Laserfiche WebLink
Juvenile drug arrests are also .increasing, though not as <br />rapidly as in pas~ years (Figure 2). Unfortunately, actual <br />drug abuse among juveniles is apparently continuing to soar. <br />County education specialist state that ¥~ithin the public school <br />system~ of 521 schools with 450,000 students there is s high <br />rate of involvement in drugs. They estimate that 50~ to <br />bf all high school students have experimented with mariju~na~ <br />with 90~ becoming users. Involvement in j~nior high school <br />in between 7[~ to !4~ with 6[~ to 10~ using frequently. Usage <br />· n elementary schools ~s esozma~ed at ~/a to 7~, .~mth ~/~ be- . . <br />coming users, During the 1970-71 school year, 400 high <br />school students were expelled for ~]~ug abuse offenses.. This <br />figure is highly significant~ since only'.l/3 of th~ h~gh <br />schools expel for these offenses and only 10[~ of the .school. <br />age users ~re iSentified. It appears that arrests may have <br />hit a "ceiling"~ or a 'maximum number of arrests possible <br />using current law enforcement resources, w~ile ~ctual drug <br />abuse continues to increase. <br /> <br />The problem of drug abuse results ir~ many eases with victims <br />suffering monetary loss. Drug abuse contributes to the cost <br />spiral in three ways: (1) the human cost of people (e~pecially <br />juveniles) victimized by drugs~ (2) dollar cost of arrests, <br />trials, etc.; (3) burglaries and thefts by drmg abusers. Il-1 <br />1970, Orange County was the only major county in the 'State <br />where the felony 5rug arrest rate was higher 'than the non-drug <br />arrest rate. The felony 5rug arrest rate was the highest of <br />the major countles and far exceeded the State-wi~e rate, The <br />rate of abuse wes 5~J7.3 per 100,000 populatJ, on~ or,3~. Although <br />the percentage increase is not as great as in. previous yaar. s., <br />~]r~g arrests are still on the rise.' <br /> <br />The Orange County Drug and Narcotic Task Force was fount]ed in <br />November, 1970. The narcotic details' of 22 municipal po!i. ce <br />departme~bs in.Orange County are members a'~ well as the She~iff's <br />Department, and the State Bu'reau.df Narcotic Enforcement <br />Department of Justice), Other members include the <br />Orange County Harbor Patrol, Orange County Airport Security <br />and the Orange Ccm~ty Probation Department.. Close liaison ls <br />mainta~[ru~d by the Task ]?oreo Coordinator with all o[' Chase <br />agencies as well as law enforcement agencies throughout the <br />Southern Cali['ornia area. Through the elimination of dupli- <br />ca'tion of effort and the pro~oting of C~ood w]l! among thc <br />narcotic officers from each of these agencies~ the Task Fo.ree <br />has made remark~b!e progress toward the ulti~,ate goal of <br />moving the narco'[-~c trafficker from the commun]'ty. <br /> <br />J[n January, ]..072, the Coordinator of the. Tas!~ Force init:tn ted <br />a recorc] Xaep~ng r~ysl;,em _i[.atcd. zing ih~: results of the Ta~;k Foreo <br />:invest:i.gatJours. Tho oml)h~J:; by 'J?~al~ ]?orca ::~amb:l, rs was <br />op destroyinf~ o~-~;m:~zed g'coup~: (ton~:piri~:{?, to v:]o]~te 'thc s <br />n:,reob:~c :L~wr~. Whil. e worhir~L; on Ta~l,c Force <br /> <br />their o~.;n jurJsdJ¢:L~on:: regarclj~k~ ],c)c:~]l narcob.;r: t~rob].et,:a. <br /> <br /> <br />