This study examines a relatively obscure group who occupy a unique position in the overall structure of drug distribution: low-level independent dealers. Using ethnographic methods, fieldwork, and interviews in several Mexico City neighborhoods, we discuss the activities, strategies, and characteristics of what we designate as low-profile drug dealers. Working as freelancers, they exploit their community connections to operate relatively autonomously. They are socialized to function on a subterranean level of narcotrafficking avoiding the attention of drug trafficking organizations and law enforcement. They manage licit (front businesses) and illicit (back businesses), and tend to be in their late twenties with past experience in riskier criminal pursuits. Because their proceeds from the sale of drugs supplement household income, their activities expand and contract according to financial need.
AdlerP. (1993). Wheeling and dealing: An ethnography of an upper-level drug dealing and smuggling community (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
2.
AkersR.KrohnM.Lanza-KaduceL.RadosevichM. (1979). Social learning and deviant behavior: A specific test of a general theory. American Sociological Review, 44, 636-655.
3.
AzaolaE. (2009). Crimen, castigo y violencias en México [Crime, Punishment and Violence in Mexico] (2nd ed.). Quito, Ecuador: FLACSO.
BabchukW. A.HitchcockR. K. (2013). Grounded theory ethnography: Merging methodologies for advancing naturalistic inquiry. In Adult Education Research Conference (pp. 26-33). Retrieved from http://newprairiepress.org/aerc/2013/papers/5
6.
BeckerH. (1953). Becoming a marijuana user. The American Journal of Sociology, 59, 235-242.
7.
BelackovaV.VaccaroC. A. (2013). “A friend with weed is a friend indeed”: Understanding the relationship between friendship identity and market relations among marijuana users. Journal of Drug Issues, 43, 289-313.
8.
BergB. (2007). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
9.
BotelloN. A.RiveraA. L. (2000). Everything in this job is money: Inside the Mexican police. World Policy Journal, 17, 61-70.
10.
BourgoisP. (2003). In search of respect: Selling crack in El Barrio. London, England: Cambridge University Press.
11.
CampbellS. (2009). Enhanced mysticism, perception and cognition of psychedelic states of consciousness: Assessment of a new questionnaire (Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Tennessee, Knoxville). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/851696864?accountid=845
12.
ChalmersJ.BradfordD. (2013). Methamphetamine users’ perceptions of exchanging drugs for money: Does trust matter?Journal of Drug Issues, 43, 256-269.
ClowardR.OhlinL. E. (1960). Delinquency and opportunity: A theory of delinquent gangs. New York, NY: The Free Press.
17.
CoomberR. (2015). A tale of two cities: Understanding differences in levels of heroin/crack market-related violence—A two city comparison. Criminal Justice Review, 40, 7-31.
18.
CoomberR.TurnbullP. (2007). Arenas of drug transaction: Adolescent cannabis transactions in England—“Social supply.”Journal of Drug Issues, 37, 845-866.
19.
Correa-CabreraG. (2017). Los Zetas Inc: Criminal corporations, energy, and civil war in Mexico. Austin: University of Texas Press.
20.
CurrieE. (1993). Reckoning: Drugs, the cities, and the American future. New York, NY: Hill & Wang.
21.
DavisD. S. (2013). Zero-tolerance policing, stealth real estate development, and the transformation of public space: Evidence from Mexico City. Latin American Perspectives, 189, 53-76.
22.
DentonB. (2001). Dealing: Women in the drug economy. Sydney, Australia: University of New South Wales Press.
23.
DuckW. (2014). Becoming a drug dealer: Local interaction orders and criminal careers. Critical Sociology, 42, 1069-1085.
24.
DuránM. A. (2015). Drugs around the corner: Domestic drug markets and violence in Colombia and Mexico. Latin American Politics and Society, 57, 122-146.
25.
FieldingN. (2005). Working in hostile environments. In SealeC.SilvermanD.GbriumJ. F.GoboG. (Eds.), Inside qualitative research: Craft, practice, and Context (pp. 236-48). London: SAGE.
26.
GarfinkelH. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
GlaserB. G.StraussA. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine Publishing.
29.
GraysonG. (2013). The cartels: The story of Mexico’s most dangerous criminal organizations and their impact on U.S. security. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.
30.
HagedornJ. (1994). Homeboys, dope fiends, legits, and new jacks. Criminology, 32, 197-219.
31.
HernándezA.RoushL. (2008). The vita-migas of Tepito. Ethnology, 47, 89-93.
32.
HernándezA.SavianoR. (2013). Narcoland: The Mexican drug lords and their godfathers. Brooklyn, NY: Verso.
33.
HigginsG. E.RickettsM. L.MarcumC. D.MahoneyM. (2010). Primary socialization theory: An exploratory study of delinquent trajectories. Criminal Justice Studies, 23, 133-146.
HolmesD. R.MarcusG. E. (2005). Refunctioning ethnography: The challenge of an anthropology of the contemporary. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.). Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 1099-1113). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
36.
JacquesS.WrightR. (2008). The relevance of peace to studies of drug market violence. Criminology, 46, 221-253.
37.
JankowskiM. S. (1991). Islands in the street: Gangs and American urban society. Los Angeles: University of California Press.
38.
