Buying Heroin Garda

__________________________

📍 Verified store!

📍 Guarantees! Quality! Reviews!

__________________________

▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼ ▼▼

▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲ ▲▲

Buying Heroin Garda

Connolly, Johnny Illicit drug markets in Ireland. Drugnet Ireland, Issue 52, Winter , pp. This article provides a summary of the key findings of the study. This exploratory study was conducted over a month period from to and included a cross-section of four local drug markets: two urban, one suburban and one rural drug market anonymised as A—D. The study adopted a mixed methodological or triangulation approach to the investigation. This included the following:. When asked what they thought were the main reasons for local drug use, most survey respondents highlighted social issues, with drug use seen as a symptom of deeper underlying factors. These included the absence of facilities for young people, high unemployment, boredom, poor parental supervision and drug availability. A number of explanations were also advanced during interviews as to how illegal drugs entered the areas. Despite popular portrayals of illicit drug markets as hierarchical entities controlled by organised crime groups, recent international research has emphasised a more complex, decentralised and fluid phenomenon involving numerous participants, most of them strangers to each other. There were a number of key differences in how drug markets were organised across the four sites surveyed, from more loosely structured to more co-ordinated arrangements. Site D, for example, was highly structured in terms of distributing heroin, cocaine and cannabis, with several high-level suppliers involved in drug importation and distribution over this very wide area. Although crack cocaine had originated with West Africans in site D, it now involved more Irish sellers. In site C, the distribution of drugs such as cannabis and cocaine was concentrated among a small number of established families. Heroin distributors were described as non-local, both Irish and non-Irish, who had arrived in the area with an addiction. The heroin market was also described as less structured and easier to penetrate from a law-enforcement perspective. In site B, the heroin supply was regarded as having originated within specific families but more recently it involved a looser network of individuals. Heroin was not imported directly but sourced from the major cities of Dublin and Limerick. Cocaine distribution in site B was more structured and lucrative and dominated by a particular group of individuals who used legitimate businesses as a means of transporting drugs throughout the region. Across all sites, it was found that a large number of individuals performed roles on behalf of higher-level suppliers. Another common factor we found across all sites was that higher-level suppliers usually avoided any contact with drugs once they had been imported. In site A, a large number of individuals performed roles on behalf of higher-level suppliers, including diluting or preparing drugs. Those involved in the storage and transport of drugs were generally relatively minor participants, either earning drugs for their own use or trying to pay off a drug debt. The involvement of young people in the drugs trade was also a factor. In site A, young people played a substantial role in drug distribution at street level. Storing or running drugs was a financially lucrative option for teenagers. Over a six-month period, PULSE data revealed that one-fifth of suspected supply offenders were aged 18 or younger. Not all these runners used drugs themselves and some were doing it as a way of earning money. The profile of runners was different in site B. They were often older heroin addicts running drugs in return for a personal supply. Non-drug-using young people aged under 18 were not reported as playing a significant role in drug distribution. Similarly, in site C, although runners did exist, there was little evidence to suggest the involvement of very young people aged 16 and under. It was reported that this would not have been tolerated by local residents. By contrast, in site D, young people were reported to be heavily involved in running drugs. The main drug sold across all four sites surveyed was cannabis. Heroin, crack cocaine and prescription drugs could be purchased at different levels in all areas. All the main drugs were available in all four study locations, although heroin was a relatively recent phenomenon in site C. The research indicated that some dealers sold multiple substances. PULSE data also suggested a degree of overlap between drug types, with multiple substances often being seized from the same individual in supply type offences. However, there were also many sellers who concentrated on only one substance, such as cannabis. Where drugs are sold was shown to vary across sites — not all drugs were sold on the open market. No drugs were reported to be sold openly in sites B and C, yet sites A and D had several highly visible open street-level markets, often located in the midst of legitimate commercial businesses. In site A, dealers took turns to sell drugs to buyers who came from outside the area. Across all sites, it was reported that closed markets were to be found in pubs and flat complexes. There were thriving open markets for crack cocaine in sites A and D, while site B, which was a rural town, had an emerging crack problem. Drug sellers in all sites reported the increased use of mobile phones to assist in the carrying-out of drug transactions. When asked if they avoided areas in their neighbourhood and why , many respondents noted that this was mainly because of people hanging around in groups taking drugs. All four sites reported an increase in violence associated with the drug trade — violence that was increasingly visible in public in the form of fights or damage to property. Violence in all four markets was largely related to unpaid debts, although territorial disputes did occasionally emerge in less ordered drug markets. Drug debts were acquired through people consuming their own supply or as a result of Garda seizures. This may be described as an unintended or adverse consequence of drug law enforcement, whereby effective supply reduction activities can indirectly contribute to greater levels of drug-related violence. In site A, drugs were provided on credit at all levels of distribution and most of the violence related to money owed. In site A, in a busy open street market for crack cocaine, dealers took turns in selling to new buyers. If one dealer began to dominate, however, this could contribute to conflict, which could lead to public fights. However, not all drug markets studied here can be described as equally violent. Explaining their refusal to report local drug-related problems, the majority of residents in all locations stated their fear of reprisal from those involved in the drug trade. Residents in all four study sites reported being offered stolen goods by people they suspected of being drug users. Interviews with drug users and sellers revealed that stolen property was an important currency in everyday drug transactions, so there was clearly a local market for the proceeds of drug-related crime. Stolen goods, such as jewellery, mobile phones, satellite navigation devices and computer games were regularly exchanged for drugs. Stolen goods were either retained by the dealer for their personal use or they were sold in the local community. With regards to drug seizures, the air mail unit Dublin , the Athlone mail centre and Dublin airport passenger terminal accounted for most of the seizures made by Customs Drug Law Enforcement CDLE during the research period. Mail stations such as Portlaoise reported a high rate of low-volume seizures of substances such as cannabis, and licit but prescribed medication such as benzodiazepines. It is not possible to determine accurately the proportion of these drugs that were destined for the Irish market or whether these seizures had any significant impact on drug availability in Ireland. Such intelligence was acquired through developing relationships with offenders working in the lower levels of distribution. On the one hand, this reflects the intelligence-led and focused nature of activity by individual Garda drug units. On the other, it reflects the greater availability of drugs in these areas. While some drug sellers acknowledged the importance of being wary of Garda activity, our research showed no evidence that drug availability was affected for any significant period because of successful law enforcement. Local