cafe. He said that just drug addicts go there. On my f i r s t day at work the supervisor told me that the s t a f f usually goes f o r coffee at either Fran's or the one across the stre e t . He said they never go to the Family 'cause i t s a hangout for junkies. Thus, for. some, the probability that drug users w i l l be encountered there i s taken as a good reason f o r avoiding the Family Cafe. For others, t h i s same probability i s taken as a good reason for attending the cafe. Drug peddlers are an obvious example. "Undercover" narcotic enforcement o f f i c e r s are perhaps a less obvious example; - 5 -A member of the drug squad told me that undercover o f f i c e r s attempting to gather evidence f o r " t r a f f i c k i n g i n narcotics" (in this case, heroin) always centered th e i r operations i n the Family Cafe. He said i t was " . . . the l o g i c a l place to go because a l l the addicts and pushers hang around there". Canadian law enforcement o f f i c a l s are permitted to use entrapment procedures to gather incriminating evidence and methods of t h i s type are often employed to produce arrests f o r " t r a f f i c k i n g i n narcotics". In these cases, the under-cover policeman w i l l represent himself as a drug user i n order to have others supply him with drugs and incriminate them-selves i n the process. Generally, those so incriminated are a l l arrested at the same time, which may be some months afte r the actual incident of incrimination. As many as 43 persons have been arrested i n one of these "roundups". The occurrence of these events i s "news" and i s generally written up i n considerable d e t a i l i n Western City newspapers. As well as being a center f o r "undercover" police operations, the Family Cafe i s also the f o c a l point of the day-to-day arrest-producing a c t i v i t i e s of a unit of the police drug squad. Both the day and evening s h i f t s of the unit of the drug squad known as the "street crew" have one member who spends the entire work period observing the Family Cafe from a vantage point across the street from i t . This "spotter" observes drug transactions taking place and radioes the res t of the crew when a purchaser has l e f t the cafe i n "possession of narcotics". The street crew follows the drug-carrying person and l a t e r attempts to obtain the evidence necessary to warrant an arrest. Over 70 per cent - 6 -of a l l arrests for "possession of narcotics" (heroin) result from police observation of the Family Cafe (see Table I f o r d e t a i l s ) . TABLE I Arrests f o r possession of narcotics (heroin)  by manner i n which police received i n i t i a l information Number * Followed from Family Cafe 146 73.74 Information received (informers) 23 11 .62 Investigation re; drug a c t i v i t i e s 5 2.52 Investigation re: other a c t i v i t i e s 4 2.02 Street check 4 2.02 Other 7 3.54 No data 9 4.54 Total 198 100.00 The observations of the Family Cafe were made over a three month period. During this period, I " v i s i t e d " the cafe almost every day. The length of the observational sessions ranged from half-an-hour to seven hours; these observational hours were f a i r l y evenly distributed over a twenty-four hour day. During this period, I came to be on famil i a r , first-name terms with many of the drug users who frequented the cafe. Most were unaware of the reason underlying my presence and merely regarded me as some form of "moval outsider": Suzanne, a young prostitute, asked me i f I would stand outside a hote l room door while she was engaging i n sexual intercourse with a "customer". She said that she was worried that her " t r i c k " might become violent and she wanted me to be able to intervene i n the event of trouble. - 7 -After an absence of about half-an-hour, I rejoined Robbie i n the cafe. She asked me where I had been and I told her that I was at a l o c a l department store. She said: "What did you steal?". After my second observational session i n the cafe, a drug-using acquaintance informed me that some persons thought I was an undercover policeman: Hughie said that another drug user had told him that a new undercover policeman was ". . hanging around the Family". Hughie said that the description he gave f i t me perfectly: "It was you he was t a l k i n * about. I told him that you were a friend of mine and he just said 'Oh'. So everything's a l r i g h t " . Following t h i s , I was seen i n "Hughie"s" company on several occasions and thi s probably eliminated most of the suspicions regarding my status. The drug user's general suspicion of "strangers" i s discussed i n Chapter 4. At no point during the observational period was I asked s p e c i f i c questions regarding my status or the reason f o r my presence i n the cafe. Thus, I never told anyone personally what I was doing. My drug-using acquaintance introduced me to two drug peddlers as ". . . a guy who's doin 1 a book on junk". This did not appear to pose any threat to them and on numerous occasions (before both were arrested f o r "possession of narcotics") I sat with them while they went about the business of s e l l i n g drugs. The data f o r the section of this report that deals with police procedures and routine police a c t i v i t i e s were collected during the course of observing a drug squad "at work". Portions of two consecutive evening s h i f t s were spent with a 7 unit of the Western City police - federal police drug squad. - 8 -On both these evenings I participated i n investigations that were intended to produce arrests for "possession of narcotics". On several occasions I was called upon to as s i s t the police by performing tasks such as holding a f l a s h l i g h t , • holding a window open, or "boosting" one of them up a fire-escape. The data which i s represented i n tabular form was obtained by coding reports of police investigations. This was done during the evening i n the o f f i c e of the Federal Police Force. Members of the drug squad were assigned to as s i s t me i n the endeavour and thi s created the opportunity f o r much informal i n t e r a c t i o n . The tables are based on arrests that occurred during a ten-month period. An overview Chapter 2 consists of a description of the Family Cafe -the setting where the majority of Western City's heroin transactions take place. Included i n thi s chapter i s a discussion of the categories of persons that drug users and others normally expect to be present i n the cafe. Some data i s presented to indicate that drug users see the category of "undercover policeman" as one that i s available f o r those who cannot be c l a s s i f i e d i n terms of the cafe's "special uses". Chapter 3 treats the question "What i s a drug addict?" as a problematic one and attempts to answer i t by re f e r r i n g to the practices of those who are regularly involved i n "defining drug addicts". Data regarding the procedural d e f i n i t i o n s offered by the members of a police drug squad and the s t a f f members of a narcotic addiction treatment center are - 9 -presented here. The section on the police i s especially important because th e i r notion of what drug addicts "are" i s taken as "shaping" the nature of heroin transactions. The section on the narcotic addiction treatment center discusses the organizationally relevant notion of the "normal drug addict". Chapter 4 deals with the type of information that must be present before a person can purchase drugs and thus be procedurally defined as a drug user. The drug user's knowledge of the methods the police employ to gather the evidence s u f f i c i e n t to warrant arrests f o r " t r a f f i c k i n g .in narcotics" has created a s i t u a t i o n wherein only those who are properly c e r t i f i e d as drug users are able to purchase drugs or get information about them. The point i s that drug transactions are structured i n accordance with t h i s knowledge. Chapter 5 consists of a discussion of this f o l k or commonsense knowledge of the evidence involved i n arrests f o r narcotic offences and the ways the police obtain i t . I t i s suggested that drug users expect arrests to occur i n a certain s p e c i f i a b l e manner. The drug user's notion of the "normal drug arrest" i s introduced here. These are organizationally relevant events i n the sense that the drug user's knowledge of the circumstances of th e i r production serves as a basis for structuring drug transactions and drug-relevant a c t i v i t i e s i n general. Chapter 6 describes the a c t i v i t i e s that drug users routinely engage i n following the purchase of a capsule of - 10 -heroin. These a c t i v i t i e s can be taken as the a r t i c u l a t i o n i n actual practice of the notion of the circumstances involved i n the production of the normal drug arrest f o r "possession of narcotics". Despite the precautions that drug users take, drug arrests nevertheless occur. Chapter 6 discusses t h e i r orientation to the occurrence of these events. Footnotes The v a l i d i t y of data produced by t h i s type of research i s subject to question for the following reasons? (a) The general f a i l u r e to distinguish between those personal-psychological characteristics which existed p r i o r to drug use and those which emerged af t e r the onset of drug use. (b) The tendency of c l i n i c a l personnel to assume i n advance that addicted individuals possess psychic disorders; i . e . , addiction per se i s presumptive evidence of mental disturbance. For l i t e r a t u r e supporting the former statement see; Richard H. Blum & Lauraine Braunstein "Mind Alt e r i n g Drugs and Dangerous Behaviours Narcotics" i n The President's Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice, Task Force Report; Narcotics and Drug Abuse. Washington; U.S. Government Printing Office 1967. John A. Fort J r . , "Heroin Use Among Young Men", i n John A. O'Donnell and John C. B a l l (Eds.), Narcotic  Addiction. New York; Harper and Row, 1966. Alfred R. Lindesmith, "Basic Problems i n the Social Psychology of Addiction and a Theory", i n John A. O'Donnell and John C. B a l l (Eds.), i b i d . Jordan Scher, "Patterns and P r o f i l e s of Addiction and Drug Abuse", Archives of General Psychiatry, V 1 5 , 1966, pp. 5 3 9 - 5 1 . Edwin M. Schur, Crimes without Victims: Doviant  Behaviour and Public P o l i c y . Englewood C l i f f s , New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1964. For information on the l a t t e r see: Richard H. Blum and Lauraine Braunstein i n the President' Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice, op. c i t . Alfred R. Lindesmith i n John A. O'Donnell and John C. B a l l (Eds.), op. c i t . Alfred R. Lindesmith, "The Drug Addict as Psychopath", American Sociological Review. V 5 , 1940. Alfred R. Lindesmith, Opiate Addiction, Evanston, I l l i n o i s : P r i n c i p i a Press, 1 9 4 7 . R.K. Merton, "Social Structure and Anomie", i n his Social  Theory and Social Structure (rev. ed.), New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1 9 5 7 . A l f r e d Lindesmith's work (op. c i t . ) i s an obvious exception to this s o c i o l o g i c a l perspective. - 12 -3. Herbert Blumer's recent study i s an obvious exception. See h i s Add Center F i n a l Report: The World of Youthful Drue; Use. Berkeley: U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a " S c h o o l - o f Criminology, 1967. For l i t e r a r y d e s c r i p t i o n s of some of the s o c i a l aspects see the f o l l o w i n g : W i l l i a m Lee, Junkie, New York: Ace Books, 1952; James M i l l s , The Panic i n Needle Park, New York: Signet Books, 1967. 4. See, f o r example: A l f r e d Lindesmith, The Addict and the Law. Bloomington: U n i v e r s i t y of Indiana Press, 1965; Edwin Schur, Crimes without V i c t i m s . Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: P r e n t i c e - h a l l , 1965. Edwin Schur, N a r c o t i c A d d i c t i o n i n B r i t a i n and America, London: Tavistock P u b l i c a t i o n s , 1963. 5. This i s r e l a t e d to the s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of policework and i s discussed i n Chapter 3. 6. For a more extensive study of t h i s type see Jerome Skolnick, J u s t i c e without T r i a l : Law Enforcement i n Democratic Society. New York: John Wiley and Sons (Science E d i t i o n s ) , 1967. 7. I t was o r i g i n a l l y planned that approximately one month be 3pent observing the p o l i c e . However, on the second evening i t became obvious that f u r t h e r observation would not be p o s s i b l e . What f o l l o w s i s a d i s c u s s i o n of the events that lead up to the termination of my observations of the drug squad. I was introduced to the s t a f f sergeant i n charge of the Western C i t y drug squad by the executive d i r e c t o r of the n a r c o t i c a d d i c t i o n treatment center where I was employed at the time. The two had known each other f o r a number of years. He t o l d the sergeant that the observations would be part of the treatment center's research program, and would enable me to "see the drug a d d i c t as the policeman does". The s t a f f sergeant was quite r e c e p t i v e to t h i s and s a i d that on many occasions i n the past probation o f f i c e r s , s o c i a l workers, clergymen, e t c . , had accompanied the drug squad f o r t h i s reason. One month was the agreed-upon le n g t h of the o b s e r v a t i o n a l p eriod. The sergeant t o l d me to telephone him a few days before I wanted to begin the observations. A few weeks l a t e r I telephoned the' sergeant and informed him that I was ready to begin observing. He s a i d that he would "set i t up" and t o l d me to come to the drug squad o f f i c e s h o r t l y before s i x o'clock the f o l l o w i n g evening. The next evening I reported to the o f f i c e and i n t r o -duced myself to the drug squad members who wore already present. When I gave my name, one of them s a i d : "That's very n i c e , but why are you here?". I explained my - 13 -presence and i t was obvious that they had not been informed that I would be accompanying them. One of the policemen phoned the sergeant to ascertain the legitimacy of my presence. Following t h i s , the evening's work began. During the evening, I explained the purpose of the observations to them exactly as i t had been explained to the s t a f f sergeant by the executive d i r e c t o r . At the end of the evening, the o f f i c e r s I had accompanied looked surprised when I said that I would be seeing them "tomorrow". During the next evening, one of the o f f i c e r s asked me how much time I planned to spend with them. I replied that I had received permission to spend approximately one month accompanying them i n the i r nightly a c t i v i t i e s . At this point one of the o f f i c e r s saids "Well, we're going to get r i d of you as soon as we can — l i k e tonight". I asked i f I had been "getting i n t h e i r way" or hampering them and I was assured that I had not. They suggested that I see the s t a f f sergeant f o r an explanation. Following t h i s , I was told that the squad had some "special business" to take care of and I was driven to my home. The following day, the s t a f f sergeant told me that further observation would not be possible. He said that i f I was injured during the course of observation, the police department would ". . never hear the end of i t " . I offered to have prepared a l e g a l document which would relie v e the department of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r any injury I might incur. At thi s point he stated that there was also a "security" or " c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y " issue at stakes he f e l t that the "hypes" might one day read my "book" and find out how the drug squad operates. He had told mo e a r l i e r that drug users were well aware of the arrest-producing procedures employed by tho police and I reminded him of t h i s . However, he maintained that more observations could not be made "anyway" and refused to discuss the matter further. The decision to discontinue further observations seems to have been made not at the administrative l e v e l but at "working" or "squad" l e v e l . The reason could have been merely that the police did not " l i k e " me (although one member did i n v i t e me to his home to l i s t e n to recorded music) or that I hampered the performance of some of t h e i r tasks (although I was h e l p f u l on some occasions). An alternate explanation i s that the members of the drug squad engage i n some a c t i v i t i e s that they do not want observed by an "outsider", i . e . , the presence of an observer might interrupt some aspects of the i r normal routine. There i s often a certain amount of physical coercion involved i n gathering the evidence s u f f i c i e n t to warrant an arrest f o r "possession of narcotis". (Indeed, at the - 14 -time of thi s writing a coroner's inquest i s being held to ascertain whether or not the police are responsible f o r the death of a drug user who suffocated during the process of being "searched" for drugs. Similar incidents have occurred i n the past). A public issue i s often made of this coercion by Western City c i v i l l i b e r t a r i a n s . I f e l t that some of the questions the drug squad members asked me during the evening were attempts to locate me on a liberal-conservative continuum (e.g., "I don't think smoking marijuana i s r e a l l y such a bad thing, do you?"). Despite my non-committal answers, i t i s quite l i k e l y that due to my a f f i l i a t i o n with a treatment center they saw me as a " l i b e r a l " and a person who might react negatively to some of t h e i r methods. CHAPTER 2 THE FAMILY CAFE: A SETTING POR DRUG TRANSACTIONS This chapter discusses the physical setting of the Family Cafe, some of the scenes that arc observable there, and the categories of persons that the population of the cafe i s normally expected to include. The setting and some observable scenes The public portion of the cafe i s dingy and poorly main-tained. The walls are painted a l i g h t green colour reminiscent of the Chinese restaurants that could be found i n Western City decades ago; i n many places, the walls arc either "peeling" or badly stained with grease. The c e i l i n g i s unusually high and two large unoperative " t r o p i c a l - s t y l e " fans hang from i t . The floor-covering, dark brown i n s t i t u t i o n a l linoleum, has been worn through to the boards i n the areas near the door and d i r e c t l y behind the stools. The p l a s t i c material covering the stools and booths i s s i m i l a r l y worn and i n many instances the upholstery s t u f f i n g i s v i s i b l e . Behind the counter, and running i t s f u l l length, i s a cracked and grease-stained mirror; i t r e f l e c t s the tarnished images of the dated soda-fountain and coffee-making equipment. The counter i s made of green "pearl" formica which has cracked and faded i n some places; the several remote jukebox stations on i t control the main unit located near the door. The two large windows which face the street are seldom clean. In general, the cafe has a somewhat dismal atmosphere. This i s i n t e n s i f i e d by the poor overhead l i g h t i n g ; furthermore, most of these l i g h t s are - 16 -l e f t o ff during the day. The standards of cleanliness generally expected to p r e v a i l i n food-serving establishments appear to be of l i t t l e importance i n the Family Cafe. For example, i t i s not unusual to receive a coffee cup bearing the l a s t user's l i p s t i c k print and on numerous occasions waiters were observed selecting a "clean" saucer from a stack of used ones. Ashtrays are t y p i c a l l y over-flowing and the f l o o r i s often l i t t e r e d with cigarette butts, empty cigarette packages, candy-bar wrappers, etc. Similarly, the s t a f f often do not adhere to the standards of v i s i b l e personal cleanliness generally expected of food-serving personnel. Although the male Chinese waiters ( a l l of whom had some d i f f i c u l t y speaking English) wear white serving jackets, those garments are seldom clean; the same food and beverage stained jackets were observed being worn day af t e r day. Furthermore, th e i r "behind^-the-counter" behaviour i s sometimes of an "unappetizing" nature: The waiter was standing behind the counter picking his nose. One of the patrons accused a waiter of "staring" at him and threatened attack i f he caught him doing i t again. Presumably to prevent accidental eye-contact, the waiter became engrossed i n a scab on his elbow. A waiter sneezed and wiped his nose on his sleeve. One of the waiters could be heard s p i t t i n g i n the sink near the rear of the counter. As a setting located near the skid road area of the c i t y , the Family Cafe i s re a d i l y accessible to indigents of a l l ages and sexes. These persons frequently enter the cafe to eat or, more commonly, to attempt to s o l i c i t money, cigarettes, food, cups of coffee, etc., from those present. Many instances - 17 -of the l a t t e r type occurred during the period of observations. The following are examplary: An elderly man was standing near the door asking people for . . a dime or a couple of smokes", as they l e f t . Most ignored him. One drug user gave him a cigarette package. Upon opening i t , the elderly man found i t to be empty and threw i t on the f l o o r . An intoxicated native Indian woman sat next to me at the counter and asked i f I would buy her something to eat. When I replied that I did not have any money, she moved on to the next person at the counter. He refused so she asked the next one. After a few more unsuccess-f u l attempts she l e f t the cafe. An old man s i t t i n g near me at the counter asked me for a cigarette. Occasionally, persons who appear to be of low economic circumstances w i l l enter the cafe and attempt to s e l l certain objects to those present; A shabbily-dressed elderly man was wandering around the cafe trying to s e l l a large can of apple juice. He approached a young female drug user with i t and she said; "Por Christ's sake fuck off with that god-damned thing. I told you before not to bother me with your s t u f f " . After a few unsuccessful attempts, he l e f t the cafe. Later i n the afternoon he returned with a cellophane-wrapped piece of meat and a can of pork and beans. He was also unable to s e l l these. An elderly man who was walking with a cane and not wearing any socks approached me at the counter. He hold out three tattered picture postcards to me. In a barely-understandable scratchy voice he said: "Fifteen cents". I told him I did not want them and he l e f t the cafe. Some violence can frequently be observed i n the cafe: A member of the Devils Motorcycle Club entered the cafe, looked around, and strode purposefully toward a male seated i n a booth near the back. He pulled the male into the a i s l e , punched him on the jaw, and l e f t . Two waiters l i f t e n the unconcious male from the f l o o r and placed him i n a booth. A few minutes l a t e r he regained consciousness and l e f t the cafe. G a i l , a young prostitute, was s i t t i n g at the counter next to Frank and George. She appeared to be under the influence of barbiturates and was barely conscious. - 18 -A native Indian stopped behind her and started kissing hor neck and fondling her breasts. She was i n no condition to offer much resistance but nonetheless attemptod to push him away. F i n a l l y , Frank got up and h i t the Indian, knocking him to the f l o o r . The waiter peered over the counter at the body and then went back to mopping the f l o o r . Frank sat down and continued his conversation with George. The Indian remained on the f l o o r f o r about f i v e minutes. During th i s time several people entered the cafe and laughed at the body as they stepped around i t to proceed to seats at the counter. Tho waiter asked Frank i f the Indian was dead. He repl i e d that he wasn't. The waiter threw a bucket of soapy water i n the Indian's face; he got up from the f l o o r and stumbled out of the cafe. A group of people (including two waiters) were standing near the back of the cafe watching a young negro male beat an old man's hoad against the side of a booth. No one attempted to intercede. The old man staggered out of the cafe with his face covered with blood. A native Indian on crutches entered the cafe and asked a white male of his acquaintance to buy him an i c e cream cone. The white male said; "Fuck off, you d i r t y Indian c r i p p l e " . The Indian h i t him across the forehead with one of his crutches. Tho male f e l l into the a i s l e , apparently unconscious, and his assailant l e f t the cafe. Such incidents seldom involve drug users and are regarded by them as normal "for this part of town": I asked Freddie i f there were many f i g h t s i n tho Family Cafe. He r e p l i e d that there were and added: "It's not the friends that cause the trouble, though. It's the drunks and other types that you get down there. People that d r i f t i n of f the s t r e e t . The waiters i n the Family Cafe have come to r e a l i z e that the population of the cafe w i l l regularly include some persons who w i l l be unable to pay fo r the food they have ordered. This i s revealed by th e i r general practice of not releasing a plate of food or a cup of coffee u n t i l payment f o r i t has been received: I was rather slow i n producing the required change to pay for my coffee. During the time I was fe e l i n g i n my pockets f o r the money, the waiter held the cup i n his hand. He did not put i t down on the counter u n t i l I had placed the money i n his other hand. The old man next to me at the counter had ordered a cob of corn. The waiter brought i t on a plate and the old man reached f o r i t . The waiter pushed h i s hand away and said; "Gimme money f i r s t " . The old man gave him the money and the corn was placed on the counter i n front of him. Similarly, the waiters often demand that a person produce proof of his a b i l i t y to pay prior to accepting a food or beverage order from him: An elderly man entered the cafe and sat near the front of the counter. He c a l l e d the waiter. The waiter approached him and the old man ordered a bacon sandwich. The waiter asked him i f he had f o r t y - f i v e cents to pay for i t ; he replied that he did and the waiter asked