“I Sometimes Pretended to Get Groceries”: Restrictive Deterrence in Drug Dealing

• Published date: 01 December 2023
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X221144301
• Author: Jing-ying Guo,Yi Kong
• Date: 01 December 2023
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X221144301

International Journal of

Offender Therapy and

Comparative Criminology

2023, Vol. 67(16) 1681 –1698

© The Author(s) 2022

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0306624X221144301

journals.sagepub.com/home/ijo

Article

“I Sometimes Pretended to

Get Groceries”: Restrictive

Deterrence in Drug Dealing

Jing-ying Guo1 and Yi Kong1

Abstract

Despite steady progress in drug control work, drug-related crimes are ranked third

in the total number of criminal cases in China. Based on in-depth interviews with

24 offenders who are now incarcerated for drug offenses, this paper examines

the strategies employed by drug offenders to evade detection and mitigate their

punishment for drug dealing. Their most frequently-used strategies focus on filtering

out risky people, ensuring information asymmetry and knowing when to stop.

Exploring how offenders adapt their behavior in response to punishment helps to

further our understanding of crime commission and control.

Keywords

restrictive deterrence, drug, punishment, avoid

Introduction

In accordance with the World Drug Report 2021, the illicit drug trade continues to hold

back economic and social development, and constitutes a fundamental threat to secu-

rity and stability in some parts of the world. Drug-related crimes pose a severe danger

to the citizens and a significant challenge for the law enforcement and health care

systems in China. In order to reduce drug-related crimes and their dire consequences,

the Chinese government has adopted a series of measures and tactics. In addition to

strict drug control laws and severe punishments, more types of precursor chemicals

1Zhejiang Police Vocational Academy, Xiasha Higher Education Zone, Hangzhou City, China (中国浙江

省杭州市下沙高教园区浙江警官职业学院刑事司法系)

Corresponding Author:

Kong Yi, Department of Criminal Justice, Zhejiang Police Vocational Academy, Xiasha Higher Education

Zone, Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province 310018, China (中国浙江省杭州市下沙高教园区浙江警官职

业学院刑事司法系 310018).

Email: kongyi@zjjy.com.cn

1144301IJOXXX10.1177/0306624X221144301International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative CriminologyGuo and Kong

research-article2022

1682 International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 67(16)

and drugs, fentanyl-related substances and synthetic cannabinoids were added to the

drug substances control list, and stronger industry oversight and inspections were

enforced. In response to the increasing number of online drug offenses, a national drug

control network, enabling investigators to target offenders and crimes more precisely,

based on big data, has been introduced. The drug control work has been making steady

progress. In 2020, the public security authorities handled 64,000 drug-related criminal

cases, which was only half of the 128,000 cases recorded in 2016. However, despite

the achievements gained so far, drug-related crimes are still ranked third in the total

number of criminal cases, following dangerous driving and theft.

There has been abundant Chinese research into drug-related crimes, which can be

roughly classified into four categories. First, there have been descriptive or explanatory

studies on drug crimes or offenders; for example, Deng and Qian (2001) and Chen and

Huang (2007) described the current drug problems and trends within drug crimes. Li

and Liu (2017) provided an illustration of the demographic and socioeconomic compo-

sition of the drug trafficking groups, while Liu and Qiao (2021), and Tang (2021) dem-

onstrated transnational, cross-border and trans-regional drug trafficking activities.

Second, there has been the introduction of western research on drug crimes; for exam-

ple, Luo (2011) and Guo et al. (2018) introduced and analyzed western studies on the

correlation or causality between drugs and crime. Third, there have been reflections on

the relevant laws, policies and measures; for example, scholars have reflected on the

legal issues related to the laws and regulations (Hu & Chen, 2021; Mo, 2012; Zheng,

2012), international anti-drug police cooperation (Gu & Zhao, 2021), the use of under-

cover police or informants (Zhang, 2012; Huang, 2019; Wang, 2021), controlled deliv-

ery in drug investigation (Deng, 2019, 2020; Yue, 2018), the exclusion of

illegally-obtained evidence (Hou et al., 2019; Xiang, 2021), and the death penalty for

drug offenses (Mei & Wu, 2019; Zhao & Zhang, 2020; Zhou & Liu, 2021). Fourth,

there have been studies about the reduction and prevention of drug crimes; for example,

Wang and Jie (2016), Zheng (2019), and Li and Chen (2021) explored the relationship

between drug consumption and supply, and recommended that more attention should

be paid to the demand side. Li and Xiong (2020) and Mei and Wang (2021) focused on

how to reduce drug crimes via postal and courier services. In recent years, more atten-

tion has been paid to combating drug crimes based on big data (Chen & Gong, 2018;

Wang, 2019; Xu, 2018). These studies reflect the current mainstream criminological

research interest and methods. It is worth noting that little attention has been paid to

“how, why, and under what circumstances sanction threats affect behavior” (Jacobs &

Cherbonneau, 2016, p. 21). Yang (2005) analyzed the conditions and factors that

affected the deterrent effect of punishment on drug crimes, while Jie and Wang (2020)

examined the influence of the methods, approach and attitude of the law enforcement

of public security organs with regard to drug crimes. However, the relationship between

punishment and drug crimes or how offenders adjust their behavior in order to reduce

the certainty and severity of punishment remains unexplored. One reason for this might

be the fact that the majority of drug offenders, especially those who are also drug users

or addicts, are considered to have lost their basic way of thinking and judgment and,

therefore, are unable to assess the cost of crime in a rational way (Jie, 2018).