In contemporary times, organisations and institutions adopt mission statements to define their purpose. Police adopted "Keeping People Safe" as their mantra in 2014, extending this to "Keeping Communities Safe" on vehicles.
However, recent research reveals a troubling contradiction. When law enforcement successfully disrupts drug supply lines, overdose deaths among users actually increase afterwards. This represents the opposite of the stated mission — communities become less safe as a direct consequence of police enforcement actions.
Most officers join the force with honest intentions to serve their communities positively. Yet increased spending on the "War on Drugs" produces worse outcomes: higher violence, intensified competition for supply lines, and preventable deaths on streets.
Two approaches exist to address this failure. First, police could accept responsibility by establishing safe consumption sites and interventions that protect vulnerable populations when supply disruptions occur. Alternatively — and more fundamentally — society could end prohibition entirely. Regulated markets controlled by authorities could determine product access and criteria while removing criminal control.
Prohibition fundamentally fails because it serves only to provide political sound bites rather than evidence-based solutions. Police and politicians must be held accountable to their stated missions — and actually think hard about what "Keeping People Safe" means in practice.