him to show i t . The old man did this and the waiter went to the kitchen to order his sandwich. A young native Indian g i r l sat at the counter and ordered a doughnut. The waiter asked her i f she had any money. She r e p l i e d that she did and the waiter asked her to show i t to him before he delivered the doughnut. As she was unable to, the waiter l e f t . When he passed by a few minutes l a t e r , the g i r l held out a man's watch to him. The waiter replied that he didn't want her watch and continued on his way. Tears came to her eyes and she put her head down on the counter. She l e f t the cafe about ten minutes l a t e r . In the above example, the g i r l was not asked to leave the premises when i t was discovered that she was not q u a l i f i e d to be a customer. This point becomes relevant i n the following discussion of the waiters' expectation that a second v a r i e t y of customer w i l l be frequently encountered. Generally, mere presence i n a cafe i s s u f f i c i e n t to define a person who has entered s p e c i f i c a l l y f or the purpose of partaking of the food and beverages that the establishment has to o f f e r . Furthermore, the approach of a waiter i s usually taken as an opportunity to place an order. In the Family Cafe, th i s i s not always the case: - 20 -A male entered the cafe and sat at the counter. The waiter approached him, apparently to take his order. The male looked up at the waiter and s a i d : "What the fuck do you want, asshole?". The waiter i n the above example was a new employee. One drug user spoke of h i s behaviour as follows: "Lo'ok at that asshole. He comes up to you as soon as you walk i n . H e ' l l learn what's goin' on pretty soon". The waiters i n the Family Cafe have come to r e a l i z e that some of those present i n the setting w i l l not be interested i n purchasing anything. Of these persons, some indicate t h e i r detachment by s i t t i n g i n such a fashion that i t i s v i r t u a l l y impossible to engage i n v i s u a l interaction with the waiter. These persons are c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y not asked to place an order. When the waiters do approach a person who may bo a legitimate customer, they do so i n a manner that allows f o r the p o s s i b i l i t y that he may not be on the premises i n th i s r o l e . The following are examplary: After I had been s i t t i n g at the counter f o r about f i v e minutes, the waiter approached me and said: "Do you want anything?". I r e p l i e d that I didn't and he returned to the rear of the counter. Waiter: Do you want anything? Male: Yeah, I want you to fuck off and die, Chink. Thus, by asking "Do you want anything?", the waiter allows for the p o s s i b i l i t y that one may not be a customer "after a l l " . Furthermore, a negative reply to t h i s question i s a legitimate one i n that a person who gives i t i s not required to vacate the premises. Consequently, drug users are able to use the setting as a place to wait f o r a drug peddler to arrive and drug peddlers are able to use i t as a place to transact business. Hence, the following "day" i n the Family - 21 -Cafe i s possible: There were about twenty people i n and around the cafe. Some were s i t t i n g at the counter or i n the booths, others were standing i n the open doorway or near the jukebox; a few were outside the cafe, leaning on the window. None of these people were eating or drinking any of the fare that the cafe had to o f f e r . The drug peddler entered the cafe and proceeded d i r e c t l y to a booth near the rear. Everyone present gathered around him at the booth, "scored" and then l e f t the cafe either singly or i n p a i r s . Minutes l a t e r , the drug peddler and myself were the only non-employees who remained on the premises. During the next hour, two persons entered the cafe, joined the drug peddler and "scored", and then immediately l e f t the premises. Neither of them purchased anything other than the heroin. The drug peddler l o f t with the second person; I was the sole remaining "patron". Eleven people entered the cafe during the hour that followed. Two sat at the counter, had coffee, and l e f t . Of the other nine, two sat at the counter, two stood looking out the window, two stood leaning on the jukebox, and three sat i n a booth; none of them ordered anything to eat or drink. One of the man standing by the window turned and said: "Here he comes", and Don, a drug peddler, entered the cafe. He joined the three men i n the booth and the other six persons on the premises gathered around i t . Each one "scored" and l e f t alone. A few mintues l a t e r the three o r i g i n a l occupants of the booth l e f t ; the drug peddler and myself were the only non-employees i n the cafe. Thus, the drug user i s not oriented to the cafe as a food serving establishment, but rather as a s e t t i n g where l e g a l l y unavailable narcotics can be purchased. That the cafe i s not viewed primarily as a food-serving establishment, i s also evidenced by the a c t i v i t i e s of those female drug users who are prostitutes. Many female drug users earn- t h e i r drug money through p r o s t i t u t i o n . During the evening hours, many of them use the cafe as a "home base" f o r the i r streetwalking a c t i v i t i e s . Prostitutes can often be observed entei'ing the cafe "resting" f o r a few moments, and then leaving to seek c l i e n t e l e % About half-a-dozen times during the evening a young prostitute entered tho cafe, sat at the stoo l nearest the door f o r a few moments, and then l e f t . At no time did she order anything to cat or drink. On one of these occasions, the waiter approached and asked her i f she wanted anything. She said: "Fuck o f f " and the waiter l e f t . At t h i s point, tho male drug user next to me said to her: "Business pretty slow tonight, Suzanne?". Sho said: "Yeah, there's no t r i c k s on the street". A few minutes l a t e r she got up and sa i d : "Well, I guess I ' l l go out and have another look". Furthermore, there i s some evidence to indicate that drug-using prostitutes view the cafe as a place where "customers" as well as drugs may bo found: A l i c e , a young prostitute, looked around the cafe and said: "It's sure easy to see there's no t r i c k s i n here tonight". The male and female drug user's disregard f o r the Family Cafe as a place where food can bo purchased i s further evidenced by the practice of "going out to coffee" to other restaurentss Robbie suggested that we go to the cafe down the street for coffee. I asked her why she didn't want to stay i n the Family and she said: "Aw, l e t s go to a r e a l coffee shop . . ." Similarly, some drug users note that they prefer not to eat i n the cafe: "I wouldn't eat i n that fuckin' place f o r a l l the money i n the world. It's just a place to score, that's a l l " . When food i s eaten i n the Family Cafe, i t i s often "brought i n " from other restaurants or stores: A couple were s i t t i n g at the counter eating grapes and bananas from a bag. Robbie returned to the cafe with a box of french f r i e s that she had purchased from a cafe down the street. She sat at the counter and ate them. - 23 -Frank entered the cafe with a hamburger and a milkshake. He joined two addicts at the counter. One of them nodded to hi s milkshake and said; "Jesus that looks good. I think I ' l l get one". He started to leave the cafe and the other addict said: "Pick me up a chocolate". A few mintues l a t e r the f i r s t addict returned with two milkshakes. A l i c e and G a i l were s i t t i n g i n a booth eating doughnuts from a box. The pairs of uniformed, walkie-talkie carrying policemen who regularly patrol the street routinely enter the cafe as part of each tour of duty. Generally, they merely walk around the cafe, look inside both male and female bathrooms, and leave without incident. Their appearance i s regular and frequent enough not to be taken as an indicator of "trouble" or a "special occasion": The f i r s t time I saw the uniformed policemen come into the cafe I asked Hughie, a drug user, why they had come. He said: "Don't worry about them. They're i n here about a hundred times a day. Mostly they're just lookin' f o r drunks". However, under certain circumstances the appearance of the uniformed policemen i s taken as a matter worth anticipating. For example, there occasionally exists an outstanding warrant for a drug user's arrest. These are mainly for f a i l i n g to pay fines f o r minor vi o l a t i o n s such as jaywalking, etc. At any rate, apprehension could mean a two or three day period of imprisonment. Such apprehensions are often made by the uniformed policemen who regularly enter the cafe: The uniformed policemen entered the cafe, questioned a young male drug user, and l e f t with him. I asked Robbie, who had been s i t t i n g with him, what had happened. She said: "The bul l s had a warrant f o r him f o r not paying a jaywalking t i c k e t " . - 24 -With possible apprehension i n mind, then, a drug user who knows there i s an outstanding warrant for his arrest w i l l often watch f o r the police patrolmen and leave the cafe as they approach; When wo arrived at the cafe, Hughie said: "I gotta watch f o r the harness b u l l s . I got a tic k e t f o r speeding and my old lady's car and I haven't paid i t . " Wo stood outside the cafe; when Hughie saw the p o l i c e -men coming down the street he said: "Here they come" and walked away from the cafe. This section has presented data on some of what i s observable i n tho Family Cafe. Some of the scenes that can be observed there may be attri b u t a b l e to i t s location i n tho urban structure, i . e . : near the skid road area of the c i t y . For example, some violence, intoxicated and indigent persons are c h a r a c t e r i s t i c features of skid roads. There are other observable scones, though, that are only understandable i n terms of tho cafe's special character as a setting where l e g a l l y unavailable narcotics can be purchased and the drug user's orientation to i t as such. Normal participants: insider's views and outsider's views As a food-serving establishment, the Family Cafe has "room" f o r only two categories of person: s t a f f and c l i e n t e l e . However, i t has been indicated that the cafe i s a se t t i n g where many a c t i v i t i e s go on other than those related to i t s ' o f f i c i a l ' d e f i n i t i o n . In thi s sense, there i s "room" f o r many categories of participant: t r i c k s , prostitutes, drug users, drug peddlers, bums, etc. The intent of this section - 25 -i s to present some data on the categories that are available for persons seen i n the Family Cafe. Discussion w i l l proceed from two points of view: that of the drug user who i s an habitue of the cafe and that of the outsider, i . e . , the person who i s not an habitue of the cafe. Although the Family Cafe i s a public place, i t i s expected by those who enter that certain categories of person w i l l be found there. Some persons entering may respond to the cafe's location i n the urban structure, i . e . near "skid road", and merely categorize those seen as "moral outsiders" or "persons who are l i k e l y to be engaged i n i l l e g a l a c t i v i t i e s " : Stan, a fellow with whom I'd had coffee on two occasions, entered the cafe and joined me at the counter. After wo exchanged greetings he handed me a two inch by throe inch piece of paper and said: "This i s worth money, m'boy". The s l i p of paper bore the following c a r e f u l l y printed message: FOR ANY STOLEN GOODS CONTACT STAN JACQUES ROOM 107 PYRAMID HOTEL He said: "Are you a pretty good booster?". I r e p l i e d that I didn't boost and he said: "Well, spread the word around. It's 50-50 with me. You bring the st u f f to me and I take i t to the fence . . . . sweaters, rings, suede coats, suede coats especially, (name of store) suede coats. Mostly good s t u f f . T e l l some of your friends, okay?". I told him that I would; he assured me that I would see him soon and l e f t the cafe. It should be noted that his question, "Are you a pretty good booster?", presumes involvement i n i l l e g a l a c t i v i t i e s . - 26 -H i s c o n c e r n was w i t h my competence i n t h e s e a c t i v i t i e s , n o t w i t h w h e t h e r o r n o t I was i n v o l v e d . F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e r e p l y t h a t I " d i d n ' t b o o s t " , was t a k e n t o mean t h a t I p u r s u e d o t h e r i l l e g a l endeavours and n o t t h a t I was a l a w - a b i d i n g c i t i z e n . On t h e two o c c a s i o n s I had e n c o u n t e r e d " S t a n " p r i o r t o t h i s o n e , he n e i t h e r r e q u e s t e d n o r r e c e i v e d any i n f o r m a t i o n on my b a c k g r o u n d , a c t i v i t i e s , a t t i t u d e s , e t c . ( I n a c t u a l f a c t , I had met h i m p r i o r t o o u r i n i t i a l e n c o u n t e r i n t h e F a m i l y C a f e ; w h i l e I was w o r k i n g i n a p r i s o n I once i n t e r v i e w e d h i m f o r a p e r i o d o f about h a l f -a n - h o u r . I t i s p e r h a p s s i g n i f i c a n t t h a t he d i d n o t r e c o g n i z e m e ) . H e n c e , a l l he "knew" about me was t h a t I was a p e r s o n who f r e q u e n t e d t h e F a m i l y C a f e . T h i s was a p p a r e n t l y enough f o r h i m t o f e e l t h a t I c o u l d make use o f i n f o r m a t i o n about where s t o l e n goods c o u l d be s o l d . O t h e r s , on e n t e r i n g t h e c a f e , may know t h a t i t i s a p l a c e w h e r e s e x may be p u r c h a s e d and d e f i n e t h o s e s e e n as " w h o r e s " and " p i m p s " . A male i n h i s m i d - t w e n t i e s e n t e r e d t h e c a f e and s a t n e x t t o me a t t h e c o u n t e r . A f t e r a f e w m i n u t e s , he p a s s e d me a n o t e w h i c h s a i d ; " I c a n ' t speak o r h e a r . I t ' s a n i c e d a y , i s n ' t i t ? " . . I nodded i n a g r e e m e n t . He p a s s e d a n o t h e r n o t e : " I s t h i s p l a c e w h o r e h o u s e ? " . I gave a n e g a t i v e r e p l y . A t t h i s p o i n t , I l o f t t h e c o u n t e r and s t o o d a t t h e f r o n t o f t h e c a f e n e a r w h e r e G a i l was s i t t i n g . l a t e r , I j o i n e d G a i l i n h e r b o o t h . The d e a f mute l e f t s h o r t l y t h e r e a f t e r . Ho r e t u r n e d f o u r o r f i v e h o u r s l a t e r and a g a i n s a t n e x t t o mo a t t h e c o u n t e r . T h i s t i m e he w r o t e : " I ' m l o o k i n g f o r a f u c k . Can y o u h e l p m o ? " . He w r o t e : " Y o u ' r e a p i m p , a r e n ' t y o u ? . . . I saw y o u s i t t i n g w i t h t h a t l o v e l y l o o k i n g f e m a l e ( G a i l ) . I s she y o u r w h o r e ? " . - 27 -Some persons entering the cafe may have s p e c i f i c knowledge of i t s special character as a setting where l e g a l l y unavailable narcotics can be purchased and thus c l a s s i f y those already present as "drug users": A fellow dressed i n working clothes was s i t t i n g next to me at the counter. When the foot patrolmen entered the cafe f o r a routine check, he turned to me and said: "Jesus, they come i n here regular. When you get a couple of naive ones i n here though, that's when you get the trouble. They start to look around too much". I told him that I didn't understand what he meant and he said: "Oh fuck, I'm not stupid. I know what's happening. You don't have to pretend with me that there's nothin' goin' on. I been here before. You fuckin' dope fiends think that nobody knows nothin'." A v i s i b l y intoxicated male i n his mid-thirties entered tho cafe and sat next to me at the counter. He asked me how to go about getting some service and I suggested that he c a l l the waiter. Later, when he had received his coffee, he said: "A p l a s t i c spoon? Why the fuck do they bring a p l a s t i c spoon? This i s the only place I've had coffee with a p l a s t i c spoon. I bet they think you guys could be s t e a l i n ' them i f they were the ordinary kind". I told him that I didn't understand what he meant and he said: "Puck, for schmeck. For the old arm (makes mocking i n j e c t i o n gestures). Don't play i t so fuckin' secretive. I've been around here before . . . Y'know, you fiends are a l l the same. You're fuckin' unsociable. You fiends never want to t a l k to anybody you don't know". A shabby looking old man s i t t i n g two seats away from me asked me f o r a cigarette. I told him I didn't have any. He muttered to himself: "Fuckin' dope fiend". For those who know the character of the setting, the cafe and "around the cafe" are taken as a unit. Thus i t i s possible to be i d e n t i f i e d as a drug user merely by being i n the general area of the Family Cafe. Hughie and I were leaning on a car parked i n front of the cafe. The driver of the car appeared and said: "You fuckin' dope fiends. What's the matter . . you too fuckin' hopped up to stand up straight?" Hughie told me that he had never seen this man before. - 28 -In this example, my companion and I had been outside the oafe f o r long enough to safely assume that the person who i d e n t i f i e d us as drug users had not seen us leave. There i s a p o s s i b i l i t y that he may have seen "Hughie1' before but, since t h i s was my f i r s t v i s i t to the Family Cafe, i t was most unlikely that he had seen me p r i o r to this occasion. Hence, his i d e n t i f i c a t i o n was probably based on h i s knowledge that "drug users are i n and around the Family Cafe". On a s i m i l a r occasion I was i d e n t i f i e d as a drug user by the poli c e : I was standing outside the oafe when a police car stopped i n front of i t . One of the o f f i c e r s called me over and told me to produce some I.D. After checking my I.D. and writing my name i n h i s note-book he asked: "What kind of trouble have you had with the police?" I explained my purposes to him and he said: "Oh yeah, I've seen you hanging around here associating with addicts and talking to addicts and I figured oh-oh, there's a new one". The policeman's question: "What kind of trouble have you had with the police?" presumes that I have had prior l e g a l d i f f i c u l t i e s and i s indicative of the "type" of person that o f f i c i a l s expect to be around the Family Cafe. Although the Family Cafe i s a public place and there-fore a setting that i s a v a i l a b l e to a l l who choose to enter, those drug users who frequent i t on a regular basis expect that only c e r t a i n categories of person w i l l be normally present. As i n the case of "normal trouble", the presence of some persons i s regarded as normal merely by virtu e of - 29 -the cafe's location near the skid road area of Western Gity. Por example, i n an e a r l i e r section i t was reported that indigents (such as native Indians and elderly "homeless" men) often enter the cafe to eat or, not uncommonly, to attempt to s o l i c i t money, cups of coffee, etc., from those present. The appearance of such persons i s taken as cha r a c t e r i s t i c of "this part of town": An old man who smelled of bay rum had asked Hughie to buy him a cup of coffee. He refused and the old man l e f t . Hughie said to me: "Jesus I wish this place was somewhere else. In this part of town you get a l l the fuckin' bums and drunk Indians comin' i n " . S i m i l a r l y , the drug user regards the frequent . appearances of uniformed policemen i n the cafe as normal fo r "this part of town": "The harness b u l l s don't come i n here (the cafe) just 'cause i t s a hangout f o r fiends. They come i n because i t s on the street and more things happen on t h i s street than anywhere else i n town". The drug user normalizes the presence of some persons i n the cafe by r e f e r r i n g to the time of the day at which they c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y appear. For example, when the beer parlour next door closes (at midnight) the cafe often becomes crowded with intoxicated persons. The presence of such persons i s expected, and hence normal, at t h i s time: Hughie asked me why I never brought my wife with me to the cafe. I told him that I had never r e a l l y thought about i t before and he said: "Well, i f you ever do, just make sure you never bring her down around eleven-thirty or twelve at night. The place i s f u l l of fuckin' drunks then and I wouldn't want her to get a bad impression of us dope fiends". The presence of a large number of intoxicated persons at an e a r l i e r time i s taken as "unusual": - 30 -Pour v i s i b l y intoxicated males were s i t t i n g i n a booth. One of them was singing an obscene song. Freddie said, "Jeez, i t s a b i t early f o r that, don't ya think". I t was about 9.30 p.m. Ultimately, however, the f a c t of the presence of intoxicated persons, regardless of the time of t h e i r appearance, i s "explained" by reference to the cafe's lo c a t i o n . In this p a r t i c u l a r case, the reference i s s p e c i f i c ; as one drug user noted: "There's l o t s of drunks i n here l a t e at night -the beer parlour's right next door, y'know". However, those persons whose presence i s seen as normal by virtue of the cafe's location " i n this part of town", are generally r e a d i l y i d e n t i f i a b l e as "bums", "drunks", "policemen" and the l i k e . In those cases where thi s easy i d e n t i f i c a t i o n i s not possible, the drug user may employ as a basis f o r categorization his knowledge of how the setting i s used and the chara c t e r i s t i c reasons people have f o r entering i t . Thus, strangers, u n t i l further information i s received, may be viewed as persons who have entered the cafe i n search of an i l l i c i t sexual encounter: The middle-aged woman s i t t i n g two stools away moved over next to me and offered me half-an-hour of sexual entertainment i n exchange f o r f i f t e e n d o l l a r s . Although I to l d her I wasn't interested, she spent a couple of minutes expanding on the nature of the services she would be w i l l i n g to provide, how much she needed the money, etc. During her discourse, an acquaintance of mine, a well-known drug addict, entered the cafe and sat next to me. After a b r i e f exchange with him I l e f t my seat to play the juke-box. As I rose, the woman addressed my acquaintance: "Hughie, i s that guy a fr i e n d of yours?", he replied that I was and she sa i d : "Shit, I should have known I was wasting my time with a fiend who was putting me on". - 31 -A young g i r l entered the cafe, looked around and took the s t o o l next to mine. She tapped me on the shoulder, and said: "Hey, y1wanna see a g i r l ? Y 1 wanna go out for a good time?". I told her that I wasn't interested i n a g i r l and she asked me i f I was "waiting". I replied that I was and she said: "Oh yeah. Sorry I didn't recognize you at f i r s t . It's just that every unfamiliar face i s a t r i c k to me, y'know". In both of these cases, a process of r e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n took place, i . e . , from potential t r i c k to drug user. In the f i r s t instance, being seen on f a m i l i a r terms with a drug user was s u f f i c i e n t to warrant r e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . The g i r l i n the second example was able to invoke the category "drug user" because by establishing the f a c t that I was "waiting" (for a drug peddler) she was able to attribute a rationale to my presence i n the cafe. Had a drug peddler been present at that time, the category may not have been available. The following i s an example of an occasion when a "stranger" could be placed i n neither " t r i c k " nor "drug user" categories: The young g i r l s i t t i n g next to me at the counter] offered me a package of matches to l i g h t the cigarette I was holding. (My actions p r i o r to her off e r of the matches had made i t f a i r l y obvious that I was out of them). I accepted her offer, l i t the c i g a r e tte and returned them with thanks. At this point she said: "I haven't seen you here before. Is this your f i r s t time down here?". I replied that i t wasn't, whereupon she said: "I'm down here almost every night and I've never seen you. How long have you been comin 1 down?". I told her that I had been frequenting the cafe for about two weeks. A few minutes l a t e r , she engaged a drug peddler who was just leaving the cafe i n a conversation about when he would be returning with h i s evening supply of narcotics. After he l e f t , she asked me i f I knew him; I repl i e d that I didn't. Then she said: "You're not l o o k i n 1 f o r a g i r l , are you?". I told her that I wasn't. Shortly a f t e r t h i s , she l e f t me and joined some drug users who were s i t t i n g near the - 32 -roar of the counter. I l e f t the cafe and stood outside. When I returned to the inside of the, cafe a few minutes l a t e r , I was able to overhear the following conversation that the g i r l was having with a male drug user: G i r l : Do you know that guy with the beard? He said he's been comin 1 down here f o r a couple of weeks. I don't think he uses. (Peripherally, I could see her point to me). Male: I don't know him, but I've seen him s i t t i n ' around here. I don't know what he does. At t h i s point, Robbie, a lesbian of my acquaintance, approached me and sa i d : "Jesus, i t ' s slow tonight". The g i r l and the male drug user continued t h e i r conversation as follows: Male: Well, Robbie knows him. G i r l : Yeah. The male l e f t the cafe and stood outise; the g i r l returned to her seat near the front of the counter. In the above example, i t appears that the g i r l made every attempt to categorize me i n terms of her knowledge of how the sett i n g i s used. Given that there were no drugs i n the cafe at that time, she could legitimately entertain the p o s s i b i l i t y that I was indeed a drug user. However, she was able to eliminate t h i s p o s s i b i l i t y by noting the fact that I did not know the drug peddler. In the event that the drug peddler had indicated that he knew me, or had I said that I knew him, the g i r l ' s categorization problem may have been solved. Having established that I was not a drug user, her knowledge of the chara c t e r i s t i c reasons persons have f o r entering the cafe lead her to attempt to place me i n the category of " t r i c k " : "You're not lookin' f o r a g i r l are you?". My negative response to this question apparently exhausted the categories of - 33 -persons who are normally expected to be present. Hence, my presence immediately became suspect: "He could be a b u l l " . (It i s interesting to note that the category of merely "customer" i s not av a i l a b l e ) . The above example also indicates that the suspicion surrounding my status was suspended, at least f o r the moment, when I was seen to be on fa m i l i a r terms with a drug user. This point becomes more relevant i n a l a t e r chapter. This chapter has presented data on the setting of the Family Cafe, some of the scenes that can be observed there, and the categories of person that are expected to be present there. It was i l l u s t r a t e d that the population of the cafe regularly includes some persons who are oriented to i t as a place where l e g a l l y unavailable narcotics can be purchased rather than as a food-serving establishment. Many of the observable scenes are explainable i n terms of the drug user's expectation that narcotics are or soon w i l l be available f o r purchase there. The "special uses" to which the cafe i s put can be taken as structuring the categories available f o r those seen i n the cafe by both habitues and "outsiders". In thi s regard, when a person displays no symbolic detachment from the setting's "special uses" and yet cannot be categorized i n - 34 -t h e i r terms, he may be seen as a policeman. The drug user's notion that some of those seen i n the cafe may turn out to be policemen, i s central to the manner i n which drug trans-actions proceed and i s the topic of a l a t e r chapter. CHAPTER 5  WHAT IS A DRUG ADDICT?  