tolerance of cannabis use was highlighted by Garda members and by treatment workers in a number of sites. The report highlights the challenges that arise in any attempt to assess the effectiveness of responses to illicit drug markets. Such problems are related to the obvious difficulties in trying to account for largely hidden activities, but they are due also to the limitations of criminal justice data. Moreover, the absence of reliable evidence of a straightforward link between supply-reduction initiatives and sustained reductions in drug availability has been highlighted in the international literature. For instance, a convicted drug courier claimed that he had smuggled cannabis across Europe into Ireland for many years without detection. For this individual, the transporting of drugs was a lucrative business and one in which he participated for monetary gain. The incarceration of such individuals, while it removes some drugs from circulation, is unlikely to have any real impact on those individuals higher up the supply chain, and thus its effect on drug availability will be limited in the longer term. Drug sellers adapted to drug law enforcement by managing risk exposure. For instance, many interviewees did not keep drugs on their person: they would divide up consignments and leave them at different locations, for buyers to collect. Higher-level sellers often used others to transport drugs for them. Another way of determining the impact of law-enforcement approaches is whether they reassure the public. In site B, more than half of them knew a Garda by name, while in site C more than a third knew a Garda member by name. Evidence is growing, both internationally and in Ireland, that partnership approaches involving drug law enforcement, local communities and other stakeholders offer the most sustainable method of responding to many drug problems, including illicit drug markets. In three sites A, B and C , Garda members had little contact with local drug-treatment agencies and factors such as confidentiality issues were cited as possibly preventing closer links. However, in site C, it was felt that better working relationships with social welfare services and housing authorities could produce beneficial outputs for all agencies involved. There was also doubt expressed about the suitability or effectiveness of Garda members taking a bigger role in diverting offenders to treatment. In site D, inter-agency partnership was developing and proving beneficial. The relationship with local municipal housing authorities was described as positive, and local housing authorities assisted efficiently in the eviction of drug-dealers. Recent improvements in relationships with drug-treatment services had also produced positive results such as the identification of persistent drug sellers stationed outside drug-treatment clinics. The study raises a number of general implications for future responses to illicit drug markets. First, the complete removal of illicit drug markets through drug law enforcement is not an achievable goal in the foreseeable future. The aim must be to consider how future drug law enforcement might evolve to address the complexities and particular harms associated with Irish drug markets. It is suggested that such an approach does not necessarily require a change in the legal control framework but rather a more pragmatic use and co-ordination of existing resources and the targeting of those resources at the most harmful aspects of drug markets. Second, not all drug markets are equally harmful. For example, some are more violent than others and open markets cause more disruption to communities than closed ones. Third, law-enforcement interventions that focus on the particular harms associated with a specific market have the potential to have an impact on those harms and they may also lead to a more effective and economically viable use of public resources. Finally, approaches that seek to divert problematic drug users into treatment and that prioritise local community perspectives, and those that occur in collaboration with other relevant agencies, are more likely to be sustainable over time and to win public support. The study concludes with a discussion about how to address four key challenges which, it is suggested, need to be overcome if such an approach is to be successful:. The illicit drug market can be understood as loosely incorporating three inter-related levels or dimensions. May and Hough4 provide a classification of retail markets distinguishing between open markets, semi-open markets such as pubs and clubs, closed markets and crack or dealing houses. Some of their main features are described as follows:. Can be in residential, uninhabited or semi-derelict properties and often for a short period until enforcement closes them down. Can attract large numbers of buyers, often calling at day and night and are often associated with anti-social behaviour in the building or in the surrounding area. Repository Staff Only: item control page. Skip to main content Link to Health Research Board twitter page, opens in new window Link to Health Research Board r s s feed, opens in new window drugslibrary hrb. Preview Title Contact Preview. This included the following: face-to-face in-depth interviews with both former and active drug users and street sellers and with individuals serving prison sentences of more than seven years for drugs supply; 24 interviews with experienced members of dedicated garda drug units in the four study sites and with senior members of the Garda National Drugs Unit; 1nterviews with drug treatment workers, public health specialists and a family support group; a street survey of local residents and business people approximately respondents in each location ; analysis of 1, drug offences and seizures on the Garda PULSE IT system throughout the four study sites and nationwide seizures made by Customs Drug Law Enforcement CDLE from 18 stations; and analysis of cocaine and heroin purities and adulterants in all study sites by the Forensic Science Laboratory. Evolution and organisation of illicit drug markets When asked what they thought were the main reasons for local drug use, most survey respondents highlighted social issues, with drug use seen as a symptom of deeper underlying factors. Impact of illicit drug markets When asked if they avoided areas in their neighbourhood and why , many respondents noted that this was mainly because of people hanging around in groups taking drugs. Law enforcement responses With regards to drug seizures, the air mail unit Dublin , the Athlone mail centre and Dublin airport passenger terminal accounted for most of the seizures made by Customs Drug Law Enforcement CDLE during the research period. Assessing impact of drug-related law enforcement Drug availability The report highlights the challenges that arise in any attempt to assess the effectiveness of responses to illicit drug markets. Engaging and reassuring communities Another way of determining the impact of law-enforcement approaches is whether they reassure the public. Partnership responses Evidence is growing, both internationally and in Ireland, that partnership approaches involving drug law enforcement, local communities and other stakeholders offer the most sustainable method of responding to many drug problems, including illicit drug markets. Research implications The study raises a number of general implications for future responses to illicit drug markets. The study concludes with a discussion about how to address four key challenges which, it is suggested, need to be overcome if such an approach is to be successful: how to deliver change through inclusive community-based, inter-agency partnerships, how to engage with communities in light of the widespread localised fears that drug markets and those involved in them can create, how to prioritise harms and use resources to their maximum effect, and how to profile drug markets and monitor responses to them. Conceptualising drug markets The illicit drug market can be understood as loosely incorporating three inter-related levels or dimensions. Oxford: Oxford University Press Connolly J Responding to open drug scenes, drug-related crime and public nuisance — towards a partnership approach. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Pompidou Group; Jacobs K et al Making sense of partnerships: a study of police and housing department collaborations for tackling drug and related problems on public housing estates. Project Report. Item Type. Publication Type. Irish-related, Open Access, Article. Drug Type. Issue Title. Issue 52, Winter January Page Range. Health Research Board.

