Yearly, dozens of Estonians get caught «drug muling», lion’s share in Latin-America. In 2013, about ten such offenders have gotten themselves caught in the region, 37 sitting behind bars. For drug trafficking, mainly. Hence the question: are the means to prevent crimes like that wise enough?
Usually, it all boils down to legal or moral arguments. The legal one claiming that offenders must be punished, the penalties being quite severe. In Latin-America, jails offer extreme courses on survival. Should anyone doubt that, surf the Internet and read comments by former inmates.
And, on the other hand: morals would dictate that those trafficking drugs will indirectly be responsible for the young lives destroyed by use thereof.
Both of the above arguments are right, but toothless. As, glancing at the views of those involved – abounding over the Internet – none, not the legal nor moral, serves to either inspire or hinder. Maybe, it would help to try to understand those who, after anonymous web-chatting say their «yes», print out plane tickets, and head out to buy a bigger suitcase.
A large part being youth in their 20ies, not bad people as they come... just a little simple. Longing for big bucks, or adventure. On the stupid-smart scale, most would claim to be on the «smart» side: having been poorly educated, as is most often the case, they are no candidates for well paid jobs. And even when considering the option of getting caught, they sense no real danger – at that age, life looks endless. And the really bad stuff happens to others, on TV.
Searching for preventive arguments working with these kids, these personal motives should be addressed. While they approach drug trafficking as a business project, harping on morals will not do. Why not talk up the risks – the «business» risks. As, in comparison to other forms of business, and considering the sums involved drug trafficking, the mules’ pay is minimal and risks maximal.
No businessman would risk like this. This is no calculated risk, this is suicide mission – and not for the sake of any high ideal passionately believed in, rather for some swelling words by a chance acquaintance over Internet. The job, however, falls not under category of «good gig» but of «exploitation». Turns out: on the stupid-smart scale, one finds himself at the opposite and undesired end.
Protesting the moral arguments comes with the process of growing up; thus, it may be a bit hopeless to stress this. But being proclaimed stupid... just might work.