PROCEDURAL DEFINITIONS I: ENFORCEMENT AND TREATMENT OFFICIALS. According to the World Health Organization, a person i s dependent upon drugs, i . e . a drug addict, when the following 1 conditions exist: (a) strong psychic dependence, which manifests i t s e l f as an overpowering drive (compulsion) to continue taking the drug and to obtain i t by any means fo r pleasure or to avoid discomfort; (b) development of tolerance, which requires an increase i n dose to maintain the i n i t i a l pharmacodynamic effect; (c) an early development of physical dependence, which increases i n intensity, p a r a l l e l i n g the increase i n dosage. This requires a continuation of drug administration i n order to prevent the appearance of the symptoms and signs of withdrawal; withdrawal of the drug, or the administration of a s p e c i f i c antagonist, precipitates a d e f i n i t e , c h a r a c t e r i s t i c , and s e l f -l i m i t i n g abstinence syndrome. The W.H.O. thus defines "drug addiction" i n medical, psychological, and pharmacological terms. The Organization further suggests that the " . . . use of the term be confined p to conditions where such a d e f i n i t i o n applies". However, i n d a i l y l i f e , the term i s used independently of medical, psychological and pharmacological referents. For example, establishment of a person's psychological and physical dependence on a narcotic does not always constitute grounds f o r defining and treating him as a "drug addict". In the course of medical treatment some terminally i l l h ospital patients become addicted to narcotics; however, while such persons may die addicted, i n a sense they never " l i v e d " as drug addicts. Similarly, i n the case of medical - 36 -personnel who are addicted to drugs, the mere fact of t h e i r addiction does not always warrant talk and treatment of them as "drug addicts": An o f f i c i a l of a narcotic addiction treatment center to l d me that only one or two "professional addicts" had ever been to the center. He added that i f and when the "next one" appeared he would receive a di f f e r e n t , " s p e c i a l " form of treatment: "We couldn't treat a doctor or a professional person the same way we treat the addicts that generally come here". Furthermore, despite t h e i r "addiction" and i l l e g a l use of drugs, such persons may be exempt from police attention and consequently be eliminated from s t a t i s t i c a l represen-tations of "drug addiction": A c i t y drug squad member told me that they (the drug squad) knew that there were doctors who were i l l e g a l l y using drugs and i n many cases addicted to them but they "didn't bother with them . . . because they don't s t e a l and damage the community l i k e the hypes do". On the other hand, some who are not "drug addicts" i n the medical and pharmacological sense may be apprehended by the police, c l a s s i f i e d as "drug addicts" and subsequently •5 be enumerated i n o f f i c i a l , "drug addiction s t a t i s t i c s " : Hughie nodded i n the d i r e c t i o n of a young male s i t t i n g at the counter and said: "See that guy? He's a univers i t y student. He's on remand r i g h t now. Got pinched on about the second or t h i r d time he ever scored. Wasn't even wired up", ( i . e . , addicted). Thus, i t appears that what a drug addict " i s " cannot be decided a p r i o r i . At any rate, medical, pharmacological and psychological d e f i n i t i o n s do not appear to be adequate. In this chapter the point of view i s taken that the 1 question "what i s a drug addict?" must be formulated as a problematic one and the material included i n i t s answer must - 37 -consult the practices of those who are regularly involved i n the task of defining persons as "drug addicts". This chapter examines some of the defining practices of the members of a police drug squad and the s t a f f members of a drug addiction treatment center. The police are s p e c i f i c a l l y concerned with defining "drug addicts" and the re s u l t s of t h e i r d e f i n i t i o n s are eventually included i n s t a t i s t i c a l representations of "drug addiction". The i n i t i a l section of thi s chapter presents some data on t h e i r p r a c t i c a l l y organized work si t u a t i o n and some of the considerations they refer to when sele c t i n g persons to be the subjects of investigations which could result i n arrests. E s s e n t i a l l y , t h i s section can be taken 4 as an essay on the assembling of o f f i c i a l s t a t i s t i c s . The second section deals with the notion of the "normal addict" held by members of a drug addiction treatment center. I t i s suggested that the features of thi s stereo-type serve as a basis f o r organizing "treatment" and other a c t i v i t i e s . The police; assembling o f f i c i a l s t a t i s t i c s Before a person can become a "registered drug addict", i . e . one known to the Di v i s i o n of Narcotic Control, and subsequently be enumerated i n annual "drug addiction s t a t i s t i c s " , he must f i r s t be i d e n t i f i e d as such by o f f i c i a l s . In Canada, cases of "drug addiction" become o f f i c i a l l y known i n a variety of fashions; however, the great majority - 38 -of cases are brought to o f f i c i a l attention by the police and t h e i r reports of arrests f o r narcotic violations constitute the major source of data upon which "drug addiction s t a t i s t i c s " are based. In this sense, the police are "definers" of "drug addicts" and "producers" of o f f i c i a l "drug addiction s t a t i s t i c s " . The defining a c t i v i t i e s that narcotic enforcement policemen engage i n are problematic i n the sense that t h e i r explication can provide the sociologist with a clearer understanding of what o f f i c i a l s t a t i s t i c s a c t u a l l y represent and hence what a drug addict " i s " o f f i c i a l l y . Thus, this section addresses the general question "what i s a drug addict?" by examining the considerations the members of a drug squad re f e r to i n the performance of t h e i r d a i l y occupational tasks of defining those who w i l l ultimately be included i n s t a t i s t i c a l representations of "drug addiction". In Western City, narcotic enforcement i s the joint r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the c i t y police drug squad and the drug squad of the federal police force. The two work "as a team" i n most endeavours. With the exception of t h e i r common task, the two components of the "team" bear l i t t l e s i m i l a r i t y to one another: the federal police force members are t y p i c a l l y younger, better trained, have greater career opportunities, and a more "professional orientation" to law enforcement. Also, despite allegations of "equality" by c i t y police o f f i c i a l s , the federal force c l e a r l y has the "authority" i n - 39 -narcotic enforcement: when evidence i s obtained, they are responsible f o r holding i t and, furthermore, they have the c e r t i f i c a t i o n to obtain i t i n the f i r s t place. Under the provisions of the Narcotic Control Act, some members of the federal force are granted a special "Writ of Assistance". E s s e n t i a l l y , t h i s document gives i t s holders the authority to enter and search any place i n which they reasonably believe there is a narcotic and to do so without a warrant. It should be noted that the l e g a l s i t u a t i o n i n the United States i s en t i r e l y d i f f e r e n t : Constitutional guarantees l i m i t police evidence gathering procedures. The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution deals with the r i g h t of the people to be secure i n t h e i r properties, persons, etc.; as such, one of i t s requirements i s that l e g a l o f f i c i a l s are not to conduct a search of property or person without f i r s t stating to a magistrate t h e i r reasons for such a search and obtaining his consent i n the form of a warrant. Warrantless search, except incident to arrest or with the permission of the suspect, i s prohibited. Hence, while i n the U.S.A. the focus i s on the l e g a l i t y of search, i n Canada i t i s on the reasonability of search.^ Being able to provide "reasonable grounds" i s attended to, i n theory i f not i n practice, as a matter of some serious-ness : The officer-in-charge of the Western City police section of the drug squad said: "My men have to be able to j u s t i f y everything they do. They just can't break into any old house or stop anybody on the - 40 -street. They have to have reasonable and probable grounds f o r t h e i r actions". However, there i s some evidence to indicate that "reasonable and probable ground" are often after-the-fact, retrospective interpretations of an event that are written i n such a manner as to s a t i s f y examining o f f i c i a l s : A federal drug squad member told me that i n the event of a non-resultant search, i . e . : one i n which a dwelling was entered and searched but no drugs were found, one of the p a r t i c i p a t i n g members i n possession of a Writ of Assistance must f i l e an " a f f i d a v i t of j u s t i f i c a t i o n " specifying the grounds f o r "reasonably believing" that drugs were on the premises. Eventually, i t i s sent to the Department of Justice, but prior to this i t i s scrutinized by the squad s t a f f sergeant and then the commanding o f f i c e r of the d i v i s i o n . I f either of these o f f i c i a l s f e e l that i t i s not written i n such a manner as to s a t i s f y the "reasonable grounds" section of the Narcotic Control Act, the o f f i c e r who prepared i t apparently hears about i t ". . . i n no uncertain terms". Following i t s "approval" the document i s sworn before a f e d e r a l l y appointed "Commissioner of Oaths". Operationally, the drug squad i s divided into three units: the " t r a f f i c k i n g squad", the "pot squad" and the "street crew". The t r a f f i c k i n g squad's concern i s not with the s t r e e t - l e v e l drug peddler, but rather with the heroin "wholesaler" or "backman". The number of arrests produced by this unit i s small i n comparison with the "pot squad", which focuses on the marijuana user, and the "street crew" which focuses on the heroin user. This section i s concerned with the operations of the l a t t e r . The street crew includes personnel from both the Western City police force and the f e d e r a l force. On the evenings of observation the crew was composed of f i v e members (one - 41 -federal, four c i t y ) , but a number greater than this i s apparently not uncommon. The crew i s organized into two s h i f t s : 8.00 a.m. - 4 p.m. and 6 p.m. - 2 a.m. The choice of these hours i s based on the density of t r a f f i c : a f t e r 4 p.m. the t r a f f i c i s too heavy to permit the often complex driv i n g involved and a f t e r 2 a.m. i t i s so l i g h t that even the unarked police car would be obvious. The day s h i f t ' s week i s from Monday 8.00 a.m. to Friday 4 p.m., the night' s h i f t ' s week i s from Sunday 6.00 p.m. to Friday 2.00 a.m. They are plain-clothes o f f i c e r s and appear at work i n very casual a t t i r e . The street crew's primary r e s p o n s i b i l i t y i s the production of arrests for "possession of narcotics". The procedure they follow to do t h i s is as follows: One of the members of the crew serves as a "spotter". The spotter remains i n a location somewhere across the s t r e e t from the Family Cafe f o r the duration of the evening's work. (The police would not specify the exact location: "If the hypes found out where we were, they might burn the place down."). From t h i s vantage point he i s apparently able to observe a l l the a c t i v i t i e s that take place i n the cafe. When he "sees" a person purchase heroin and leave the cafe i n possession of i t , he radios a description of the person, the d i r e c t i o n he i s proceeding, etc., to the crew v i a walkie-talkie. (Each member of the crew carries a walkie-talkie costing approximately $ 1,000 and having a range of about 2 miles). The crew awaits his advice i n two unmarked cars. One i s located i n an a l l e y south-west of the cafe, the other i n a parking l o t north-west of the cafe. (Most of the walk-up hotels often chosen by drug users to " f i x " are west of the cafe). When the spotter radios the d i r e c t i o n a heroin-possessing person i s proceeding i n and h i s means of t r a v e l ( i . e . : on foot or i n a car), the crew responds appropriately. I f the suspect i s traveling i n a car, the police cars follow i t j o i n t l y . a practice which both makes for a more e f f i c i e n t " t a i l " and minimizes the p r o b a b i l i t y that a single car w i l l be spotted. - 42 -Example: Gar 1: "It's out of sight at X and Y (streets ) . You should be able to pick i t up going north on Z (st r e e t ) " . Car 2: "Okay, we'll try and pick i t up here". Walkie-talkie contact i s maintained at a l l times. I f the suspect i s proceeding to his destination on foot, one of the members w i l l leave the car, follow him and advise the other members regarding h i s whereabouts. When the squad reaches the suspect's destination, they enter the building i n as inconspicuous a fashion as possible (e.g., f i r e escape), wait outside the door u n t i l they hear the "signs" that indicate the drug i s being prepared (and thus e a s i l y available) and then f o r c i b l y enter the room (e.g., by using the sledge hammer carr i e d i n the car). Alternatively, they may apprehend the suspect en route to his destination, and attempt to extract the heroin from h i s mouth. The spotter i s not able to actually "see" a heroin transaction but r e l i e s on "signs" that are taken as indications of i t s occurrence: A member of the drug squad told me that the spotter watched f o r the "signs" of a drug transaction. He said the following were taken as indicators: money changing hands, r o l l i n g an object between the hands, placing the hand to the mouth. Some of these "signs" are common to other a c t i v i t i e s and mistakes may be made: An inmate of a borstal home told me that he had previously frequented the Family Cafe and although he knew many drug users, he was not one himself. He said that on one occasion he entered the Family Cafe and paid a drug user some money that he owed him. They engaged i n a b r i e f conversation and the inmate put a piece of chewing gum i n h i s mouth. He l e f t the cafe and went to the beer parlour down the street. Apparently the police "jumped" him while he was there. He f e l t that they must have seen him put the gum i n h i s mouth and assumed that i t was a capsule of heroin. The spotter obviously plays a central role i n deter-mining who w i l l be followed, arrested, and included i n - 43 -o f f i c i a l "drug addiction s t a t i s t i c s " . Each s h i f t of the "street crew" has a permanent, full-time spotter. His task i s c l e a r l y a decisional one: A narcotic enforcement o f f i c e r characterized the spotter's job as follows: "He s i t s up there and picks out the hypes we're going to t a i l " . Furthermore, the character of his decisions i s seen as a f f e c t i n g the number of arrests the crew w i l l make on any given night: As the spotter was leaving the drug squad o f f i c e , one of the detectives said to him: "Pick us some good ones tonight, Fred. It's been a slow week". The spotter who was working during the evenings of observation was of a higher rank (sergeant) than the rest of the crew (detectives): hence, his decisions have a certain legitimacy. The following i s an example of a "spotter's decision": One of the detectives informed the spotter that the crew would follow the next person who purchased heroin and l e f t the cafe. The spotter said that Berkowitz had scored and would probably be leaving the cafe soon. However, he noted that Berkowitz l i v e d i n [a c i t y about 30 miles from Western City] and a t r i p there and back would take the crew away from the downtown area f o r too long a period of time. The detective agreed. A few minutes l a t e r the detective called the spotter again and asked him to inform them when Berkowitz l e f t the cafe because they were going to follow him "anyway". The spotter agreed to advise the crew on the subject's a c t i v i t i e s . After half-an-hour had passed without word from the spotter, the detective radioed him and said: "What's happened to Berkowits?" The spotter replied that the subject l e f t the cafe about twenty minutes ago and he had not advised the crew " . . . because i t would've been a t r i p to [ c i t y ] f o r sure and we' might've missed something down here". - 44 -Perhaps t h i s accounts f o r the fact that arrests f o r "possession of heroin" are d i f f e r e n t i a l l y distributed throughout Western City and occur mainly i n the area around the Family Cafe. (See Tables II and III f o r details ). TABLE II ARRESTS FOR POSSESSION OF NARCOTICS (HEROIN)  BY CITY OR MUNICIPALITY OF OCCURRENCE City Western City Municipalities adjoining Western City Total TABLE III ARRESTS FOR POSSESSION OF NARCOTICS (HEROIN)  IN WESTERN CITY BY CENSUS TRACT OF OCCURRENOE Census tracts Area around Family Cafe (5 adjacent census tracts) Remainder of Western City (52 census tracts) Total The evening during which the above incident occurred was considered by drug squad members to be a "slow one": One of the detectives remarked that i t was a shame I had to be with them "tonight" because there was so l i t t l e action. He said that they were usually "much busier". Another detective wondered aloud, " . . . where everybody i s tonight". Immediately p r i o r to one detective's announcement (to the spotter) that the crew would follow the next person who Arrests  No. % 174 87.9 24 12.1 198 100.0 Arrests  No. g 101 58 13 42 174 100.0 - 45 -l e f t the Family Cafe, the other had said: "God, i t ' s getting boring just s i t t i n g here". At this point the f i r s t detective informed the spotter of t h e i r desire to follow the "next one". The mere fact that they had to t e l l the spotter that they "wanted" the "next one" may indicate that under ordinary circumstances, i . e . not a "slow" night, the "next one" might not necessarily be the one followed. Below i s an example of an incident wherein some "next ones" were allowed to leave the cafe i n possession of heroin while the drug squad was waiting for an "easy one": The spotter advised the crew that "the guy who usually drives the motorcycle was just dropped off by a blue-and-white Ford". One of the detectives replied: "We'll take him. This should be an easy one — we've got the key to his place. I f he goes there we'll get him f o r sure". He told the spotter to advise them when the subject had scored and l e f t the cafe. About f i f t e e n minutes passed between this time and the time he entered. During t h i s period the spotter mentioned the names of three other persons who had purchased heroin and l e f t the cafe i n possession of i t . This case was regarded as an "easy one" because the police had information about where the subject l i v e d and further-more, a key to h i s home. While they were waiting f o r him to purchase heroin and leave the cafe, a number of other drug users "went free.", so to speak. Others as well are able to "escape" a r r e s t : The spotter radioed that a person had purchased heroin, l e f t the cafe, and hired a Checker cab. The crew followed the t a x i but eventually l o s t sight of i t . The detective told the spotter to telephone the t a x i company dispatcher and f i n d out where car No. 78 had taken h i s l a s t fare. - 46 -The spotter radioed the address a few minutes l a t e r and said that the cab driver believed i t to be a "hippy hang-out". He said to "lay o f f " , i . e . , not enter, i f i t happened to be the hippy newspaper o f f i c e . The detectives agreed that this would be advisable. I asked one of them why a "lay o f f " would be necessary i f t h i s was the case and he replied that entering such premises would probably result i n unfavourable p u b l i c i t y . The newspaper i n this case had recently been the subject of a c i v i c l i c e n c i n g "scandal" which had resulted i n considerable p u b l i c i t y regarding the manner i n which Western City o f f i c i a l s were dealing with "hippies". The data presented thus f a r have provided some information on how the police go about defining "drug addicts" and some of the considerations they refer to when deciding who should be so defined. What follows i s a discussion of the law as i t relates to "possession of narcotics" and how the law and the policeman's handling of i t effects s t a t i s t i c a l representations of "drug addiction". The Criminal Code of Canada specifies what i t means to be i n possession of somethings (a) A person has anything i n his possession when he has i t i n his personal possession or knowingly; ( i ) has i t i n the actual possession or custody of another person, or ( i i ) has i t i n any place, whether or not that place belongs to or i s occupied by him, or the use or benefit of himself or another person; and (b) where one of two or more persons, with the knowledge and consent of the rest, has anything i n his custody or possession, i t s h a l l be deemed to be i n the custody and possession of a l l of them. Thus, under these conditions a person may be l e g a l l y arrested for "possession of narcotics" and subsequently appear i n an o f f i c i a l t a l l y of "drug addicts" merely by being - 47 -discovered by the police i n a room where drugs are found. The following i s a female drug user's description of such a situations This old guy had a room down on [name of s t r e e t ] . He l i k e d a l l the kids so he l e t us use h i s room to f i x i n . Well, one day me and another g i r l were up there with him and the b u l l s came i n and pinched a l l three of us. The poor old guy hardly knew what was goin' on, but there he was, charged with possession of narcotics just l i k e us. He did six months on that beef too, I think. The judge said that he was just as g u i l t y as we were because he knew that drugs were being used i n his room. He had knowledge of i t and gave consent, so the old bugger got time. Similarly, a s i t u a t i o n frequently encountered i n the prison i s one i n which a person i s admitted to serve a sentence f o r a conviction on a narcotics offence, routinely c l a s s i f i e d as a drug addict by records o f f i c e r s , and i s found, upon l a t e r interview to be a v i c t i m of circumstance rather than a drug user. The following instance i s exemplary of many "remembered" from my experience as a prison employees Upon interviewing an inmate who was i n prison f o r "possession of narcotics" and had been c l a s s i f i e d as a "drug addict", I discovered that he was not even a user of drugs. He was a logger and one of his campmates occasionally used heroin. Apparently the two came to Vancouver and took a room i n a hotel near the skid road area of the c i t y . The subject stayed i n the room and got druhk. His friend went to the Family Cafe, purchased a capsule of heroin, and returned to the room with i t . Minutes l a t e r , the police arrived, found the heroin, and arrested them both f o r "possession of narcotics". The subject claimed he had never used drugs i n his l i f e . Later, i t was medically established that he was not addicted to drugs. Hence, there i s evidence to indicate that at least some of those who are charged with narcotic offences and represented - 48 -i n o f f i c i a l "drug addiction s t a t i s t i c s " may not even be users of narcotics. Drug users know that there i s a ce r t a i n element of r i s k involved i n merely being i n the presence of narcotics and avoid situations where drugs are being used unless they them-selves are doing the using. One drug user commented as follows: "Only an asshole would go watch somebody f i x . For one thing you'd get yenny. And i f the bulls came through the door, you're pinched just f o r bein' there. They always pinch everybody that's around". There i s some evidence to indicate that the charging of everyone present i n a drug-using s i t u a t i o n with "possession of narcotics" i s seen by the police not only as something they are l e g a l l y able to do but also as something that i s "sensible", i . e . : p r a c t i c a l to do: "We generally charge everybody that's i n the room. I f we don't, one of them can take the Act, say i t was his junk, and get the whole works o f f " . The "Act" the above quoted narcotic enforcement o f f i c e r was re f e r r i n g to i s the Canada Evidence Act. Under i