![]() National Drug Intelligence
Center |
Mexican DTOs and criminal groups operating in the Los Angeles HIDTA region have become increasingly more prominent in national-level drug distribution, expanding their market share and dominance. No other trafficking group currently is positioned to challenge their dominance in the near term, principally because of their proximity to the Southwest Border, their strong affiliations with Mexican and Colombian drug sources, their businesslike approach to drug trafficking and other illicit activities, and their well-established transportation routes and distribution networks throughout the country. However, their high and increasing levels of violence--particularly against law enforcement and military personnel in northwestern Mexico that are attempting to curtail their illicit activities--may impact their ability to move the same quantities of illicit drugs across the Southwest Border that they once did. Several indicators suggest that drug flow from Mexico to and through the Los Angeles HIDTA region and other Southwest Border areas is already being impacted and, although the current impact to the Los Angeles HIDTA region is relatively minimal, the continual losses of significant drug loads and drug proceeds very likely will force Mexican traffickers to rethink the way they smuggle illicit drugs into the United States, including into the Los Angeles HIDTA region. As a result, some of these traffickers may enhance their drug operations and manpower along the East Coast and other areas where they feel drug smuggling enforcement is comparatively minimal. Those that choose to reroute their shipments may rely on well-known transit areas through the Caribbean for distribution in East Coast markets and the rest of the country. The same Mexican DTOs and criminal groups that control drug trafficking in and from Los Angeles HIDTA region very likely will maintain control over any such changes.
Street gang migration into suburban and rural communities very likely will become increasingly problematic as gang members can no longer afford to reside in Los Angeles and other areas where housing is expensive. The limited number of law enforcement resources in these suburban and rural areas will very likely become overtaxed in gang-related activities alone. In addition, their inexperience in dealing with gang-related crimes at levels similar to that which has consistently occurred in Los Angeles most likely will help gang-related criminal activities flourish for much longer than would be expected in the heavily enforced inner-city Los Angeles neighborhoods. To compound that threat, an increased interest by gang members in recruiting members with military training poses serious threats to the law enforcement officers who are not similarly trained. Absent enhanced law enforcement training that is based on military principles, the death rate attributed to gangs that distribute illicit drugs and commit other crimes very likely will escalate, possibly dramatically, in the next year or two.
The Los Angeles HIDTA region will continue to be the principal source for PCP and a significant source for methamphetamine available throughout the country over the next year. The Mexican DTOs and criminal groups that still produce methamphetamine in the HIDTA region very likely will continue to explore alternative production methods that are not as heavily scrutinized as are the current production processes they use--increasingly after January 2009 when Mexican authorities institute a zero tolerance policy restricting pseudoephedrine products even for legitimate ailments. The amount of PCP produced in the HIDTA region will most likely remain at current levels since demand for the drug has remained relatively stable. However, if the demand for PCP increases in the United States, then it is highly probable that PCP production in the Los Angeles HIDTA will increase to meet that demand, primarily because no other producers in the country have attempted to curtail the dominance of PCP producers in the Los Angeles HIDTA region.
The first AVM was introduced in Los Angeles on January 24, 2008; however, a number of other AVMs have since been utilized, and it is only a matter of time, possibly months, before law enforcement officers discover that drug traffickers will exploit the protections offered through Proposition 215 using these machines in the same way that they have exploited the law by opening medical marijuana dispensaries and clinics.
To Top To Contents To Previous Page To Sources
To Publications Page To Home Page
UNCLASSIFIED
End of page.