Reporting drug dealing

Buying Heroin Garda

We use cookies to collect information about how you use citizensinformation. This helps us to improve your experience. You can find out more about the cookies we use in our Cookie notice. You can also read our Privacy policy. You can accept all cookies or you can chose which cookies to accept or reject. You can change your cookie preferences at any time by using the My cookie preferences link at the bottom of each page. We use Google Analytics to measure how you use the website so we can improve it. We have configured Google Analytics to anonymise your IP address so that you are not personally identified. We gather information on:. Drug dealing is a serious problem affecting many communities. One of the biggest barriers to dealing effectively with drug dealers is the use of intimidation by drug dealers to prevent people from reporting drug dealing. Dial to Stop Drug Dealing is an initiative to tackle drug dealing in local communities around Ireland. It provides a confidential and completely anonymous way for individuals to pass on information on drug dealing in their local community. When people are reporting drug dealing activity, they are never asked for their names or addresses, or any other information which might identify them. Anyone wishing to pass on information on drug dealing should call the Crimestoppers freephone confidential number 25 00 25 or the Garda Confidential freephone number If you have information on drug dealing activity in your community you can telephone the freephone number. You will get through to a trained operator who will ask you for your information and nothing more. The calls are handled by staff that have been trained to deal with the sensitivities around the issue. You will not be asked for your name and your number will not be traced. No one will know that you have called. If you have a question about this topic you can contact the Citizens Information Phone Service on 07 Monday to Friday, 9am to 8pm. You can also contact your local Citizens Information Centre. Cookies on citizensinformation. Reject cookies Manage my preferences Accept all cookies. Cookie preferences. Cookies used by Google Analytics We use Google Analytics to measure how you use the website so we can improve it. We gather information on: How you got to the site The pages you visit on citizensinformation. Save preferences Close. Dial to Stop Drug Dealing. How to report suspicions of drugdealing. Page edited: 26 January Irish residents are entitled to either free or subsidised approved prescribed drugs and medicines and certain medical and surgical aids and appliances. It enables the movements of convicted drug dealers to be recorded. Contact Us If you have a question about this topic you can contact the Citizens Information Phone Service on 07 Monday to Friday, 9am to 8pm. Manage cookie preferences Manage preferences.

Buying Heroin Garda