t s protection, a person who has not been charged with committing an offence can appear as a witness i n the t r i a l of those who have, t e s t i f y without fear of prosecution that he i s the proper offender, and thereby "free" those who have been charged with " h i s " crime. Those who are present at the time of a narcotics arrest and not charged are i n an excellent position to do t h i s . Thus, i f the police discover two persons i n a drug using sit u a t i o n and arrest only one of them, the p o s s i b i l i t y i s recognized that the other may claim ownership of the drug i n court and have the case dismissed as a consequence. Narcotic enforcement o f f i c e r s regard such occasions as a waste of time and e f f o r t : " I f t h i s happens [ i . e . : i f somebody t e s t i f i e s under the Canada Evidence Act], then a l l the work we put into making the arrest and the time we spend i n court i s just wasted". On the other hand, i f both had been charged and one "copped out", i . e . , pleaded g u i l t y , the police would s t i l l have a conviction to t h e i r c r e d i t . One member of the drug squad commented as follows: "If we arrest three or four hypes f o r possession, one of them w i l l probably cop out. But that's better than not arresting them a l l and having one of them take the Act. At least we get one of them". This section has presented some data on the s o c i a l organization of police work and i t s relationship to o f f i c i a l s t a t i s t i c a l representations of "drug addiction". The police are not concerned with apprehending "drug addicts" but rather persons who v i o l a t e laws by "being i n possession of narcotics". However, those whom they apprehend come to be included i n o f f i c i a l "drug addiction s t a t i s t i c s " . In the course of structuring a work routine i n terms of p r a c t i c a l considerations, i . e . , selecting persons to follow on the grounds of ease of arrest, anticipated p u b l i c i t y of arrest, etc. and regarding the law i n p r a c t i c a l terms, the police produce an " o f f i c i a l " population of "drug addicts". Thus, o f f i c i a l s t a t i s t i c a l representations of "drug addiction" can only be understood i n these terms, and not i n terms of the medical-psychological-pharmacological d e f i n i t i o n offered by the W.H.O. - 50 -The next section discusses the manner i n which "drug addicts" are procedurally defined by the s t a f f members of a narcotic addiction treatment center i n Western City. A narcotic addiction treatment center; normal drug addicts Perhaps the most persistent controversy i n the l i t e r a t u r e of "drug addiction" i s the one r e l a t i n g to whether i t should be regarded as a "crime" or as a "disease". On one hand, there are those who see the drug user as a veteran moral outsider whose use of drugs i s only i n c i d e n t a l to the fact of his c r i m i n a l i t y . In these terms, an individual's use of drugs i s not seen as i n i t i a t i n g his separation from legitimacy, but merely enhancing i t . Central to t h i s argument, though, i s the notion that those who become addicted to drugs are responsible fo r t h e i r own state of a f f a i r s : His sickness was not contracted unintentionally but by design. Undoubtedly he knew that the possession of drugs was i l l e g a l and realized the demoralizing and d e b i l i t a t i n g effect that t h e i r use could have on the human body. Then, disregarding the obvious dangers, he started to use drugs i n direct opposition to the normas of society . . .7 In the early days drug abuse was mostly as i t i s almost e n t i r e l y today, a vice of the underworld or of delinquency which must be deliberately and v o l u n t a r i l y acquired by a person seeking a new pleasure, a new release, a new experience.8 On the other hand,- there are those who see the drug user as an e s s e n t i a l l y "sick" person whose use of drugs i s a "symptom" of a "disease" over which he had no control: - 51 -A l l the research done on drug addiction within the l a s t two generations indicates that addiction i s . . . a symptom of personality defects which, i f they did not lead to drug addiction, would lead to d i f f i c u l t i e s of other types.9 The decision of o f f i c i a l s to regard drug addiction either as a "crime" or as a "disease" has r e a l consequences for drug users: . . . those who espouse the disease theory of drug dependency tend to he determinists who advocate non-punitive handling; those who see men as responsible and s e l f - d i r e c t i n g , who see men as capable of foresight and self-controlthey are the advocates of punishment as a determent and of incarceration as the means to s e l f - c o r r e c t i o n . 1 0 The narcotic addiction treatment center that w i l l be discussed i n t h i s section o f f i c i a l l y supports the " i l l n e s s " d e f i n i t i o n of drug addiction. Its published l i t e r a t u r e deals with drug addiction wholly as ". . . a symptom of emotional disturbance" and suggests that since persons take drugs ". . . because of t h e i r anxiety-ridden or disturbed personalities", they should be viewed as ". . . sick persons (both i n mind and body) who require medical attention". The orientation to drug addiction as an " i l l n e s s " i s further evidenced by the manner i n which objects and events are "named", fo r example, the drug users who report to the center are referred to as "patients" (hence, "patients washroom", "patients coffee machine", "patients fund"); the s o c i a l work programs such persons enter into are called "treatment" or "therapy"; those who stop using drugs are said to be "cured". When drug users come to the center seeking "treatment", they follow a specified "treatment" routine. One part of this ~ 52 -section describes some of the general features of the "treatment" routine and i n doing so indicates how drug users are defined i n actual practice, as d i s t i n c t from the treatment center's "public" d e f i n i t i o n . The other part discusses the organizationally relevant notion of "normal drug addicts". a) "Treatment"_routines This treatment center i s distinguished by the f a c t that i t dispenses l i q u i d methadone, a synthetic opiate, to r e l i e v e any physical distress that the drug user may experience during "withdrawal" from his drug habit. Also, most drug users are assigned to s o c i a l workers or "counsellors". Each drug user coming to the center f o r treatment must submit a specimen of urine f o r laboratory analysis. In the case of new "patients", i . e . , those appearing at the center f o r the f i r s t time, and those whose f i l e s have been "re-opened" aft e r a period of absence, the purpose of the u r i n a l y s i s i s to e s t a b l i s h the quantitative and qualitative aspects of "addiction". Those who are attending the center on a regular basis are required to submit a urine specimen so that the laboratory can ascertain whether they are taking drugs other than those that have been prescribed to them. Establishing a person's addiction" by chemical means i s seen as necessary because i n the past non-addicted - 53 -persons had come to the center and obtained withdrawal medication either f o r a "kick" for themselves or to provide to drug-using friends; A s o c i a l worker at the treatment center said: "Now that we've got the lab we won't get these guys coming i n here, saying they're addicts and getting methadone f o r nothing. Some of them didn't need i t and just took i f for kicks or else gave to people they knew who were already coming here". Furthermore, of those who attend the treatment center on a regular basis, i t i s expected that some w i l l occasionally "supplement" t h e i r withdrawal medication by using l e g a l l y unavailable drugs: A s o c i a l worker said: "We had no idea how many (of the "patients") were f i x i n g on the side. We figured the number was quite high, knowing addicts, but now that we've got the lab, we'll know for sure". Thus "checking" on a "patient's" adherance to a treatment program i s seen as something that must be done. I f i t i s found that a "patient" i s not following the program, he i s not allowed to receive further treatment f o r a period of 30 days. When a "patient" gives a urine specimen, he i s "accompanied" to the lavatory by a s t a f f member (male or female as the case requires), hired to supervise such proceedings. The reason f o r requiring "patients" to provide a specimen under supervision i s to ensure that the urine they are supplying for laboratory analysis i s indeed their own: The c l i n i c a l d i r e c t o r said at a meeting that the "patients" had to be watched very c l o s e l y to make sure that they gave a specimen of t h e i r own urine. - 54 -He f e l t that some might bring bottles of other's urine with them and thus avoid detection of drug use. Prio r to the h i r i n g of these persons, another system of "checking" was planned. Although i t i s not known to most s t a f f members, the bathroom where urine specimens are given i s equipped with a "two-way mirror": A research worker who was present during the construction of the specimen lavatory told me that a two-way mirror had been i n s t a l l e d . He showed me where the "other side" of the mirror was located . . behind a small, locked door i n an alcove off the laboratory. He told me that "get up close" to the mirror i n the lavatory and by doing so I could see that i t had an unusual depth to i t . Later, I asked the chief lab technician what'was behind the small door. He said that he couldn't t e l l me because i t was "top secret". I asked him i f the lavatory was v i s i b l e through the door and i f i t did indeed conceal the "other side" of a two-way mirror. He replied that I could make up my own mind about i t but i f I wanted to know for sure I should ask the c l i n i c a l director . . . "he's got the only key to i t " . He added that even i f there was a mirror behind the door, i t wouldn't be used because people had been hire d to supervise the giving of specimens. The out-patient c l i n i c i s open from Monday to Friday; i t s hours of operation are 8.30 a.m. to noon, 1.00 p.m. to 4.30 p.m. A sign advises "patients" to telephone the in-patient c l i n i c f o r after-hours or emergency service. Theoretically, then, service i s available to "patients" at a l l times. In actual practice, however, this i s not the case; "patients" who request after-hours service are most often denied i t and regarded as "demanding". While I was at the in-patient c l i n i c during the evening, a drug user phoned, said he was very i l l and wanted to be admitted. The male nurse who answered the phone told him that nothing could - 55 -be done "at this time of the night", said "go to h e l l " , and hung up. Following t h i s , he said to me: "Jesus, some of these bloody addicts are demanding. They think they can c a l l you at any time of the night, just l i k e that, and get you to cow-tow to th e i r demands". Similarly, "patients" who are unable to pick up t h e i r medication during working hours are regarded and treated as "irresponsible": The receptionist told the person who was dispensing the medications that a "patient" had phoned i n to say that he had a job and would be unable to pick up his medication at the usual time. The "patient" wanted to know i f i t would be a l r i g h t f o r him to pick i t up at the in-patient c l i n i c that evening. The medication dispenser got on the phone and asked the "patient" who he thought he was and "what kind of a place do you think this i s , anyway?" F i n a l l y , he reluctantly agreed to l e t him pick up his medication at a l a t e r time. Afterwards, he remarked on the general "irresponsible nature" of drug addicts. To f a c i l i t a t e "cleaning up", the pharmacy closes at 4 . 0 0 p.m. Thus, "patients" who arrive a f t e r t h i s hour are not given t h e i r medication and are told to return "tomorrow": A "patient" came to the treatment center pharmacy just as i t was closing. He remakred that he was "just on time". The pharmacist's assistant informed him that he was not on time and that he couldn't have his medication because he was l a t e . At lunch-time, from noon to 1 .00 p.m., a female receptionist who handles incoming c a l l s , etc., i s often the only person at the treatment center. During this one hour period, the center i s locked and "patients" are not permitted to enter: they can often be seen s i t t i n g on tho steps waiting f o r the doors to re-open. On one occasion, the receptionist l e t a male "patient" into the center p r i o r to the o f f i c i a l re-opening hour. An executive of - 56 -the center returned from lunch early, saw the "patient", and subsequently had the receptionist "talked to" by the o f f i c e manager. The following i s an account of thi s incident : The receptionist told me that she was given a severe "talking to" by the o f f i c e manager because she had allowed a "patient" into the building before 1 .00; thus creating a s i t u a t i o n where she and the "patient" were the only two persons on the premises. She said "[The executive] said that I should know by now that these people are criminals and you never know what they are l i a b l e to do". On another occasion I arrived at the center half-an-hour before i t s o f f i c i a l opening hour of 5.30 and noticed a male "patient" s i t t i n g i n the waiting-room. A female s t a f f member who regularly arrived at work early, approached me and said she was "glad to see me" because "[the executive] doesn't l i k e the g i r l s to be alone when there's a male patient here. I didn't know -whether I should turn him out or what". The data presented thus f a r has i l l u s t r a t e d some of the routines and situations that drug users encounter when they come to the center seeking "treatment". What follows i s a discussion of the persons f o r whom those routines are constructed - - "normal drug addicts". b) Normal_drug_addicts A psyc h i a t r i s t employed by the treatment center noted that the drug users who appear f o r treatment at the center form a "stereotype": - 57 -"The group we are f a m i l i a r with at the [treatment center] form a stereotype and have many factors i n common which distinguish them from other addicts . . . " 1 2 In the course of routinely interviewing, examining and "treating" drug users, s t a f f members become fa m i l i a r with t h e i r " t y p i c a l features" and " t y p i c a l careers" and l i k e 1 3 Sudnow's public defenders, are able to provide detailed characterizations of the "normal case". The following i s taken from one of the center's publications and i s exemplary of the characterizations that members can give: "Let's take a b r i e f look at John Doc, Addict, Vancouver. He was born i n the East End during 1946 or 1947 . His father had returned from the war and he was the r e s u l t of the reunion. But during the war, his parents wore forced to go t h e i r separate ways, and a f t e r the war, there were no mutual interests and sharings to make the home atmosphere a happy one. The home was torn by s t r i f e , bickering and nagging. John quite often was the cause, severely chastised by his father, but over-protected by his mother. John did not love his mother, but she afforded a convenient means of support, both f i n a n c i a l and emotional, whenever John was i n trouble. His troubles started i n school, spread to the playground, the neighbourhood, and soon he was shunned by his former playmates and began to associate with a group of s i m i l a r rejects. Drinking, dancing, joy-rides, g i r l s etc., were t h e i r main forms of entertainment. Minor skirmishes with the p l l i c o were encountered. School was a bore and John dropped out as soon as i t was l e g a l l y allowed, not,.of course, without having played truant as often as possible. He eventually got a job as a car-hop; but he missed his friends for evening play, so he chucked this overboard. Besides, i t didn't pay enough. One evening, being thoroughly bored, he v i s i t e d some friends who had "turned on" a few weeks ago and were glowingly t e l l i n g him what the s t u f f did f o r them. At f i r s t John was a b i t reluctant•to try, but he then resolutely went half on a cap (e.g. paid $ 2.50) and stuck out h i s arm and got his f i r s t mainline f i x of heroin. I n i t i a l l y , he was v i o l e n t l y i l l up to the point of vomiting. But aft e r a few hours he f e l t very well. A l l was at peace, the boredom gone, nothing bothersome anymore, including h i s family. - 58 -$ 2.50 was not r e a l l y too much to pay f o r t h i s kind of pleasure. On from here he continued, f i r s t increasing his dosage from a half capsule to one capsule a day, then 2 capsules a day, etc. He had no job, indeed did not want to work, so the only means for getting money were i l l e g a l ones. Pretty soon he became a pretty good booster ( s h o p - l i f t e r ) , graduated to being a t h i e f and burglar. He also discovered the money making s k i l l s of certain g i r l s and since he was n i c e l y b u i l t and generally a good guy, the g i r l s were quite w i l l i n g to work f o r him. By t h i s time, ho had moved away from home and began l i v i n g with the g i r l s who "turned t r i c k s " f o r him, who i n turn, would eventually get apprehended for s o l i c i t i n g and pr o s t i t u t i n g (Vagrancy Charges). One day John was caught stealing and was apprehended. His f i r s t serious contact with the police brought him to j a i l . Since there were no drugs i n j a i l , he got v i o l e n t l y i l l and was t o l d that he was sick because he d i d not have drugs. And so tho f a c t of unpleasant experiences and not having a drug was firmly established i n h i s mind. John got a year, served half time and found a job out of town through his parole o f f i c e r . He worked quite w e l l at i t , but i t was a seasonal job and eventually he returned to the c i t y and h i s old associates. He had no money, no friends outside the addict sub-culture, and l i f e at home was s t i l l as unpleasant as ever. The association of unpleasantness - no drugs - grew stronger and stronger and soon John had to have the drug to make l i f e bearable. Pretty soon nothing but the drug mattered. The cycle of drugs - work - j a i l had started and with variations was repeated over a number of years xsrith the work periods becoming shorter and the j a i l sentences becoming longer. Not so long ago, John had just turned 25 or so, the s t u f f (heroin) was very poor f o r a while, but then by some mistake some good ( i . e . not too much adulterated) heroin came into town. John's dosage was quite high -6 capsules per day, 2 to a f i x . He t r i e d the new s t u f f , which was rather strong, but not knowing t h i s , John took an overdose and consequently died. His body was found i n a dark a l l e y on skid road. Not many mourned his death since h i s only associates were those involved i n drugs on skid road". 14 Those drug users f o r whom the s t a f f members can provide a characterization of " t y p i c a l features" or " t y p i c a l careers" s h a l l be called "normal addicts". The treatment - 59 -f a c i l i t i e s and practices outlined i n an e a r l i e r section are organized around the expectancy that individuals of this "type", i . e . , those with features and careers s i m i l a r to the above, w i l l constitute the majority of the treatment population. The following are some general features of "normal addicts". 1 5 1. Characterization of normal addicts can be given without r e f e r r i n g to the s p e c i f i c biographical d e t a i l s of a par t i c u l a r case that can be "remembered". Thus, when preparing a "John Doe case" l i k e the one cited above, a s t a f f member would not have to use an individual's f i l e material as a guide. Similarly, i f asked what drug addicts were " l i k e " a s t a f f member would begin his discourse with "drug addicts are l i k e . . " and not "Fred Smith was l i k e . . 11 2. Normal addicts are those which s t a f f members frequently encounter at the treatment center. Such persons are o f f i c i a l l y referred to as "criminal addicts" or "street addicts". While s t a f f members are able to give-general, "John Doe" characterizations of biographies, etc., of these persons, they are unable to provide material of a s i m i l a r form f o r "medical addicts" or "professional addicts". Generally, when asked what these l a t t e r categories are " l i k e " the s t a f f members w i l l either r e f e r to the d e t a i l s of a s p e c i f i c "remembered" case or c i t e a l i t e r a r y example. - 60 -3. Characterizations of normal addicts are s p e c i f i c to time and place. Thus, the treatment agency's s t a f f members are above to speak of what addicts are l i k e "here" as compared to what they are l i k e "there". For example, the difference between "New York addicts" and "Western City addicts" i s one that i s commonly noted: The majority of New York's addicts i f from s o c i a l and ethnic minority groups: most of Western City's addicts are white, anglo-saxon protestants. The majority of New York's addicts i s a product of the New York slums; the majority of Western City's addicts was not born i n Western C i t y but had congregated here from a l l over the country. New York addicts' age range i s narrower than Western C i t y ' s . Here, the white opium smoker changed morphinist - changed heroin addict (depending on the drug available) s t i l l exists i n small numbers past the age of 50. 16" Simil a r l y , s t a f f members of long tenure are able to speak of what addicts were l i k e "then" as compared to what they arc l i k e "now": "When I f i r s t came here, most of the patients were older, case-hardened types. Now they're a younger bunch". 4. Characterizations of normal addicts are structured to include biographical material that w i l l "account f o r " a person's use of drugs i n the terms of the currently operative "theory" of drug addiction that prevails i n the treatment center. Thus, when drug addiction i s conceived as a symptom or outward mani-fes t a t i o n of an underlying personality disorder, the characterization w i l l include the factors that the current state of knowledge relates to the production of that disorder, e.g., "broken home", "disorganized neighbourhood". - 61 -5. Characterizations of normal addicts include characterological assessments of the ind i v i d u a l which are unrelated to the conception of drug addiction as a "disease". Thus, while the normal addict can be talked about as a "sick" person, he can also be talked about as an "immoral" person, a person "who can't be trusted", etc., the following examples are i l l u s t r a t i v e of t h i s : An executive of the treatment center said that " . . . the addicts who come here are at the bottom of the bar r e l , morally. They don't think of the things that normal members of society do". A lab worker told me that an executive of the treatment center told him not to have anything to do with the addicts because they were a l l l i a r s and cheats and would t r y to use him to the i r advantage at every opportunity. A s o c i a l worker told me that two addicts were planning to get married. She added that she thought t h i s was funny because " . . . usually they don't bother with the for m a l i t i e s . They just shack up together and move on to the next one when they get bored of each other". The following characterization, offered by a chief of police, also i l l u s t r a t e s t h i s : "Some authorities w i l l t e l l you that drug addicts are nice people, but i t i s the police experience that t h i s i s f a r from being the case. We f i n d that an addict docs not care about h i s parents, his wife or children i f any, his best f r i e n d , h i s health, his cleanliness, nor his clothing and personal appearance. He does not care about society, nor does he lead a useful existence. He does not drink intoxicating liquor, and he does not get along well with others unless, of course, he i s under the influence of narcotics. He does not work, i n fac t w i l l not work unless he i s forced to do so to prevent being arrested f o r vagrancy. When an addict i s under the influence of drugs, his sense of well being i s such that work does not interest him i n any way, and then when he needs drugs, his physical condition i s such that his craving for drugs makes i t impossible - 62 -f o r him to concentrate f o r any length of time on any task, no matter how l i g h t or menial. The drug addict has no morals, no p r i n c i p l e s , and very seldom t e l l s the t r u t h . 