Amsterdam coffeeshops, victimisation, and police mobilization

ABSTRACT

Police mobilisation is a first step in the judicial process and an important source of information on offending. Whether victims mobilise police is affected by their assessment of its utility. Victims who are criminals, such as drug dealers, are known to face a different cost–benefit scenario than law-abiding persons. Dutch ‘coffeeshops’ are a unique type of dealer. They operate in a grey area, allowed by the government to sell a prohibited drug, cannabis, so long as they comply with a set of regulations. Little is known about their mobilisation of police in response to victimisation, including how it is affected by the rules governing their business. We explore this issue with qualitative data collected from personnel of 50 coffeeshops in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. We analyse how they think about the potential benefits and costs of asking the police for help post victimisation. In many ways, their thought process is similar to that of most any victim, but they also consider the potential negative ramifications of inviting police to their door. We conclude by discussing the implications for future research, regulation and drug control broadly, and coffeeshops specifically.

KEYWORDS:

• Police mobilisation
• victimisation
• regulation policy
• cannabis

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 As used herein, the term ‘drug dealer’ – or ‘dealer’ for short – refers to someone who sells psychoactive substances used for recreation (see Zimring and Hawkins 1992). Like many roles, that of the dealer is filled by many types of people and found across many times and places (Coomber 2006).

2 For further details on the study, (see Jacques 2019, Jacques 2016). The study was approved by the fieldworker’s Institutional Review Board.

3 See, for example, Jacques (2019).

4 Also, dealers of fully prohibited drugs refrain from mobilising police to prevent apprehension and punishment, though are known to involve police if the cost-benefit balance is right (Jacques and Wright 2013; among criminals generally, see Rosenfeld et al. 2003, Topalli 2005).

5 Specifically, bars cold not sell alcoholic beverages to persons 16 of age or younger, or drinks over 15% alcohol to person under 18 years of age.