JenkinsS. A. (2015). Assistants, guides, collaborators, friends: The concealed figures of conflict research. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 43, 143-170.
39.
KoneckiK. T.KacperczykA.ChomczyńskiP. A.AlbarracínA. (2013). The spirit of communitarianism and the cultural background of the Limoncocha community in the context of sustainable development. Quito, Ecuador: SEK University Press.
40.
KonopásekZ. (2008). Making thinking visible with Atlas.ti: Computer assisted qualitative analysis as textual practices. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 9(2), Article 12.
41.
MacCounR.ReuterP. (1992). Are the wages of sin $30 an hour? Economic aspects of street level drug dealing. Crime & Delinquency, 38, 477-491.
42.
MacitR. (2017). Becoming a drug dealer in Turkey. Journal of Drug Issues, 48, 106-117.
MatseudaR. (1988). The current state of differential association theory. Crime & Delinquency, 34, 277-304.
45.
McCordJ. (1991). The cycle of crime and socialization practices. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 82, 211-228.
46.
MieczkowskiT. (1994). The experiences of women who sell crack: Some descriptive data from the Detroit Crack Ethnography Project. Journal of Drug Issues, 24, 277-248.
47.
MorrisE. K. (2013, December). Think again: Mexican drug cartels. Foreign Policy, No. 203, pp. 30-33.
48.
MortimerJ. T.SimmonsR. G. (1978). Adult socialization. Annual Review of Sociology, 4, 421-454.
49.
OettingE. R.DeffenbacherJ. L.DonnermeyerJ. F. (1998). Primary socialization theory: The role played by personal traits in the etiology of drug use and deviance. II. Substance Use & Misuse, 33, 1337-1366.
50.
ParisM. D.PérezF.RaquelL. (2013). La marca de las drogas: violencias y prácticas de consume [The brand of drugs: Violence and consumer practices] (1st ed.). Tijuana, México: El Colegio de la Frontera Norte, Juan Pablos Editor.
51.
PereyraG. (2012). México: violencia criminal y “guerra contra el narcotráfico [Mexico: Criminal Violence and the Drug War].”Revista Mexicana de Sociología, 74, 429-460.
52.
PettigrewJ.ShinY.SteinJ. B.Van RaalteL. J. (2017). Family communication and adolescent alcohol use in Nicaragua, Central America: A test of primary socialization theory. Journal of Family Communication, 17, 33-48.
53.
PotterG. R. (2009). Exploring retail-level drug distribution: Social supply, “real” dealers and the user/dealer interface. In DemetrovicsZ.FountainJ.KrausL. (Eds.), Old and new policies, theories, research methods and drug users across Europe. Lengerich, Germany: Pabst Science Publishers.
54.
PotterG. R. (2010). Weed, need and greed: A study of domestic cannabis cultivation. London, England: Free Association Press.
55.
PriestG. (1994). The ambiguous moral foundations of the informal economy. The Yale Law Journal, 103, 2259-2288.
56.
RiosV. (2013). Why did Mexico become so violent? A self-reinforcing violent equilibrium caused by competition and enforcement. Trends in Organized Crime, 16, 138-155.
57.
RodriguezM.MartinezA. (2012). Politica criminal del estado Mexicano: Sobre drogas y narcotrafico [Drug trafficking policy in Mexico]. Mexico: Miguel Angel Porrua.
58.
RossO. (1983, October22). Working-class mart alive with color and contraband. The Globe and Mail, 16-17.
59.
RuggerioV.SouthN. (1995). Eurodrugs: Drug use, markets, and trafficking in Europe. London, England: UCL Press. Retrieved from https://www.ucl.ac.uk/ucl-press
60.
SandbergS.PedersenW. (2009). Street capital: Black cannabis dealers in a White welfare state. Bristol, UK: Policy Press.
61.
SchützA. (1953). Common sense and scientific interpretation of human action. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 14, 1-38.
62.
SilvermanD. (2011). Interpreting qualitative data (4th ed.). London, England: SAGE.
63.
StoddartK. (1986). The presentation of everyday life. Urban Life, 15, 103-121.
64.
SutherlandE. (1947). Principles of criminology (4th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott.
65.
TardeG. (1962). The laws of imitation. Gloucester, MA: P. Smith.
66.
TrejoG.LeyS. (2018). Why did drug cartels go to war in Mexico? Subnational party alternation, the breakdown of criminal protection, and the onset of large-scale violence. Comparative Political Studies, 51, 900-937.
67.
VeirasJ. L.InzunzaA. S. (2018, October22). Asesinatos y crimen organizado en el corazón de Ciudad de México [Murders and Organized Crime in the Heart of Mexico]. The New York Times ES. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/es/2018/10/22/tepito-crimen-organizado/
68.
VenkateshS. (2006). Off the books: The underground economy of the urban poor. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
69.
VenkateshS. (2008). Gang leader for a day: A rogue sociologist takes to the streets. New York, NY: Penguin.
70.
WerseB. (2008). Retails markets for cannabis: Users, sharers, go betweens and stash dealers. In KorfD. J. (Ed.), Cannabis in Europe: Dynamics in perception, policy and markets (pp. 106-123). Lengerich, Germany: Pabst Science Publishers.