1 7 The accuracy of the features attributed to "normal drug addicts" i s not an issue here. The point i s that the notion of what drug users are " l i k e " serves as a basis f o r structuring and organizing treatment a c t i v i t i e s . The "plans" f o r such a c t i v i t i e s as those described e a r l i e r have been formulated i n accordance with the expectation that a certain "type" of drug user w i l l routinely appear at the treatment center. In the introduction to this chapter i t was indicated that some features of the treatment routine may be altered i n the event that a "professional addict" (e.g. physician, nurse) came to the center seeking treatment. The following i s an example of some of the ways i n which the routine i s modified f o r a person who i s taken as other than a "normal drug addict". An 18 year old female drug user came to the treatment center accompanied by her parents. Apparently, either the g i r l or her parents had telephoned e a r l i e r and made an appointment to discuss a treatment program with the relevant o f f i c i a l s . The receptionist was aware of t h i s and promptly escorted the t r i o to the s t a f f l i b r a r y to wait. A s o c i a l worker and a research worker joined them there soon afterward. During t h e i r discussion other s t a f f members were not permitted to use the l i b r a r y . At the end of the discussion, I heard the s o c i a l worker d i s c r e e t l y inform the g i r l that she would be required to leave a urine sample. However, I l a t e r learned that she was allowed to do t h i s p r i v a t e l y rather than i n the company of the female s t a f f member generally assigned to supervise the procedure. Before the g i r l and her parents l e f t , the s o c i a l worker said that i n the future he would delive r - 63 -the medication to t h e i r home and do the necessary s o c i a l work while he was there. In other words, the g i r l would not have to come to the treatment center to receive treatment. Later, I asked the s o c i a l worker why these "special arrangements" were being made f o r the g i r l . He said? "She's just a kid from a nice family. She's gone a l i t t l e b i t wrong but s h e ' l l turn out okay. [ G i r l ' s f i r s t name] i s d i f f e r e n t from the type of person that usually comes here". In the above example, the g i r l was not "seen" as a "drug addict" and consequently was not required to follow the routines that "drug addicts" do. This section has examined some of the routines that take place i n a narcotic addiction treatment center and has i l l u s t r a t e d how drug users are procedurally defined by the center's s t a f f members. Drug addiction i s viewed as a medical-pharmacological-psychological state of a f f a i r s (indeed, doctors, medicine, and counselling are a l l part of the treatment routine) and drug addicts are referred to as "patients". However, "drug addicts" are primarily regarded i n moral terms and this i s seen as colouring the whole "treatment" process. This chapter has presented some data and discussion on o f f i c i a l s ' notions of what drug addicts "are". It was i l l u s t r a t e d that the police and treatment o f f i c i a l s only define "criminal" or "street" drug addicts as "drug addicts". In the procedural sense outlined i n t h i s chapter, the term "drug addict" cannot be used to describe a physician or - 64 -nurse who uses or i s addicted to a narcotic. In the case of the police, t h i s i s especially important. Their notion of what "drug addicts" "are" provides at least a p a r t i a l explanation f o r the r e l a t i v e l y small number of "reported cases of professional addiction". Furthermore, the investigative a c t i v i t i e s that are based on this notion, can be taken as "shaping" the nature of drug transactions. This w i l l become more evident i n the chapters to follow. - 65 -Footnotes 1. World Health Organization, Evaluation of Dependence- Producing Drugs (W.H.O. Technical Report Series No. 287), Geneva: World Health Organization, 1964, p.6. 2. World Health Organization, i b i d . , p. 4. 3. Under Canadian law, i t i s not a crime to he addicted to drugs. Consequently, the police are not concerned with "drug addicts" hut rather with "persons i n possession of narcotics", "persons t r a f f i c k i n g i n narcotics", etc. However, the persons the police arrest f o r these offences are "counted" as "drug addicts" merely because they have been arrested f o r narcotic v i o l a t i o n s . Whether or not they are "drug addicts" i n the terms of the d e f i n i t i o n proposed by the W.H.O. cannot be assumed merely by the fact of t h e i r arrest, as the above example indicates. Furthermore, persons arrested f o r offences involving narcotics are included i n s t a t i s t i c a l representations of "drug addiction" f o r a period of ten years following t h e i r arrest, even i f no further v i o l a t i o n s are reported. 4. For discussion of th i s topic see J . I . Kitsuse and A.V. Cicourel, "A Note on the Use of O f f i c i a l S t a t i s t i c s " , S ocial Problems, v o l . 11, no. 2 .(Fall 1963), pp. 131-139• Also see A.V. Cicourel, The Social Organization  of Juvenile Just i c e. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1968. 5. D i v i s i o n of Narcotic Control, " S t a t i s t i c s f o r 1967", (mimeo). 6. For information on the l e g a l framework within which U.S. narcotic enforcement o f f i c e r s work, see Jerome Skolnick, Justice Without T r i a l : Law Enforcement i n Democratic  Society, Now York: John Wiley and Sons (Science Editions), 1967. 7. A.M. Gronnan, quoted i n E.M. Schur, "Attitudes Towards Addicts", American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, v o l . 34, no. 1, 1964, p. 87. 8. John C. Cross, "Drug Abuse as a Law Enforcement Problem", i n Proceedings of the White House Conference on Narcotic  and Drug Abuse. Washington, D.C: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1962, p. 55. 9. David W. Maurer and Victor H. Vogel, Narcotics and Narcotic  Addiction (Third E d i t i o n ) , Springfield, I l l i n o i s : C.C. Thomas, 1967, p. 91 . - 66 -10. Richard H. Blum, "Drugs, Dangerous Behavior, and Social Policy", i n The- President's Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice, Task Force Report:  Narcotics and Drug Abuse. Washington, D.C: U.S. Government Printing Of f i c e , 1967, p. 68. 11. A l l quotations i n this paragraph are taken from the treatment center's "educational" publications. 12. This i s an excerpt from a c r i t i q u e of a research project. 13. See David Sudnow, "Normal Crimes: Sociological Features of the Penal Code i n a Public Defender Office", Social  Problems. Vol. 12, no. 3 (Winter 1965), pp. 255-276. 14. This i s taken from a treatment center publication. 15. The notion of tho "normal addict" i s taken from Sudnow's notion of the "normal crime". Sec David Sudnow, op. c i t . 16. This i s taken from a treatment center publication. 17. Walter Mulligan, i n Proceedings of the Special Committee  on the T r a f f i c i n Narcotic Drugs i n Canada. Ottawa: Queen's Printer, 1955, p. 86. CHAPTER 4  WHAT IS A DRUG ADDICT? PROCEDURAL DEFINITIONS I I ; DRUG USERS AND DRUG PEDDLERS The l a s t chapter examined how a "drug addict" i s procedurally defined by enforcement and treatment o f f i c i a l s . It was indicated that what a drug addict " i s " cannot be decided a p r i o r i i n medical, pharmacological or psychological terms; rather, the answer to the question "what i s a drug addict?" must consult the practices of those who are regularly involved i n a c t i v i t i e s related to "defining drug addicts". What a drug addict " i s " , i s further explored i n thi s chapter. This chapter discusses some aspects of the business of s e l l i n g drugs and i n doing so provides some data on the procedural sense i n which the term "drug addict" i s used by drug users and drug peddlers. Purchasing an i l l i c i t commodity i s i n many ways d i f f e r e n t from puchasing a l e g a l l y available one. In the case of drugs, 1 Blumer notes the following; It i s not possible to buy drugs i n the same way that one would buy shoes; one cannot just go into an open, available source and make a purchase. It i s necessary to know people who have drugs, and one must be able to establish connections with them i n order to obtain drugs for use. While knowledge of a source and an a b i l i t y to establish connections are indeed required to participate i n trans-actions involving i l l i c i t commodities and i n a sense d i f f e r e n -- 68 -t i a t e them from those involving l e g a l l y available ones, i t i s another point-of-difference that i s of interest here. Merely purchasing a l e g a l l y available commodity p generally defines one as a user of i t . However, i n the case of an i l l i c i t commodity there i s some data to indicate that one must be defined as a user before being able to purchase i t . In this regard, Skolnick has provided some data on an elaborate procedure that some prostitutes use to c e r t i f y that those who claim to be customers are indeed what they claim to be prior to being allowed to purchase sexual services. Similarly, Cavan^" notes that even information about where commercial sex can be purchased i s only made available to those who are able to c e r t i f y themselves as bonafide, "accredited" customers. In these cases, both " i l l i c i t sex" and "information about i l l i c i t sex" are seen as items which, i f given to the police, could be used as evidence to incriminate the person involved. Transactions involving l e g a l l y unavailable narcotics proceed i n a similar fashion to the " i l l i c i t sex" trans-actions outlined above: persons must be c e r t i f i e d as "drug users" prior to being able to purchase drugs. This i s discussed i n the second section of this chapter. The f i r s t section deals with "access to drugs" as a feature of the procedural d e f i n i t i o n of a drug user. Access to drugs Before a person can use or become addicted to l e g a l l y unavailable narcotics, he must f i r s t be able to obtain them. - 69 -In this regard, Cloward and Ohlin note the following: . . . drug addiction and p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n sub-cultures organized around the consumption of drugs presuppose that persons can secure access to drugs and knowledge about how to use them. While i t may be argued that -this i s i n a sense obvious, i t i s obvious as well that such drugs are not uniformly available to a l l who may wish to use them. Kessler counts access to drugs among the factors explaining both a person's use and non-use of them: ^ . . . a person . . . must f i r s t secure drugs before he can think of actually using them. Ready access to drugs i s a factor i n addiction; the average person does not have ready access to drugs. This i s the roadblock on the highway to addiction for many persons. Becker notes the l i m i t e d a v a i l a b i l i t y of marijuana and 7 relates i t to the drug's i l l e g a l i t y per se: A number of potent forces operate to control the use of marijuana i n this country. The act i s i l l e g a l and punishable by severe penalties. Its i l l e g a l i t y makes access to the drug d i f f i c u l t , placing immediate obstacles before anyone who wishes to use i t . . . Marijuana use i s limited . . . by laws making possession or sale of the drug i l l e g a l . This confines i t s d i s t r i b u t i o n to i l l i c i t sources not e a s i l y available to the ordinary person. In a recent study, Blumer noted that certain "types" Q of person were systematically denied access to drugs: . . . early adolescent rowdies are l a r g e l y excluded from getting close to or p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the "drug market" that exists to serve the early adolescent world . . . The explanation . . . i s that the rowdy, because of his reckless and irresponsible behaviour, i s f a r too great a r i s k to those who deal or s e l l i n this market and to most of those who consume drugs obtained through th i s market. Dealers and users would unnecessarily expose themselves to apprehension and arrest by t r a f f i c k i n g with the rowdy types. Thus, i t i s d i f f i c u l t for the rowdy to get hold of marijuana, even though other youngsters usually have a steady supply available . . . - 70 -Juveniles who are "rowdy" do not often have the opportunity to use marijuana. Very few adolescents i n the cool set w i l l r i s k "turning on a rowdy dude". His conspicuous behaviour and tendency toward violence i s the f i r s t indicator of who not to hang around. Young drug users i n the cool set do not merely shy away from rowdy youth; they are careful to reject conspicuous people and cautiously select t h e i r associates. Sim i l a r l y , Schasre notes that some former heroin users stopped using the drug because they were unable to obtain i t af t e r losing t h e i r i n i t i a l connection. They made systematic o but uniformly unsuccessful attempts to regain access: . . . The int e n s i t y of these quests varied from two or three inq u i r i e s over as many days, to f a i r l y extensive effo r t s l a s t i n g two or four weeks before "giving up" or "losing i n t e r e s t " . The two primary reasons c i t e d for f a i l i n g to procure the narcotics necessary to resume use were ignorance about who might constitute a new source of supply and the r e f u s a l of known narcotics pushers to s e l l to people who were too young. Access to drugs appears to be something that i s granted to persons. Granting a person access to drugs includes the act of s e l l i n g drugs to him, buying drugs for him, and providing him with information about where drugs can be purchased. As i t i s used i n this chapter, granting a person access to drugs by performing these acts i s the procedural aspect of defining him as a drug user. Decisions as to what persons s h a l l be granted access to drugs (and thus procedurally defined as drug users) are made by those already involved with them, i . e . : drug users and drug peddlers, and can be viewed as the re s u l t s of assessment procedures. In the l i g h t of the drug user's knowledge of both the evidence s u f f i c i e n t to - 71 ~ warrant an arrest for " t r a f f i c k i n g i n narcotics" or conspiracy to commit t h i s offence and the t y p i c a l means the police employ to gather th i s evidence, the accuracy of the assessment upon which a procedural d e f i n i t i o n i s based, i s seen as a matter of utmost importances undercover narcotics enforcement o f f i c e r s are believed to represent themselves as drug users i n order to be treated as such and the acts of "treating" or defining by procedure are seen as constituting evidence. Thus, i n terms of what drug users know about the law and i t s enforcement, to procedurally define a policeman as a drug user i s to make oneself l i a b l e to be arrested f o r " t r a f f i c k i n g " or "conspiracy" and as a consequence become e l i g i b l e f o r punishment that includes l i f e imprisonment as a maximum penalty. Hence, i n order to minimize the probability of providing evidence s u f f i c i e n t to warrant an arrest f o r " t r a f f i c k i n g i n narcotics" or "conspiracy" the drug user of drug peddler must avoid procedurally defining as drug users those who would prove to be other than drug users. That i s , drug users and drug peddlers must minimize the probability thats (a) information about where drugs can be purchased i s provided to persons other than, drug users; (b) drugs are purchases f o r persons other than drug users; (c) drugs are sold to persons other than drug users. Lindesmith has suggested that this i s done by only dealing 10 with addicts or those who are able to prove addictions To eliminate the p o s s i b i l i t y of s e l l i n g drugs d i r e c t l y to a narcotic agent, many pushers refuse to have business dealings with anyone who i s not an addict and they may require proof of addiction from a new customer. This formulation, of course, leaves unanswered the question of how one proves that one i s an "addict" or that one i s "addicted". On being known This section presents some data to suggest that when deciding who s h a l l be procedurally defined as a "drug user", those who are already involved with narcotics, i . e . : drug users and drug peddlers, refer to the following decisional rules: 1. Attend to the p o s s i b i l i t y that f o r exploitative reasons some persons i n the environment w i l l present themselves as something other than what they " r e a l l y " are: Hughie t o l d me that undercover policemen were frequently i n the cafe: "There's always bu l l s around t r y i n ' to get i n and score. 2. Do not treat appearances, presentations of s e l f , etc., as indicators of what a person " r e a l l y " i s : Hughie nodded i n the di r e c t i o n of a man s i t t i n g at the counter and said: "See that guy over there? I think he's a b u l l " . I rep l i e d that he didn't look much l i k e a policeman and Hughie said: "How can you t e l l what a b u l l looks l i k e ? I f a guy looked l i k e a b u l l he wouldn't get the job of coming down here, would he?" In the course of a conversation a young female drug user said that she thought I was a policeman. I asked her i f I looked l i k e one and she said: "You don't have to look l i k e a copy to be one. They come i n a l l shapes and s i z e s " . In the "early stages" of drug use, an ind i v i d u a l generally obtains his supply of narcotics from other drug users and not d i r e c t l y from a drug peddler: "I was using off and on f o r 6 months before I ever even seen a pusher". - 73 -To be able to purchase drugs "on his own", the neophyte must be "introduced" to the drug peddler by a person who i s already a user of drugs: When I wanted to start scoring f o r myself, the guy who'd been f i x i n g me took me down and introduced me to a couple of pushers. [Do you remember what he said when he introduced you?]. Just that I was a l r i g h t , t h a t 1 s a l l . Generally the drug peddler wants to know "for sure" that the neophyte has used drugs and that the "sponsor" has seen him do so: "And the pusher 111 say: 'Did you see him f i x ? ' , and 1 111 say: 1Yeah, I saw him.' And he'11 say: 1 Are you sure you saw him?', and I ' l l say: 'For Chirst's sake yes. I put the fuckin' needle right into his fuckin' arm. I to l d you he used with me and he's okay.' Once he knows that I've seen a guy use, then he feels better about the whole thing and he knows the guy's not a b u l l 'cause an undercover bull'11 never use. That's funckin' true. I f you see a new guy use then you can be funckin' sure he's not a b u l l . But i f I t e l l the pusher I scored for a guy and he took his share and buggered off, well h e ' l l just say to me: 'Fuck o f f , mac, you don't know what you're doin'.' I f a guy takes his share and wants to leave with i t . 'No, no, l e t ' s jimmy right now', I ' l l say. I mean, I gotta protect myself. I f a guy turns out to be a b u l l , then I'm set up for a conspiracy rap myself". The alleged "character" of the sponsor i s also important: Nancy a young drug user, entered the cafe i n the company of two bearded, long-haired males; they stood near the jukebox and she joined Don, a drug peddler who was s i t t i n g i n a booth near the rear of the cafe. The following conversation took place: Nancy: Those two guys at the front - - they're okay. I've fixed with them. Don: Fuck o f f , Nancy. I don't want anything to do with you or the assholes you hang around with. Nancy: They're okay, I . . . (cut off by Don). Don: Just fuck o f f , Nancy. Okay? Nancy returned to the two males at the front of the cafe. Don addressed the other occupants of the booth: "I wouldn't trust that b i t c h as f a r as I could fuokin' throw her". - 74 -In t h i s case, i t was rumoured that "Nancy" had, on a previous occasion, "sponsored" an undercover policeman into the drug world. Thus, i n order to he able to purchase narcotics a person must be "introduced" to a drug peddler by someone who i s known to be both a drug user and a person that can be trusted. A l l drug peddlers do not know a l l drug users and in cases where the l a t t e r i s unknown, there i s some d i f f i -culty i n making a purchase; [Did you ever 'try to score off a drug peddler that didn't know you?] Yeah, i n (name of cit y ) at the City Cafe. I went up to the guy - - he was s i t t i n g i n a booth - - and sat down across from him. I said: "I hear you got some s t u f f " . He said, "Yeah, I got some s t u f f , but I don't know you, so go away". I knew the guy behind the counter - - his name was Bobo. So I ca l l e d Bobo over. I said, "Bobo t e l l t his guy I'm a l r i g h t " . He said, "Sure, Lou's a l r i g h t " . Then I scored and l e f t . I f Bobo hadn't been around I don't know what I would've done. [Did you ever t r y to score o f f a drug peddler that didn't know you?] Well, I'm pretty well known down there and I know pretty well everybody. I've been . using since the 1 9 3 0 ' s . In a town where you're a stranger, i t ' s tough sometimes, but after you get to know a few people i n the places and you s p l i t a few caps, you can get somebody to stand up for you. [Do you have to get somebody to stand up f o r you?] Well, nobody's gonna s e l l to a stranger. God knows who you may be. [Did you ever t r y to score off a drug peddler that didn't know you?] Well, there's always somebody around that we both know so somebody can put him straight on me. You just don't score i f he doesn't know you. The following examples c l e a r l y i l l u s t r a t e t h i s : George, a drug peddler, was s i t t i n g next to me at the counter. In the hour I spent observing him he "put out" heroin to nine people. At one point, a middle-aged male approached him. The following conversation took place: - 75 -Male; Hey, George. Is that s t u f f y'got white? George; I don't know you and I don't know what the fuck you're t a l k i n 1 ahout (to himself) Oocksucker. George returned his attention to the newspaper he was reading p r i o r to the male's approach. Male: Hey, George. Gimme a piece of paper. I got nothin' to put i t i n . George: Nothin' to put what in? Puck off, for Christ's sake. The male shrugged h i s shoulders and l e f t the cafe. George turned to me and s a i d : "Who the fuck was he?" Several persons were standing near the rear of the cafe waiting f o r t h e i r turn to buy heroin from Frank and his partner. A negro male i n his late teens was at the end of the " l i n e " . The following conversation took place when he t r i e d to purchase a capsule from Frank: Negro: I want one. ' Frank: (to partner) Do you know thi s guy? Partner: No, do you? Negro: C'mon. Frank: (to negro) I don't know what the fuck you're t a l k i n ' about, sonny, (to partner) I f you don't know him he's g e t t i n ' fuck a l l from me. A person who i s not "known" to be a drug user i s not able to purchase narcotics, even though he may be able to present "physical evidence" of drug use such as scarred veins, etc.: [Did you ever try to score o f f a drug peddler that didn't know you?] Sure, I've t r i e d i t l o t s of times. [How have you made out?] Well, sometimes okay, sometimes not at a l l . I t r i e d i t just a few months ago up i n Edmonton at the City Hotel. I went up and tol d the guy I wanted to score and he said no, 'cause he didn't know me. I showed him my arms though and even that didn't do any good. [Did you ever t r y to score o f f a drug peddler that didn't know you?] Oh yeah, quite a few times. But there was always somebody around who knew me. I mean, I'd see a guy puttin' out and I'd go up and say: "Gimme one". He'd say, "I don't know you", and I'd say, "Well, a l o t of people around here do". He'd c a l l comebody over and say, "Hey, do you know thi s guy", and the guy'd say: "Oh yeah, he's Hugh what's - 76 -his name. He's a l r i g h t " . And then I'd score. But i f i t was i n a place where nobody knew me, well, I'd show him my arms, mention a few names of people I knew. But 99 out of 100 there'd be somebody around that I knew. If there wasn't though, i t ' s be pretty tough to score a cap, even i f I had a snake right up my arm. [Did you every t r y to score off a drug peddler that didn't know you?] Sure, once. We went down to the corner . . there was no st u f f i n [name of c i t y ] so we had to go into Western City - - and we saw a guy i n the Family puttin' out so we went and told him we wanted to score. He told us he didn't know who we were or what we were t a l k i n ' about. Said he'd never seen us before and he hadn't. We got a l l our s t a f f i n [name of c i t y ] and never had to go into Western Cit y . We showed him our arms but that didn't do any good either. I guess you can't r e a l l y blame a guy. The Narco Police w i l l do almost anything to set a guy up for a pinch. The data of appearance are not taken by drug peddlers as necessarily indicative of what a person " r e a l l y " i s . Furthermore, drug users r e a l i z e that those who do trust i t are l i k e l y to be arrested eventually: [Did you ever try to score o f f a pusher that didn't know you?] Oh yeah, l o t s of times. [How did you make out?] Usually pretty good. I mean I scored. But i f the guy wouldn't l e t me score 'cause he didn't know me I'd just say: "Well, f o r Christ's sake, I know almost everybody i n this fuckin' place. They can vouch f o r me". Or sometimes they aren't as careful  as usual. A guy might be sick himself and want to get  r i d of the l a s t few caps and get out so he can f i x .  Or he might think you "look" okay - - that's how come  they get caught, though, so you don't often got that.  They have to be pretty c a r e f u l . Who wants to do about  ten years on a t r a f f i c k i n g beef? The police are well aware that "being known" i s the only way an undercover o f f i c e r w i l l be able to purchase 11 1 ? drugs: 1 1» 1 c It i s a popular misconception that drug peddlers seek out and attempt to interest people i n the use of drugs. This i s d e f i n i t e l y not the case. Undoubtedly the drug t r a f f i c k e r - - would l i k e to increase his p r o f i t s by increasing h i s customers and there i s no question of - 77 -scruples or morals involved i n his lack of effort i n that d i r e c t i o n . But the drug peddler i s a shrewd, ammoral (sic) criminal, who, as they say, "plays a l l the angles". They know that the police are constantly attempting to penetrate t h e i r organization; dealing with newcomers i s risk y and would lead to rapid arrest. Therefore, they attempt to s e l l only to addicts who can be vouched f o r . This i s one of the facts that makes enforcement work d i f f i c u l t . One thing that has been learned from . . . undercover operations . . . i s that the street peddler . . . are most wary of dealing with newcomers and w i l l invariably supply him through a known addict u n t i l the newcomer has associated f o r some time with other known addicts. Consequently, the notion of "being known" i s included i n t h e i r "undercover" procedures; A federal police o f f i c e r who had previously worked "undercover" told me that before he went to the cafe he would learn the names and faces of the various drug peddlers so he could c a l l them by name. "That way," he said, "They'll think they know me from somewhere". Hence, to be able to puchase narcotics from a drug peddler, one must be known to him as a drug user. However, before a purchase can be made, a drug peddler must be located. As noted i n a l a t e r chapter, drug peddling i s not an especially v i s i b l e a c t i v i t y . Consequently, there i s often some confusion regarding exactly who i s s e l l i n g drugs at a given time. During the day, a drug peddler may be locatable simply because he i s one of few people i n the cafe s i t t i n g i n a booth. During the busy evening hours, though, locating the drug peddler may be problematic; A man entered the cafe ans asked the man next to me who the current drug peddler was. He sai d that he thought Woody "had" but upon approaching him found out that he didn't. He said: "Somebody's got, but I don't know who. I'm lookin' myself, l e t ' s ask around." - 78 -Information about drugs and where they can be purchased i s c a r e f u l l y managed? Al i c e and I had l e f t the cafe and were about f i f t y feet away from i t when a young male walking i n i t s d i r e c t i o n spoke to her: "Hey A l i c e . Is anybody there?" She said: "Joe was, but he sold out". The male did not hear A l i c e and indicated that he wanted the statement repeated. He had continued walking and by th i s time was outside normal voice range. A l i c e said: "Never mind, y o u ' l l see." She turned to me and said: "Does he think I'm gonna y e l l i t so everybody can hear?" As noted e a r l i e r , the act of providing an undercover policeman with information about where narcotics can be purchased i s regarded by drug users as constituting s u f f i c i e n t evidence to warrant arrest for "conspiracy to t r a f f i c narcotics". Consequently, only "known" persons who ask f o r such information are provided with i t . The following examples, and especially the f i n a l one, i l l u s t r a t e t h i s : A male approached me and sa i d : "Who's got?" I told him that I didn't know. He asked drug users the same question before he l e f t the cafe; neither supplied him with the information he requested, although both were aware that a drug peddler was operating i n the cafe at that time. Three teenage males were wandering around the cafe asking various people where they could obtain some drugs. Nobody directed than to the drug peddler who had been on the premises f o r a few hours. While I was standing near the jukebox with Freddie, a young drug user, a male entered the cafe, looked around, and addressed us: "Has anybody got?" Freddie said: "Nobody's got" and the male l e f t . I asked Freddie why he hadn't directed him to the drug peddler who was s i t t i n g i n a booth near the roar of the cafe and he r e p l i e d : "I don't know him". Furthermore, of those who request information regarding the location of narcotics some may be denied i t : - 79 -Prank purchased a capsule of heroin from Harry, the only drug peddler i n the cafe at that time, and returned to his seat, next to mine, at the counter. A middle-aged man approached him. E a r l i e r i n the evening, t h i s fellow had presented himself i n a manner which indicated his unfamiliarity with the workings of the drug world. He addressed Prank: "I'm looking f o r some dope. Have you got?" Prank re p l i e d : "Nope. Nobody's got . . . " After the man had l e f t , Prank turned to me and said: "These fuckin' bums". When a drug peddler employs a "stoorer" to "advertise" his l o c a t i o n to prospective c l i e n t s , the steerer gives this information only to those he recognizes as drug users: A regular drug peddler had employed Hughie to "steer" fo r him. Hughie's job was to stand outside the cafe and inform prospective customers that a pusher was inside. This information i s t y p i c a l l y conveyed by using the phrase "Are you lookin'?" as a greeting. He greeted the people passing by i n thi s fashion and when he got an affirmative response he escorted the person to the drug peddler. Occasionally, Hughie would leave the front of the cafe, walk toward an approaching person, greet him and, i f need be, direct him to the pusher. At one point he started to do t h i s , got halfway, and returned. He said to me: "Fuck me. I almost asked that cocksucker i f he was lookin' and I don't know him. Holy s h i t . He could've been a b u l l or anybody". When you're steering - - well, say you go into the Family and you're a hype, the pusher's down i n the booth with the s t u f f and I'm standin' up at the front by the door. I'm steerin' so as soon as I see you comin' by I say, "Hey, i f you're lookin', look over there at so-and-so (the pusher). Just l i k e a front man. You gotta be careful to only steer guys that you recognize as hypes, though. D e f i n i t e l y . A l o t of times b u l l s that you don't know walk i n . You know, undercover guys. I f you steer a cop, i t ' s l i g h t s out. Thus, information about where drugs can be purchased i s only given to those who are known to be drug users. Further-more, those who are known not to be drug users, are not expected to be i n possession of any information regarding drugs: - 80 -Robbie joined me i n a booth. After an exchange of greetings she said: "Are there any bombers i n here Kenny?" I told her that I didn't know and she rep l i e d : "Oh yeah, you don't use anything, do you". Hughie entered the cafe, looked around, and joined me at the counter. He told me he didn't have enough money to score and i n a thinking-aloud fashion said: "I wonder i f anybody's got any bombs?" I told him that nobody did; he gave me a rather puzzled look and asked how I knew. I replied that a few minutes e a r l i e r I had heard someone else get a negative answer to the same question. He said: "Christ, I was wondering how you'd know, not being a user". Nor can such persons legitimately request the provision of this information: I said to Robbie: "Who's got?" She replied: "What do you want to know for? You don't use". When a drug user i s unable to purchase narcotics because the drug peddler does not "know" him, he may attempt to get another user to "score" f o r him. However, as noted above, purchasing heroin for an undercover o f f i c e r i s taken as s u f f i c i e n t grounds to warrant an arrest f o r " t r a f f i c k i n g i n narcotics". Consequently, drug users w i l l only purchase narcotics f o r those whom they know are drug users: [Have you ever scored f o r anybody you didn't know?] No, I wouldn't do a stupid thing l i k e that. You'd have to be an asshole. That's a good way to get your-s e l f pinched, i f the guy happens to be a narco b u l l . And i f you don't know the guy, how do you know whether or not he's a bull? However, there are circumstances when a drug user w i l l purchase narcotics f o r someone he doesn't know. Generally, this can happen when a drug user i s "sick" and i s w i l l i n g to take a chance to get a portion of the drug for himself. After purchasing, however, attempts are made to make sure the person i s a user: - 81 -[Have you ever scored f o r anybody you didn't know?] Yeah, once when I was r e a l l y sick. But when I do that I always make sure I f i x with the guy so I ' l l know he's not a b u l l . Drug users who are known by drug peddlers to be indiscrim-inate i n t h e i r dealings with unknown" persons often have d i f f i c u l t y making purchases; A male who appeared to be i n his early s i x t i e s joined a drug peddler and myself i n a booth. The following conversation took place. Male: Gimme one, Jake. Drug peddler: Get outa here old man. After the male had l e f t the booth, the drug peddler turned to me and said ; "That old bugger would score fo r anybody that asked him. I wouldn't have anything to do with a guy l i k e that. It's not worth the r i s k . " William Burroughs (writing under the pseudonym 1 3 "William Lee") provides a l i t e r a r y example of t h i s : I knew . . . that he was scoring for other people, but I did not know who they were. I should have known better than to have dealings with anybody l i k e Nick, who was sick and broke a l l the time and therefore l i a b l e to pick up anybody's money. Some people need an intermediary to score f o r them because they are strangers i n town or because they have not been on junk long enough to get acquainted. But the pusher has reason to be wary of people who send someone else to score. By and large, the reason a man can't score i s because he i s known to be "wrong". So he sends someone else to score who may not be "wrong" himself, but simply dosparate for junk. Male: I got the money. See (displays a ten-d o l l a r b i l l and a f i v e - d o l l a r b i l l ) . Drug peddler: I don't give a shit what you've got. Fuck o f f . This chapter has presented some data regarding the procedural d e f i n i t i o n of a drug user and the information which must be present before a person w i l l be treated as a - 32 -"drug user" by other drug users and drug peddlers. It was suggested that i n thi s context what a drug user " i s " i s only meaningful i n a procedural sense; a drug user i s a person who i s able to secure access to drugs, i . e . ; he i s able to buy drugs or have drugs bought f o r him, and able to obtain information about where drugs can be purchased. The drug user's knowledge of the evidence s u f f i c i e n t to warrant an arrest f o r " t r a f f i c k i n g " or "conspirary" creates a s i t u a t i o n where only those who are "known" to be drug users are procedurally defined as such. To be "known" as a drug user means that a legitimate, trustable drug user can t e s t i f y as to the legitimacy of the status you claim. 14 This could be called an "accreditation procedure". The next chapter discusses the drug user's f o l k or commonsense knowledge of law enforcement methods. In i t s terms the use of the accreditation procedure i s seen as a necessary feature of drug transactions. - 83 -Footnotes 1. Herbert Blumer, Add Center Project F i n a l Report; The  World of Youthful Drug Use. Berkeley; University of C a l i f o r n i a School of Criminology, 1967, p. 4 8 . 2 . I am gratef u l to Roy Turner for c a l l i n g my attention to this point. 3 . Jerome Skolnick, Justice Without T r i a l : Law Enforcement  i n Democratic Society. New York: John Wiley and Sons (Science Editions), 1967,pp.97-98. 4 . Sherri Cavan, Liquor Licence: An Ethnography of Bar Behavior. New York: Aldino, 1966, p. 176. 5 . Richard A. Cloward and Lloyd E. Ohlin, Delinquency and  Opportunity: A Theory of Delinquent Gangs. New York: Free Press of Glencoe, 1960, p. 152. 6. William F. Kessler, "Tho Road to Drug Use", i n Paul B. Weston (ed.), Narcotics. U.S.A. New York: Greenberg, 1952, p. 27. 7 . Howard S. Becker, "Marihuana and Social Control", i n David Solomon (ed.), The Marihuana Papers. New York: Basic Books, 1965 . 8 . Herbert Blumer, op. c i t . 9 . Robert Schasre, "Cessation Patterns among Neophyte Heroin Users", International Journal of the Addictions, Vol. 1, No. 2 , 1966. 10 . Alfred R. Lindesmith, The Addict and The Law. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1965. 11 . Howard F. Price, Proceedings of the Special Committee on  the' T r a f f i c i n Narcotic Drugs i n Canada. Ottawa: Queen's Printer, 1955, p. 3 2 3 . 12 . Edward Brakefield-Moore, i n i b i d . . p. 511 . 1 3 . William Lee, Junkie. New York: Ace Books, 1953, p. 5 2 . 14. This term i s taken from Sherri Cavan, op. c i t . CHAPTER 5  NORMAL DRUG ARRESTS;  COMMONSENSE KNOWLEDGE OF POLICE PROCEDURES One of the outcomes of the "labeling" theory of 1 deviance has been an interest i n treating the rates of deviant behaviour as data produced by o f f i c i a l s and subsequently explaining t h i s data by examining the methodology that was 2 employed i n i t s production. The area of "victimless crimes" appears to be a f e r t i l e f i e l d f o r investigations of this type. The nature of victimless crimes, i . e . , those involving the sale of a l e g a l l y unavailable commodity to a w i l l i n g customer who has no interest i n becoming a complainant, requires that a l l investigative a c t i v i t i e s leading to arrests be i n i t i a t e d by the poli c e . Furthermore, arrests f o r victimless crimes are seldom random, chance "happenings"; more often, they are planned, systematically -executed "events", i . e . , l i t e r a l l y "produced" by the police through the employment of some form of enforcement strategy. Knowledge of "how a person comes to be arrested", i . e . , the production techniques the police use, could provide the s o c i o l o g i s t with valuable alternatives to theories of deviance that treat police procedures as non-problematic. However, while an understanding of the arrest producing process i s . a matter of general theoret i c a l concern to soci o l o g i s t s , i t i s a matter of immense p r a c t i c a l concern to another category of persons - - those who are, by virtue of t h e i r engagement i n rule-breaking a c t i v i t i e s on - 85 -a regular basis, the focus of the arrest producing process. Bookies, prostitutes, bootleggers, and drug users are obvious examples. Their concern with the process i s f o r "purposes of l i v i n g " , i . e . , carrying on with l i f e - as usual i n a "normal", a l b e i t "deviant", fashion. The point here i s that one of the q u a l i f i c a t i o n s f o r the continual, regular performance of a deviant role i s an understanding of the s p e c i f i c law enforcement strategies currently being employed. The l a s t chapter i l l u s t r a t e d how the drug user's expectation that some of those who desire to purchase drugs may bo policemen creates a s i t u a t i o n wherein drugs are only made available to those who aro properly c e r t i f i e d as drug users. This i s c l e a r l y a result of the drug user's knowledge of the typo of evidence s u f f i c i e n t to warrant an arrest for " t r a f f i c k i n g i n narcotics" and the methods the police employ to obtain this evidence. The task of this chapter i s the exposition of the drug user's commonsense knowledge of s u f f i c i e n t evidence and police methods of obtaining i t f o r two offences: " t r a f f i c k i n g i n narcotics" and "possession of narcotics". The point i s developed that drug users expect arrests f o r these offences to occur i n a certain s p e c i f i a b l e manner and i n accordance with a predictable pattern. Normal drug arrests Participants i n a community organized around the pursuit and consumption of heroin frequently witness, hear - 86 -accounts of, or are involved i n arrests f o r "possession of narcotics" and, to a somewhat lesser extent, " t r a f f i c k i n g i n narcotics". As such, they become fam i l i a r with both the nature of the evidence s u f f i c i e n t to warrant arrests fo r these offences and the t y p i c a l methods the police employ to obtain this evidence; consequently, drug users, when required, are able to provide characterizations relevant to these topics. For example, the following are exemplary of the drug user's notion of the types of evidence that the police can obtain to lay charges of "possession" and " t r a f f i c k i n g " respectively: Most guys who get pinched f o r possession get caught with a cap. But they can pinch you for anything that analyzes. I t doesn't matter what i t i s - -a machine, a spoon, or what. Guys get n a i l e d f o r t r a f f i c k i n g by puttin' for a b u l l . . . But i f there's a b u l l around and you so much as t e l l him who's got, you're unable to get yourself pinched f o r conspiracy. Thus, according to the drug user's characterization, possession of a tangible object which i s seen by the police as something that can bo chemically analyzed to show the presence of heroin i s s u f f i c i e n t evidence to warrant an arrest foe "possession of narcotics". The evidence that can be obtained to lay a charge of " t r a f f i c k i n g i n narcotics" or "conspiracy to t r a f f i c i n narcotics" can be either tangible, i . e . , drugs, or intangible, i . e . , information about where drugs can be purchased. The methods the police t y p i c a l l y -employ to obtain evidence of a person's "possession of narcotics" are characterized as follows: - 87 -They've got a guy s i t t i n ' up i n that fuckin' mission across from the Family. Sometimes you can see him movin' around. He sees when ya score and t e l l s the rest of the narco h u l l s over the walkie-talkie. They follow you to where you're goin' to f i x , then wait for you to star t to cook up. Then bam - - down comes the fuckin' door and about a dozen of the cocksuckers pour i h af t e r you . . . Every time you score at the Family you're takin' the chance of get t i n ' followed when ya leave. The b u l l s are across the street watchin' i t with a telescope. When ya leave the place they go into action with t h e i r fuckin' walkie-talkies. Sometimes t h e y ' l l jump you right on the street, but usually they wait u n t i l you get to where you're goin' to f i x . Then they can beat the shit out of you without anybody seein' i t . . . They'll follow you there and knock the door down just when you're gettin' ready to f i x . They're always watching the Family Cafe 'cause they know that's where most everybody scores. They'll t r y and follow you when you score and then bust i n when you've got the st u f f out. The drug user i s also able to provide s i m i l a r l y detailed characterizations of the procedures involved i n obtaining the evidence s u f f i c i e n t to warrant an arrest f o r " t r a f f i c k i n g i n narcotics". What they do i s they get a young b u l l and f i l l him i n about dope - - a l l the words and terms. Things l i k e that. Then he comes down and starts hangin' around the Family. He's i n p l a i n clothes and a l l and he looks just l i k e an ordinary guy, so how's anybody gonna know he's a bul l ? . . Pretty soon h e ' l l t r y and get people to put out for him and as soon as that happens he's making pinches. They send guys down to pass themselves o f f as fiends. The undercover guy'11 t r y to get i n with people so he can score . . . As soon as somebody puts out to him though, he's pinched. H e ' l l get as many people to put out to him as he can and then t h e r e ' l l be a big roundup of a l l the guys that he's got pinched f o r t r a f f i c k i n g . Sometimes an undercover guy'11 be down there f o r months, l i k e Smith was l a s t year. For these events the drug user i s able to provide a " t y p i c a l " enforcement strategy, i . e . , one that i s usually - 88 -employed. Por example, the police are seen as producing arrests f o r "possession of narcotics" by observing the arrestee purchase heroin i n the Family Cafe, following him to the place he has chosen to administer the drug to him-s e l f , and either "jumping" him en route or forcing entry at a point i n time when the evidence can be c l e a r l y connected with him. The production of an arrest f o r " t r a f f i c k i n g i n narcotics" i s seen as involving the entrapment of the arrestee by an unidentifiable "undercover" policeman who employs an "addict-like" presentational strategy i n order to purchase the necessary evidence. These are normal drug arrests: those whose t y p i c a l features, i . e . , the nature of s u f f i c i e n t evidence and the methods the police use to obtain i t , are known by the drug 3 user. The following are some general characteristics of normal drug arrests: 1. Normal drug arrests are produced by police procedures that the drug user i s able to characterize i n terms of the general offence category instead on only i n terms of s p e c i f i c past arrests that can be remembered. Thus, the drug user can describe how persons come to.be arrested fo r "possession of narcotics" or " t r a f f i c k i n g i n narcotics"; i n characterizing the means the police employ to produce normal drug arrests he does not fin d i t necessary to invoke data on pa r t i c u l a r arrests, e.g.: "This i s the way Charlie was pinched", or "This i s the - 89 -way they got George". 2. The police procedures involved i n the production of normal drug arrests are s p e c i f i c to the time period and geographical region i n which the drug user i s currently l i v i n g . Thus, older drug users are able to speak of "how the police used to operate" i n comparison with how they operate "now": Most guys around now don't know what i t used to be l i k e before they started r e a l l y cracking down. It used to be that you could just score a cap of dope and go home and f i x with no worries. Its not l i k e that now . . . A l o t of things have changed since they started usin' a l l that fuckin 1 electronic equipment to help them pinch guys. They're got everything goin' f o r them now, y'know. The b u l l s work d i f f e r e n t now than they d i d when I f i r s t started using. Si m i l a r l y , drug users who have v i s i t e d or l i v e d i n other locales are able to compare "how the police operate "there" with how they operate "here": There's no comparison between here and the States. Por one thing there's di f f e r e n t laws. In tho States the b u l l s gotta have a search warrant before they can bust i n or search you. Here they can pretty well do what they fuckin' please any time they want to. I've heard that i n the east they leave the addicts alone and mainly go a f t e r the guys who are puttin' out. The cops here have had a l o t of experience with fiends. You go to some place l i k e [name] where they haven't seen too many junkies and they're not as wise. They don't have a narco squad up i n [name]. The ordinary bulls know that there's dope around but they don't know what to do about i t . - 90 -3. Normal drug arrests are for offences which the drug user frequently encounters, i . e . , hears about or i s involved i n . Thus, while the drug user i s able to give detailed descriptions of the t y p i c a l ways that people come to be arrested f o r frequently occurring violations such as "possession of narcotics" or " t r a f f i c k i n g i n narcotics", he i s unable to provide a similar characterization f o r an infrequently occurring v i o l a t i o n l i k e "importing narcotics". With regard to this offence, one drug user noted the following: Me and another guy made a run to Mexico once. I was scared s h i t l e s s a l l the way. I'd never do i t again, I don't think . . . You never know what those customs b u l l s are l i a b l e to do. Furthermore, when a drug user i s able to describe the manner i n which a person comes to be arrested for an offence which i s infrequently encountered, he w i l l do so i n terms of a pa r t i c u l a r "remembered" incident; George got i t f o r smuggling junk once. I think somebody i n Mexico tipped the bulls o f f and they got him at the border. One of the ways s o c i a l actors "solve" the problem of s o c i a l order i s by constructing and employing categorical types: types of people, situations, etc. Through the process of t y p i f i c a t i o n the actor introduces structure into h i s s o c i a l l i f e and makes orderly interaction possible. The concern of this chapter was with t y p i f i c a t i o n s of events. They are events i n s o c i a l l i f e that are known i n - 91 -t h e i r t y p i c a l i t y and hence are "explained" merely by "naming" them. Included i n the member's knowledge of t y p i c a l events i s some notion of how they come to be, i . e . the circumstances that lead up to them. It was suggested i n thi s chapter that f o r drug users, the drug arrest has the character of a t y p i c a l event. As such, i t w i l l be i l l u s t r a t e d i n a l a t e r chapter that drug users can engage i n orderly conversations about these events i n a condensed, parsimonious fashion: the de t a i l s of occurrence, i . e . , "how i t happened", etc., need not be speci f i e d on every occasion because the drug user i s i n possession of such knowledge i n i t s t y p i c a l or "normal" form. The next chapter deals with the a r t i c u l a t i o n i n actual practice of the drug user's notion of the normal arrest f o r "possession of narcotics". - 92 -Footnotes 1. For the o r i g i n a l statement of t h i s perspective, see Edwin M. Lemert, Social Pathology. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1951. Also see Howard S. Becker, Outsiders: Studies i n the  Sociology of Deviance. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1963; Howard S. Becker (ed.), The Other Side: Perspectives  on Deviance. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1964. 2. For a general statement, see J . I . Kitsuse and A.V. Cicourel, "A Note on the Use of O f f i c i a l S t a t i s t i c s " , Social Problems. Vol. 11, No. 2 ( F a l l 1963), pp. 131-139. Also see A.V. Cicourel, The Social Organisation of Juvenile  J u s t i c e . New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1968; David Sudnow, "Normal Crimes: Sociological Features of the Penal Code i n a Public Defender Of f i c e " , Social Problems. Vol. 12, No. 3 (Winter 1965), pp. 255-276. 3. The notion of the normal drug arrest i s based on Sudnow's notion of the "normal crime". See D. Sudnow, i b i d . CHAPTER 6 METHODS IH USE POR MINIMIZING THE RISE OF ARREST;  POSSESSION OF NARCOTICS In the l a s t chapter i s was noted that drug users have a certain "folk" or "commonsense" knowledge of the methods the police employ to produce drug arrests and are able to provide characterizations of these methods i n t h e i r t y p i c a l , "normal" form/ The accuracy of these t y p i f i c a t i o n s i s not an issue here. The point i s that this knowledge of the t y p i c a l manners i n which people come to be arrested constitutes the basic conceptual equipment that the drug user employes i n organizing and interpreting many of the everyday s o c i a l scenes that he participates i n and sees. Cicourel has noted that "how actors define situations as 'real' suggests how they 'prepare' the scene for further 1 inference and action". This chapter reports on how drug users "prepare" or "construct" a scene i n accordance with t h e i r knowledge of the procedures involved i n the production of the normal arrest f o r "possession of narcotics". According to the drug user's characterization, possession of a tangible object which the police assume can be chemically analyzed to show the presence of heroin i s s u f f i c i e n t evidence to warrant an arrest f o r possession of narcotics. The drug user's characterization of the method the police employ to produce normal arrests f o r the possession of narcotics i s as follows: The police (a) observe the drug - 94 -user purchasing heroin i n the Family Cafe, (b) follow him when he leaves with the drug i n hi s possession, and (c) either (1) stop and search him en route to the place he has chosen to administer the drug to himself, or (2) wait u n t i l he gets there and force entry at a point i n time when the evidence can be c l e a r l y connected with him. Hence, the drug user's problem i s one consisting mainly of being regularly i n possession of narcotics without having the police apprehend him with them. The p r a c t i c a l techniques In the terms of the drug user's t y p i f i c a t i o n , police observation of a heroin transaction i s the i n i t i a l event i n a series of events that could lead to arrest f o r the possession of narcotics. The Family Cafe i s regarded as a setting that i s being continually observed by the police; as such, a certain public character i s attributed to the drug-related a c t i v i t i e s that take place within i t . One drug user commented as follows; Scoring i n the Family i s l i k e scoring i n a glass cage. The bulls are always watchin 1 the place. They even had T.V. cameras up there one time so they could s i t back i n the o f f i c e and see what's goin' on. Hence, the drug user i s a s o c i a l actor i n the l i t e r a l sense of the term; much of what takes place i n the cafe has the character of a performance being played to an audience enforcement o f f i c i a l s . The drug user i s concerned to present an appearance that w i l l not provide the police with information that w i l l make him a candidate f o r being - 95 -followed. As such, he i s concerned with presenting what might he called a "normal appearance". This i s especially evident a f t e r the drug user has purchased heroin and l e f t the cafe i n possession of i t ; Freddie continued with h i s depiction of how he would go about getting arrested; "Then I'd go outside and look back and forth up and down the street. Like I was nervous. Then just to make sure they saw me, I'd run. They'd figure I had junk f o r sure and follow me". As Robbie and I were leaving, the front of the cafe she said; "Don't look up there l i k e that. The fuckers are l i a b l e to think we've got". Furthermore, there are sanctions available for those who are unable or unwilling to present this appearance: In the course of a conversation, Jake mentioned that he had recently gone h a l f with Mary, but would "never do i t again". I asked him why and he said: "She was so fuckin' nervous i t s lucky the cops didn't pick up out f o r havin' junk right away". Freddie nodded i n the d i r e c t i o n of a young man standing near the juke box and told me that he was ". . . a bad type to have around because he thinks junk i s a big thing and plays the man when he's got i t " . However, the apparently successful presentation of a "normal" appearance i s not taken as constituting a guarantee that one has not been selected as the subject of an investigation intended to produce an arrest f o r a narcotics v i o l a t i o n : i t i s the a r t i c u l a t i o n of only one element of the t y p i f i c a t i o n and serves only as a means to minimize the probability of selection. The a c t i v i t i e s that the drug user routinely performs following h i s departure from the cafe are based on the assumption that he indeed has been selected and are i n accordance with his knowledge of the - 96 -structure of p o s s i b i l i t y . For example, after leaving the cafe the drug user attends to that portion of the t y p i f i c a t i o n that says he may be followed to the location he has chosen to administer the drug to himself. A comment from a t a x i driver working i n the area around the Family 2 Cafe i s relevant here; Whenever I get dope fiends i n the car they act l i k e they're scared s h i t l e s s . They'll get i n and keep on lookin' around behind a l l the time. You'll go by a car with the parking l i g h t s on and one of them'11 say "there they are, there they are". They're suspicious of everything they see. The procedural aspect of this element of the t y p i f i c a t i o n involves the taking of a non-direct, devious route to the destination chosen; Freddie t o l d me that i t had cost him four d o l l a r s to take a t a x i from the Family Cafe to his home. He added; "It usually only comes to about a buck seventy-five but I had junk so I had to get the driver to wheel around a b i t . A t a x i d r i v e r told me that he often picked up fares from the Family Cafe. Many of these, he said, were " . . . dope fiends goin' somewhere to shoot them-selves with the s t u f f " . He commented as follows: "They always think the cops are after them. You'll be d r i v i n g along and one of them'11 say 'turn up here', or 'go down thi s a l l e y ' or 'stop here and turn around 1. It's enough to drive you nuts". A t a x i driver commented as follows: "I stay right away from Zone 5 ( i . e . the t a x i stand located near the Family Cafe). You get junkies comin' out of that Family Cafe i n you cab and you're just asking f o r trouble. They want you to do a l l kinds of fancy driving to keep ahead of the cops". However, regardless of whether the heroin-possessing in d i v i d u a l proceeds to his destination on foot or i n an automobile, he attends to the element of the t y p i f i c a t i o n that says the police may stop and search him en route. That - 97 -this p o s s i b i l i t y i s taken into account i s c l e a r l y indicated by the practices that the drug user regularly and routinely follows immediately a f t e r the purchase of a capsule of heroin: Six persons purchased heroin from the drug peddler during the half-hour I spent with him . . . Bach customer's post-purchase behaviour followed a ch a r a c t e r i s t i c pattern: a f t e r receiving the capsule, the drug user would place i t i n a small piece of s i l v e r f o i l paper, r o l l the two together i n h i s hands, and put the small package i n his mouth. This procedure was followed i n each case. These practices of "wrapping" and "mouthing" take place following every heroin purchase that occurs i n the Family Cafe and are independent of time of day, day of week, or reported volume of police a c t i v i t y . One drug user commented on them as follows: "It's a l l part of scoring a cap of dope". That the drug user i s expected to perform these a f t e r -purchase a c t i v i t i e s on a regular basis i s evidenced by the preparations made by the drug peddler. For example, drug peddlers often anticipate t h e i r customers needs and keep a supply of s i l v e r f o i l "wrappers" on hand: George, a drug peddler, had torn the s i l v e r f o i l l i n e r of a cigarette package into small square pieces and placed them underneath the remote control jukebox on the counter i n front hof him. The drug peddler came to the counter and addressed the woman who was s i t t i n g two stools away from me: "Mary, have you got any s i l v e r ? " She gave him the s i l v e r f o i l l i n e r from her cigarette package. He returned to his booth and tore the paper into small pieces; these were placed under the rim of an ashtray. Or, on occasion they may provide "pre-wrapped" capsules: Harry had scored and returned to the counter. He told me that George was s e l l i n g capsules that were already wrapped i n s i l v e r paper. - 98 -Freddie asked Jake, a drug peddler, wiry he didn't wrap the capsules i n s i l v e r paper as he had done i n the past. Drug peddTxrs employ a similar technique. Their supply of drugs i s secreted i n the mouth i n a small, water tig h t , knotted balloon. At the point of sale, the drug peddler removes the balloon from h i s mouth, unties the knot, and extracts the desired number of capsules. Twenty-five i s the usual number of capsules carried. Such a package i s approximately one inch i n diameter. The s i l v e r f o i l paper (or the balloon) serves the function of sealing the heroin-containing g e l a t i n capsule(s) i n an impermeable, water-tight package; thus i t can be removed from the mouth at an appropriate time and unwrapped int a c t , ready to use (or s e l l ) . Hughie asked; "Have you ever noticed how many dope fiends smoke Export cigarettes?" I replied that I hadn't and he said: "They do 'cause they've got the only r e a l s i l v e r paper. It's best for keepin 1 the cap dry". By placing the "prepared" capsule i n his mouth, the drug user gives himself the opportunity to transform an incrim-inating s i t u a t i o n into a no-case s i t u a t i o n . He does this merely by swallowing the capsule, i . e . , "destroying" the evidence. In an interview, John told me that he had narrowly escaped being arrested the evening before. He said: "Yeah, I just got r t down i n time before they grabbed me". Thus, i f the drug carrying individual encounters the police en route to his destination, he is able to prevent them from obtaining evidence to warrant an arrest. - 99 -I f the drug user i s unable to swallow the capsule or i f he f e e l s he i s unable to swallow i t , he w i l l e n l i s t the assistance of another; Two lesbians s i t t i n g near me at the counter had decided to "go h a l f " on a capsule of heroin. Just before they went to make the purchase, one said to the others "Honey, w i l l you pack i t ? You know I can't swallow". A young male entered the cafe and called Hughie away from the counter. They talked for a moment, then joined the drug peddler i n his booth. Hughie purchased a capsule of heroin and both of them l e f t the cafe. When Hughie returned he to l d me that his friend was very nervous and feared that he would be unable to swallow the capsule i f he encountered the poli c e . Hughie saids "He's done favours f o r me, so I packed i t f o r him". After a r r i v i n g at the location he has chosen to administer the in j e c t i o n , the drug user attends to the p o s s i b i l i t y that the police may have followed him there and may be waiting outside for an appropriate time to enter. His f i r s t use of defence i s to prevent them from entering by barring the door of the room with a chair., bed, etc.s A police o f f i c e r t o l d me that when they attempt to enter a drug user's room they generally f i n d the door both locked and blocked with a bed, armchair or other object. The second l i n e of defence i s of a more elegant nature. The t y p i f i c a t i o n says that the police w i l l attempt to enter the room when the evidence i s e a s i l y obtainable, i . e . , when the drug user i s preparing the narcotic f o r i n j e c t i o n . Hence, the drug user i s concerned to create the impression that such preparations are being mades Just i n case the b u l l s are outside the door you make some noises so that t h e y ' l l think you're cookin' up. Then i f they're gonna bust i n t h e y ' l l do i t while you - 1 0 0 -can s t i l l swallow the cap . . . Strike a few matches or c l i c k a l i g h t e r , run some water - - things l i k e that. Thus, the drug user allows himself a further opportunity to avoid arrest by temporarily "destroying the evidence". This chapter has discussed the manner i n which the drug user employes his knowledge of the structure of p o s s i b i l i t y . The behaviours described are seen as being carried out i n accordance with knowledge of the procedures involved i n the production of normal arrests for "possession of narcotics".^ — 101 — Footnotes 1. A.V. Cicourel, The Social Organization of Juvenile Just i c e. New Yorks John Wiley and Sons, 1968, p. 111. 2. Taking a ta x i i s seen as a more e f f i c i e n t way of avoiding the police than taking a bus. With the exception of walking, this i s the most common means of transportation to the location selected to administer drugs. Few drug users own automobiles, 3. Once the capsule has been swallowed, i t cannot be retreived by the police through the use of stomach pumps or emetics. 4. This behaviour deserves the l a b e l "rational conduct". See: McKinney, John C. - "Sociological Theory and the Process of T y p i f i c a t i o n " , mimeo, Dept. Sociology and Anthropology, Duke University, 1967, p. 12. CHAPTER 7  ORIENTATIONS TO ARREST In Western City, arrests f o r offences involving the narcotic heroin are events that occur with considerable frequency. During a ten-month period, s l i g h t l y more than 300 persons were arrested - - an average of approximately one 1 per day. The c i t y ' s heroin using population i s estimated to be i n the region of 1,500. Of these, at any given time some 300 w i l l be i n j a i l . Thus, a calculation reveals that approximately 25 per cent of those heroin users not i n prison w i l l be arrested i n any ten-month period. E a r l i e r chapters discussed the knowledge that drug users have of how persons come to be arrested and the preparations they make to avoid arrests. The intent of this chapter i s the depiction of the manner i n which drug users regard the occurrence of these events. The chapter begins with a discussion of the preparations o f f i c i a l s make f o r the arrest of drug users. Preparing f o r arrests: o f f i c i a l s . In Western City, arrests f o r violations of the Narcotic Control Act occur with such frequency and regularity that special arrangements are made f o r them by o f f i c i a l s . In this sense, some Western City o f f i c i a l s could be said to be oriented to the frequent and regular occurrence of drug arrests. This orientation i s c l e a r l y seen i n the establishment of a specialized l e g a l apparatus for handling drug cases and - 1 0 3 -the reservation of an o f f i c i a l setting where t h e i r d e t a i l s can be heard. Violators of the Narcotic Control Act are regularly prosecuted by a group of lawyers employed by the federal government's Department of Justice; they perform this task on a f u l l - t i m e basis. Pri o r to t h i s , the Department of Justice was i n the practice of appointing a p o l i t i c a l l y -favoured l o c a l attorney to the o f f i c e of "special prosecutor for drug cases". Under th i s system, the incumbent prosecuted a l l drug offenders and was remunerated on a pro rata basis. The appointment was considered by Western C i t y lawyers to be an especially l u c r a t i v e one. Each afternoon of the working week, the d e t a i l s of arrests f o r offences involving narcotics are heard i n a courtroom of the c i t y ' s public safety building which has been set aside, during t h i s time period, s p e c i f i c a l l y f o r this purpose. Unless the defendent elects to be t r i e d i n a higher court, his case i s disposed of by the presiding magistrate. In a l l cases, though, a drug offender's f i r s t court appearance i s i n t h i s setting. Thus, while those arrested f o r such offences as theft, rape, gambling, etc., are assigned to courtrooms and resident prosecutors on a presumably ad hoc basis, v i o l a t o r s of the Narcotic Control Act are dealt with i n a s p e c i a l l y reserved courtroom by prosecutors who have been employed to prosecute them s p e c i f i c a l l y . As such, there i s a location that can be legitimately referred to as "drug court" and a - 104 -group of persons called "drug prosecutors"; most categories of crime cannot be used as a prefix i n the naming of either a s e t t i n g or the persons employed there. In terms of the setting, "drunk court" and " t r a f f i c court" are obvious exceptions; however, these are, l i k e drug arrests i n Western City, part of a category of events that occur with such a frequency that i t i s appropriate to make preparations f o r them i n advance of t h e i r actual occurrence. The expectancy that drug users w i l l be frequently arrested and convicted f o r narcotic and non-narcotic v i o l a t i o n s i s further evidenced by the preparations made by prison o f f i c i a l s . Thus, there i s some data to indicate that drug users are expected to constitute, at any given time, a major proportion of the prison population. This orientation i s c l e a r l y seen i n the organizing and s o c i a l i z i n g a c t i v i t i e s that take place i n the l o c a l penal i n s t i t u t i o n . For example, incoming inmates are routinely questioned regarding t h e i r status with respect to the use of drugs. Also, a special wing of the prison, constituting approximately 25 per cent of i t s physical plant, has been set aside to accommodate and "treat" convicted drug users during t h e i r period of incarceration. The educational program designed to acquaint prospective guards with the major facts of prison l i f e includes lectures on such topics as "the causes of drug addiction"; i n the "on the job" portion of his t r a i n i n g the f l e d g l i n g prison o f f i c e r w i l l become f a m i l i a r with such p r a c t i c a l techniques - 105 -as "how to t e l l when drugs are being used on a t i e r " , "how to search a c e l l to f i n d drugs", and "places where drugs are usually hidden", etc. In the prison and i n the courtroom, drug users are encountered with such frequency that i t i s considered proper to prepare both s t a f f and f a c i l i t i e s p r i o r to t h e i r a r r i v a l . Thus, there i s , amongst o f f i c i a l s , a certain expectancy that events c a l l e d "drug arrests" and "arrests of drug users" w i l l occur with considerable frequency and regu l a r i t y . That these events w i l l occur i s presumed; t h e i r occurrence i s understood as providing the rationale underlying the establishment of special settings, agencies, etc., and the organizing practices of i n s t i t u t i o n a l personnel. The remainder of t h i s chapter i s given over to the explication of how the drug user sees the occurrence of arrests f o r narcotic offences. The section immediately following this deals with the drug user's notion of arrest as a normal experience, i . e . , one that i s expected to occur at some point i n the biography of a normal member. The next section examines some of the arrest-related a c t i v i t i e s that drug users perform i n the course of t h e i r d a i l y l i f e and suggests that drug users are oriented to the occurrence of arrest as a routine, always-possible event. The f i n a l section discusses the drug user's usage of the term "pinch". Drug arrests; normal biographical experiences. One of the things that members of a society "know" i s what type of events the l i v e s of "normal" members are - 106 -expected to include. As such, s o c i a l actors are t y p i c a l l y able to characterize t h e i r l i f e cycle i n terms of the events they w i l l experience, the circumstances they w i l l become involved i n , etc. Por example, l i t t l e , g i r l s speak of growing up, getting married, having children, etc. That such events w i l l occur i s presumed, taken f o r granted. Depictions of the unfolding of the l i f e cycle can be taken as data regarding the member's notion of the course that "normal" l i f e i s expected to take, the kinds of experiences that "normal" members are supposed to have, and the instances when sanctions may be applied for not experiencing "proper experiences". "Old maid", "drop-out", and "draft-dodger" are part of the d e r i s i v e nomenclature available to those whose l i v e s have not included "normal" events. The drug user's characterization of the course his l i f e i s expected to take i s formulated i n accordance with the expectancy that arrest w i l l occur or arrest w i l l occur "again". The following quotations are examplary: As soon as I get pinched I'm gonna quit. Next time I'm pinched I'm gonna go to (a training i n s t i t u t i o n ) so I can take a course. I'm r e a l l y gonna get h i t hard on my next pinch. The bu l l s want me bad. One time when I get pinched I'm gonna get so much fuckin' time that I ' l l come out with a fuckin' long grey beard. Thus, "getting arrested" i s regarded as an event that l i f e i s expected to include as a normal state of a f f a i r s . However, there i s some data to indicate that under certain - 107 -conditions the event can he excluded from one's l i f e : In the course of a discussion Hughie told me that on two occasions the police had attempted to "make a deal" with him: "They said that i f I'd give them information about where people are goin' to score and things l i k e that, they'd leave me alone. I to l d them I would but then I just fucked off to the cafe and t o l d everybody about i t " . I f members of a society have knowledge of the events that are expected to be included i n the l i v e s of "normal" members and knowledge of the conditions under which these events can be excluded, they w i l l , i n the case of exclusion, i n f e r the existence of these conditions. For example, inferences regarding the psychological or b i o l o g i c a l adequacy of middle-aged "unmarrieds" or ch i l d l e s s "merely marrieds". Similarly, drug users whose " f a i l u r e " to be arrested i s noticed may be taken as "finks" or "informers": I f you use junk, you're gonna get pinched. That's a l l there i s to i t . It may take them a while to catch on to you, but sooner or l a t e r y o u ' l l get i t . The only people that don't get pinched are the finks, the guys that are keepin' out by workin' with the b u l l s . A fink i s a person who doesn't get arrested 'cause he helps the b u l l s get other fiends. Hence, when a set of circumstances i s commonly defined as one i n which "normal" members w i l l imminently become involved, a member's non-involvement may be taken as evidence of h i s abnormality. There i s obviously a temporal consideration here: just as members know the character of the events that are expected to occur, they are also aware of how these events are to be scheduled. Thus, as there i s a point i n time when "sowing - 1 0 8 -wild oats" i s redefined as "irresponsible behaviour", so i s there a point where drugs users attribute "not being arrested" to "police co-operation" rather than "good fortune": Hughie told me to keep away from Suzanne because she was suspected of being a police informer. I asked him why she was under suspicion and he said: "Anybody who can go f o r that long without taking a pinch has to be a f i n k " . Fred t o l d me that he hadn't been to j a i l f o r sixteen months and added: " I f I don't get pinched soon, people are gonna s t a r t g e t t i n 1 suspicious of me. They'll f i g u r e I'm a fink or something". A drug user who appeared to be about f i f t y years old (A) and a younger one (B) had the following discussion i n the waiting room of the narcotic treatment center: A : I was using for three years before I got pinched. For three years I didn't so much as see a fuckin' mountie. B : Is that r i g h t . A : Yup, three years. B : Jeez, to stay outside that long these days you'd have to be workin' f o r them. A : That's r i g h t . Things sure have changed. B : Yeah. Knowledge of the circumstances normal members are expected to become involved i n i s of p r a c t i c a l significance to those who are concerned to have others see them as normal. Homosexuals who marry as a heterosexual front are an obvious example. A perhaps less obvious example i s the undercover narcotics enforcement o f f i c e r : A drug user t o l d me that the police often deliberately "picked on" undercover drug policemen "just to.make them seem l i k e the rest of us down here". This section has dealt with the drug user's orientation to arrest as a normal biographical experience. As such, i t i s expected to occur at some point i n the l i f e cycle of a - 1 0 9 -normal member; hence, i t s occurrence can be used i n deciding a member's normality. The next section discusses the drug users 1 orientation to arrest on a day-to-day basis. Drug arrests; routine, always-possible events. It was noted e a r l i e r that i n Western City events called "drug arrests" occur with considerable frequency and regu l a r i t y . As a consequence drug users regularly and frequently perform c e r t a i n a c t i v i t i e s related to arrests. Such a c t i v i t i e s include "reporting arrests", "discussing arrests", "preparing f o r ar r e s t " , etc. This section examines some of these arrest-related a c t i v i t i e s and suggests that drug users are oriented to arrest as a routine, always-possible event. Hence, i n this section the focus i s on the procedural d e f i n i t i o n of an event; the member's understanding of an event's nature i s revealed by the practices they follow when dealing with i t . The drug user's notion that arrests are events that can be more-or-less expected to occur on a regular, frequent basis i s revealed by the fact that they are taken as events that can be legitimately "asked about". For example, i n the Family Cafe i t i s not uncommon to hear one drug user inquire about the welfare of another i n terms of whether he has recently been arrested or made the subject of a police investigation intended to produce an arrest: Ed greeted Robbie i n the following manner: Well, how are you doin* Robbie? Have the bul l s paid a c a l l on ya l a t e l y ? " - 110 -Hughie and I entered the cafe and joined Prank at the counter. Prank said: "Well Hughie, how's i t goin'? The b u l l s been t r e a t i n ' you okay?" Similarly, i f a drug user has been absent from the l o c a l drug scene f o r any length of time, he may, upon h i s return, request an account of the events that took place i n his absence. Such requests are often given i n terms of the expectancy that some persons w i l l have been arrested: Joe and I were joined at the counter by Woody, a drug peddler who had just returned from a three week holiday i n the U.S. Joe asked Woody how he enjoyed his holiday and he said: "Great, i t was great to get away from this fuckin' place for awhile. Who got pinched while I was gone?" Joe replied: "Harry was l a s t night. I guess he was up this morning". Woody said: "Anybody else?" Joe replied "Oh yeah, but I can't r ememb er". In the two examples p r i o r to this one, inquiries about police encounters were made i n a routine fashion within the context of an ordinary greeting conversation. The above example indicates both that a number of arrests are expected to occur i n any given time period and that when they do occur they are attended to as other than memorable events. As such, arrests appear to be taken as ordinary everyday occurrences, i . e . , routine events. This aspect of the drug user's orientation to arrest i s further revealed by the manner i n which news of t h e i r occurrence i s reported. Generally, incidents of arrest are not announced as events of any special interest, significance, or c u r i o s i t y . That a person has been arrested i s an item that i s most often mentioned i n the course of an ordinary conversation and attended to matter-of-factly as a routine - 111 -occurrence. The following reports are exemplary; A ; They got Freddie l a s t night. B : Jeez, that's too bad. He wasn't out too long th i s time, was he? A : About three months, I think. B ; Huh . . . A : What's new? B : Fuck a l l . A : I hear that Marty was pinched a couple of days ago. B : Yeah, so I hear. A : Jake was pinched this afternoon. B ; Is that r i g h t . Poor old Jake. Furthermore, the above examples indicate that arrests are not subjects that generate much "talk" amongs drug users. This topic i s addressed i n more d e t a i l i n the next section. The drug user's orientation to arrests as events that are always possible i s c l e a r l y evidenced by the set of a c t i v i t i e s performed following a drug transaction. These a c t i v i t i e s , as noted e a r l i e r , include preparing the capsule of heroin f o r the purpose of transporting i t to the location where i t w i l l be administered. At the moment of purchase, the drug user wraps the capsule i n a small piece of s i l v e r f o i l paper and places i t i n his mouth, thus allowing himself the opportunity to swallow i t i n the event of an encounter with the po l i c e . The f o i l paper e f f e c t i v e l y "seals" the capsule so that i t can be removed from the mouth at an appropriate time and unwrapped ready to use; i f the s i t u a t i o n requires that i t be swallowed, i t can l a t e r be regurgitated or salvaged from excreta i n a usable condition. Hence, i t - 112 -i s not uncommon to see a drug user remove the s i l v e r f o i l paper from a discarded cigarette package, f o l d i t neatly, and place i t i n his pocket f o r l a t e r use. Similarly, drug peddlers often anticipate t h e i r c l i e n t ' s needs and keep a small stock of f o i l squares nearby. The practices of "wrapping" and "mouthing" the capsule are c a r r i e d out immediately following every heroin trans-action. Their performance i s independent of the time of the day, day of the week, or reported volume of police a c t i v i t y . Thus, a noticeable decrease i n the number of arrests that occurred i n any period of time would not be taken as s u f f i c i e n t warrant to discontinue these a c t i v i t i e s . The f a c t that these practices arc followed with such regu l a r i t y can be taken as data r e l a t i v e to the manner i n which the drug user regards the p o s s i b i l i t y that he w i l l become the subject of a police investigation. In th i s sense, involvement i n such a s i t u a t i o n appears to be regarded as an extremely l i k e l y p o s s i b i l i t y and therefore one that i s properly prepared f o r i n advance of i t s actual occurrence. Furthermore, as events that are regarded as always possible, the occurrence of arrests can bo legitimately inferred on a va r i e t y of occasions. For example, one drug user can i n f e r the p o s s i b i l i t y of another's arrest from his absence from the Family Cafe f o r what i s taken to be a longer-than-usual period of time. The two males s i t t i n g next to me at the counter were discussing the recent absence of a drug peddler: - 113 -A : Where's Woody these days? I haven't seen him around. B : He took a t r i p down to the States. A ; Oh, I thought he might've been pinched. Hughie t o l d me that he hadn't seen Freddie "around" f o r a few days and he thought that he might've been arrested. Similarly, that an arrest has occurred i s an inference that can be made i f a drug user ( i n this case a drug peddler) does not appear at the cafe i n accordance with a previously announced schedule: A drug peddler had informed some of the people i n the cafe that ho was leaving to pick up h i s supply and would return i n half-an-hour. An hour passed and he had not returned. Some concern was being expressed about his lateness: "Jeez, where's Jake? I bet he's pinched". "I bet they got him when he picked up". WhonL he f i n a l l y arrived, one drug user said: "Holy fuck, Jake, Where were ya? We thought you were pinched for sure". This section has focused on the manner i n which the drug user procedurally defines arrest. An.examination of everyday a c t i v i t i e s such as "reporting arrest", "preparing for arrest" reveals that the drug user regards^arrests as routine, always-possible events. The next section deals with some of the "understood and understood to bo understood" features of the conversational a c t i v i t i e s related to arrest. "Pinched": i t s intended moaning. McKinney has noted that language i s a typif y i n g medium 2 for transmitting s o c i a l l y derived knowledge: The vernacular of everyday l i f e i s primarily a language of named objects (things or events). Any l a b e l or name delineating an object implies a t y p i f i c a t i o n and generalization r e f e r r i n g to tho relevance system prevailing within the s o c i a l system which found tho named object s i g n i f i c a n t enough to provide a s p e c i f i c - 114 -symbol for i t . In t h i s sense the everyday language of the members of a s o c i a l system includes a veritable treasurehouse of t y p i f i c a t i o n s or types symbolically representing t h e i r relations to th e i r object world. In the segments of conversation reported i n e a r l i e r sections of thi s and other chapters, the term "pinch" and i t s grammatical variants were used with considerable frequency. Some of the available data indicates that drug users employ t h i s term assuming that i t w i l l be understood as denoting an arrest f o r a narcotics offence and, moreover, an arrest that has taken place i n accordance with the "normal" form discussed e a r l i e r . Thus, this section analyzes the s p e c i f i c meaning the drug user intends t h i s term to have. 1. When drug users report the occurrence of an arrest or an investigation intended to produce one, i t i s assumed that i f the offence i s not specified, "possession of narcotics" w i l l be understood as the "reason why" the arrest or investigation took place. Thus, although drug users are regularly involved i n a va r i e t y of i l l e g a l a c t i v i t i e s to provide funds f o r the purchase of heroin and are therefore l i a b l e to be arrested f o r any number of offences, to merely say that one has been "pinched" i s to say that one has been arrested f o r the possession of narcotics. In the course of a conversation I questioned Hughie regarding the whereabouts of Harry, a drug user I had met i n the cafe. Hughie told me that he had been "pinched". I asked what he had been arrested f o r and Hughie replied; "Por junk. What did ya think?" Hence, an unspecified "pinch" i s taken and meant to be taken as "an arrest f o r the possession of narcotics". When - 115 -reporting an arrest f o r a v i o l a t i o n other than t h i s one, the drug user s p e c i f i e s the offences Lynn's been pinched for vag. N e i l got pinched for boosting the other day. 2. When drug users i n f e r that someone has been pinched and subsequently verbalize t h i s inference * i t i s assumed to be understood that what has been inferred i s an arrest f o r an offence involving narcotics s Hughie and I were i n the Family Cafe waiting for his father, who was also a drug user. He was over an hour l a t e and Hughie was expressing some concern over his whereabouts. At one point he said: "Shit, I bet the old bugger's been pinched". I knew that his father was regularly involved i n a variety of i l l e g a l a c t i v i t i e s so I asked Hughie what i s was that he thought he might've been arrested f o r . Hughie rep l i e d : "You know I mean junk". 3. When drug users either request the provision of an inventory of recent "pinches" or ca l l e d upon to provide such an inventory, i t i s assumed that what i s called f o r or provided i s understood as "an inventory of recent arrests f o r narcotic offences". Thus, while drug users are often arrested f o r non-narcotic v i o l a t i o n s , e.g. theft, p r o s t i -tution, arrests for offences not involving drugs are not expected to be included i n these inventories: During the course of a conversation Hughie asked me i f I'd been to the Family Cafe recently. I replied that I had and he said: "Anybody been pinched?" E a r l i e r i n the week I had heard that Lynn, a young lesbian, had been arrested for vagrancy. I re p l i e d : "I heard that Lynn was". Hughie expressed some surprise and said: "Jeez, I didn't know she was using". I told him what she had been arrested for and he said: "Oh, I meant f o r junk". - 116 -4. When drug users report the occurrence of a drug arrest, or an investigation intended to produce one, i t i s assumed that the circumstances of the event are understood. Thus, reports t y p i c a l l y do not include detailed descriptions of "what happened", "how i t happened", etc. Reports of arrests are generally given i n a parsimonious fashion with minimal reference to the p a r t i c u l a r circumstances. For example, both "The:/ got Freddie l a s t night" and "Jake was pinched t h i s afternoon" are t y p i c a l of reports that are given when an arrest has occurred. Detailed accounts of routine events are not provided; nor i s i t expected that such accounts have to be provided: E a r l i e r i n the evening I had heard that John had been arrested f o r a narcotics v i o l a t i o n . I mentioned th i s to Robbie and she said: "Yeah, so I hear". I asked: "How did i t happen?" and she repl i e d : "What the fuck do you mean, how did i t happen? The same way they a l l happen, I guess". Knowledge of how persons come to be arrested f o r drug offences i s presumed, taken f o r granted, something that every drug user knows; as such, the de t a i l s of a pa r t i c u l a r arrest, e.g. "how i t happened", etc., are not topics of conversation, that naturally occur amongst drug users. Furthermore, there i s some data to indicate that there are sanctions applied to those who treat such d e t a i l s as legitimate points of discussion: Freddie came to the o f f i c e just as Joey, a neophyte drug user whom I'd been interviewing, was leaving. I asked Freddie i f he knew Joey; he replied that he did and added the following: "That i s one asshole I don't care i f I ever see again for the rest of my fuckin' natural l i f e " . He proceeded to explain that - 117 -two evenings ago Joey had spent " . . . about an hour and a h a l f " r e l a t i n g to him " . . . a l l the fuckin 1 d e t a i l s of a pinch he took. It must've been his f i r s t one. He said: 'Well I figure the cops must've been watchin' me', and 'Jeez, they broke the door right down'". He added: "Nobody wants to hear that s h i t " . I asked him why this was so and he replied: "Because i t ' s so fuckin' boring. Same old story a l l the time. Everybody knows how the b u l l s work". The exposition of the content of the drug user's knowledge of the arrest producing procedures employed by the police was the task of an e a r l i e r chapter. In th i s context i t i s s u f f i c i e n t to note that drug users attend to such procedures i n t h e i r t y p i c a l i t y . Hence, when a drug user hears a report that a person has been "pinched", he does not need explanations of "how i t happened", etc., to enable him to reconstruct the event and i t s circumstances; d e t a i l s are superfluous and are dealt with as such. Only when a drug arrest i s produced by unexpected means or has special circumstances surrounding i t i s i t raised to the status of an announcable event or a legitimate topic of discussion.In these cases, d e t a i l s of "how i t happened", etc., become matters worth reporting: About a dozen people were i n the cafe. Two addicts, Joe and Freddie, were t a l k i n g near the rear of the counter. Joe stood up and i n a very loud voice said: "Hey. Did anybody hear what happened to Shorty l a s t night?" Without waiting f o r a. reply he proceeded to describe a'rather unusual incident of arrest that had taken place the evening before. Apparently, Shorty had purchased a capsule of heroin on behalf of a woman. The police found the drug i n her possession and she named Shorty as the supplier. They l a t e r picked Shorty up for questioning. It appeared that Joe's remarks were attended to by most of those present. Several made comments l i k e : "For Christ's sake", "How about that", etc. A few minutes; l a t e r a male drug user entered the cafe and sat at the counter. Another approached him and said: "Did y'hear about Shorty?" After receiving a - 1 1 8 -negative reply, he related the d e t a i l s of Shorty's encounter with the police. Thus, the d e t a i l s of arrests that are produced i n other than the "normal" or usual fashion are "announcable" and "discussable", etc. Similarly, the d e t a i l s of arrests f o r infrequently occurring offences or those for which there i s no known "normal" form can be legitimately related or inquired about. While the above may be taken as a rather tedious discourse on a t r i v i a l matter, i t i s necessary to establish the point that when the drug user characterizes his l i f e cycle i n terms of being "pinched" and performs the everyday a c t i v i t i e s of "reporting pinches",, ".inquiring about pinches", etc., he i s r e f e r r i n g s p e c i f i c a l l y to arrest f o r an offence involving narcotics. The drug user's world i s one composed of frequently occurring l e g a l events calle d drug arrests or "pinches". This chapter has dealt mainly with the drug user's orientation to these events. It was suggested that they are regarded as normal experiences i n that they are expected to be included i n the biographies of normal members. An examination of some of the a c t i v i t i e s related to "pinches" indicated that drug users also regard them as routine events (in the sense that t h e i r occurrence can be reported, etc., i n a characteristic fashion) and as always-possible events ( i n the sense that i t i s considered proper to make preparation i n advance of t h e i r occurrence e t c . ) . Furthermore, p a r t i c u l a r pinches are only memorable, announcable, and discussable i n t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r i t y when they have occurred i n an at y p i c a l fashion or have special circumstances surrounding them: V/hen a "pinch" i s reported i n a routine fashion, i t i s understood that i t took place i n the "normal", " t y p i c a l " , "usual" manner. An e a r l i e r chapter dealt with the background of normal occurrences i n whose terms the character of any i n d i v i d u a l arrest i s decided. - 120 -Footnotes 1. Tables I, II and III are not based on numbers of persons arrested but on numbers of arrest-producing actions made by the po l i c e . In some of these, more than one person was actually arrested. The 198 arrest-producing actions resulted i n the arrest of 331 persons during the ten-month period. 2. McKinney, John C. - "Sociological Theory and the Process of T y p i f i c a t i o n " , mimeo, Dept. Sociology and Anthropology, Duke University, 1967, p. 12. CHAPTER 8  CONCLUSION Most of th i s study has reported on the a c t i v i t i e s that are observable i n a s e t t i n g where heroin can be purchased and has focused i n p a r t i c u l a r on those a c t i v i t i e s that are related to the buying and s e l l i n g of this drug. It was suggested that drug transactions and the behaviour that drug users routinely engage i n immediately following such transactions are to be understood i n terms of t h e i r knowledge of police procedures. By taking police procedures into account, drug users decrease the probability that the police w i l l be able to obtain the evidence s u f f i c i e n t to warrant an arrest f o r "possession of narcotics" or " t r a f f i c k i n g i n narcotics". In doing so, they have made a c t i v i t i e s related to the buying and s e l l i n g of drugs more or less i n v i s i b l e to a l l but s o c i a l i z e d observers. In t h i s regard, one drug user described the Family Cafe i n the following manner: It looks just l i k e an ordinary everyday cafe. Just l i k e a l o t of places. Guys s i t t i n 1 around havin' coffee and shootin' the s h i t . The average guy'd never know what was goin' on. I mean, fuck, he could be s i t t i n ' right i n the middle of i t a l l and he'd never know that there was anything to do with dope goin' on. The thing i s , i f you're not part of i t you just don't have any idea  that anything's happening. that's a l l . The user's or t r a f f i c k e r ' s discrete management of his drug relevant behaviours consists mainly of a set of p r a c t i c a l actions which are regularly and routinely performed with the objective of counteracting police evidence-gathering procedures. However, these routine performances have an important a n c i l l a r y effect i n that they tend to l i m i t access - 122 -to drugs and even awareness of drug relevant behaviours to bonafide drug users only. Hence, while the drug user's p r a c t i c a l actions are intended as elements of a methodology designed to minimize the r i s k of arrest, they also must be understood as exercising a sort of regulatory effect on new admissions to a drug using pattern. One question that has not been addressed thus f a r i s that which asks why, given t h e i r knowledge of p o l i c e procedures, drug users continually purchase heroin i n the Family Cafe. As noted e a r l i e r , drug users "know" that the Family Cafe i s observed by the police and t h e i r observation of a heroin transaction taking place there i s the i n i t i a l event i n a series of events that could lead to an arrest f o r "possession of narcotics". In terms of t h i s knowledge, i t would be reasonable to expect that drug users would be concerned to frequently change t h e i r place of purchase. Quite obviously, drug users go to the Family Cafe to purchase drugs from the drug peddlers they expect to encounter there. However, this merely raises the question of why there are drug peddlers i n the cafe i n the f i r s t place. One possible answer to t h i s question may be obtained by viewing drug peddling as a business a c t i v i t y . Its nature prohibits conventional "advertising" and consequently i t would be d i f f i c u l t f o r drug peddlers to inform drug users of continual relocations. Thus, the Family Cafe serves as a sort of "permanent premises" f o r drug peddlers. Also, the cafe i s a r e l a t i v e l y "safe" place for drug peddlers to be. They are - 1 2 3 -seldom arrested i n the cafe; [Have you ever seen a drug peddler arrested i n the Family Cafe?] It hardly ever happens. The harness bu l l s got a guy about a year ago, though. Such events are "memorable" and "countable". Some further discussion of the s o c i a l organization of police arrest-producing a c t i v i t i e s w i l l perhaps c l a r i f y t h i s . As noted e a r l i e r , the drug squad has established a r e l a t i v e l y permanent "observation post" across the street from the cafe. The majority of the i r operations are based on the assumption that drug transactions w i l l take place there. As they are "set up" to operate i n this fashion, they have a certain p r a c t i c a l interest i n ensuring that t h i s w i l l continue to be the case. For example, there i s some data to indicate that the drug squad s p e c i f i c a l l y instruct the uniformed policemen who routinely'enter the Family Cafe not to interrupt drug peddlers as they go about t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s : A member of the Western City drug squad t o l d me that they discouraged the uniformed policemen from "grabbing" drug peddler i n there and attempting to obtain t h e i r supply of drugs as evidence. He said that i f the uniformed policemen did "grab" peddlers, i t would "mess up" the drug squad's work f o r the whole evening. One of the uniformed foot patrolmen told me that they only attempt to "get" a drug peddler i n the Family Cafe when they have a "100/& chance of getting h i s s t u f f " . He indicated that i f they t r i e d and missed, they would be informally sanctioned by the drug squad members. Thus, i n a sense, drug peddlers are " l e f t alone" so they can supply persons with heroin and consequently "produce" a continuous supply of "candidates" who may be arrested f o r - 124 -"possession of narcotics". The drug squad i s only "set up" to observe transactions that take place i n the Family Cafe. Thus, they have a certain p r a c t i c a l interest i n ensuring that most of them take place there s A member of the Western City drug squad t o l d me that they always "heard" (via informers) when drug peddlers were operating i n public settings other than the Family Cafe. He said that on these occasions a couple of squad members go to the cafe or beer parlour and merely "frighten" the drug peddler by t h e i r presence. The purpose of thi s procedure i s to make the drug peddler swallow his supply of heroin and thus ". . put him out of .operation f o r the night". He said that i f they can't properly observe drug transactions occurring, they are l e g a l l y unable to take arrest-producing action. Thus, i n a sense, police practices can be seen as influencing not only how drug transactions and the a c t i v i t i e s immediately following them w i l l take place but where they w i l l take place as well. - 125 -BIBLIOGRAPHY Becker, Howard S. - Outsiders; Studies i n the Sociology of  Deviance. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1963. Becker, Howard S. (ed.) - The Other Side: Perspectives on  Deviance. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1964. Becker, Howard S. - "Marihuana Use and Social Control" i n David Solomon (ed.), The Marijuana Papers. New York: Bohbs-Merrill, 1965-Blum, Richard H. - "Drugs, Dangerous Behavior and Social Policy" i n The President 1s Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice, Task Force Report: Narcotics and Drug Abuse. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1967. Blum, Richard H. and Lauraine Braunstein « "Mind Altering Drugs and Dangerous Behavior: Narcotics" i n The President's Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice, Task Force Reportsan Narcotics and Drug Abuse. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1967. Blumer, Herbert - Add Center Project F i n a l Report: The World  of Youthful Drug Use. Berkeley: University of C a l i f o r n i a School of Criminology, 1967. Brakefield-Moore, Edward i n Proceedings of the Special  Committee on the T r a f f i c i n Narcotic Drugs i n  Canada. Ottawa: Queen's Printer, 1 9 5 5 . Cavan, Sherri - Liquor Licence: An Ethnography of Bar  Behavi or. New York: Aldine, 1966. Cicourel, A.V. - The Social Organization of Juvenile Justice. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1968. Cloward, Richard A. and Lloyd E. Ohlin - Delinquency and  Opportunity: A Theory of Delinquent Gangs. New York: Free Press of Glencoe, 1960. Cross, John C. - "Drug Abuse as a Law Enforcement Problem" i n Proceedings of the White House Conference on  Narcotic and Drug Abuse. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1962. Di v i s i o n of Narcotic Control - S t a t i s t i c s f o r 1967 (mimeo). - 126 -F o r t , John A. J r . - "Heroin Use Among Young Men", i n John A. O'Donnell and John C. B a l l (eds.), N a r c o t i c  A d d i c t i o n . New York: Harper and Row, 1966. Ke s s l e r , W i l l i a m F. - "The Road to Drug Use", i n Paul B. Weston (ed.), N a r c o t i c s , U.S.A. New York: Greenberg, 1952. Kitssuse, J . I . and A.V. C i c o u r e l - "A Note on the Use of O f f i c i a l S t a t i s t i c s " , S o c i a l Problems. V o l . 11, No. 2 ( F a l l , 1963), pp. 131-139. Lee, W i l l i a m - Junkie. New York: Ace Books, 1952. Lemert, Edwin M. - S o c i a l Pathology. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1951 . Lindesmith, A l f r e d R. - "The Drug Addict as Psychopath", American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review, V o l . 5, 1940. Lindesmith, A l f r e d R. - Opiate A d d i c t i o n . Evanston, I l l i n o i s : P r i n c i p i a Press, 1947. Lindesmith, A l f r e d R. - The Addict and the Law. Bloomington: U n i v e r s i t y of Indiana Press, 1965. Lindesmith, A l f r e d R. - "Basic Problems i n the S o c i a l Psychology of A d d i c t i o n and a Theory", i n John A. O'Donnell and John C. B a l l (eds.), N a r c o t i c A d d i c t i o n , New York: Harper and Row, 1966. Maurer, David tf. and V i c t o r H. Vogel - Na r c o t i c s and Na r c o t i c  A d d i c t i o n (Third E d i t i o n ) . S p r i n g f i e l d , I l l i n o i s : O.C. Thomas, 1967. McKinney, John C. - " S o c i o l o g i c a l Theory and the Process of T y p i f i c a t i o n " , mimeo, Dept. Sociology and Anthropology, Duke U n i v e r s i t y , 1967. Merton, Robert K. - " S o c i a l Structure and Anomie", i n Robert K. Merton, S o c i a l Theory and S o c i a l Structure (rev. ed.). New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1957. M i l l s , James - The Panic i n Needle Park. New York: Signet Books, 1967. Mu l l i g a n , Walter - Proceedings of the S p e c i a l Committee on  the T r a f f i c i n Nar c o t i c Drugs i n Canada. Ottawa: Queen's P r i n t e r , 1955, p. 86. P r i c e , Harold F. i n Proceedings of the Sper.ial Cmmrrit.tflfi nn  the T r a f f i c i n Na r c o t i c Drugs i n Canada. Ottawa: Queen's P r i n t e r , 1955. - 127 -Schasre, Robert - "Cessation Patterns Among Neophyte Heroin Users", I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o u r n a l of the A d d i c t i o n s . V o l . 1, No. 2, 1966. Scher, Jordan - "Patterns and P r o f i l e s of A d d i c t i o n and Drug Abuse", Archives of General P s y c h i a t r y . V o l . 15, 1966, pp. 539-551 . Schur, Edwin - N a r c o t i c A d d i c t i o n i n B r i t a i n and America. London: Tavistock P u b l i c a t i o n s , 1963. Schur, Edwin M. - " A t t i t u d e s Towards A d d i c t s " , American Journal of Ortho-psychiatry. V o l . 34, No. 1, 1964, pp. 30-90. Schur, Edwin M. - Crimes Without V i c t i m s : Deviant Behavior  and P u b l i c P o l i c y . Englewood C l i f f s , New Jersey: P r e n t i c e H a l l , 1964. S k o l n i c k , Jerome - J u s t i c e Without T r i a l : Law Enforcement  i n Democratic Society. New York: John Wiley and Sons (Science E d i t i o n s ) , 1967. Sudnow, David - "Normal Crimes: S o c i o l o g i c a l Features of the Penal Code i n a P u b l i c Defender O f f i c e " , S o c i a l  Problems. V o l . 12, No. 3 (Winter, 1965), pp. 255-276. World Health Organization - E v a l u a t i o n of Dependence- Producing Drugs (W.H.O. Technical Report Series  No. 287). Geneva: World Health Organization, 1964. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0104550/manifest

Comment

Related Items