Is this more feel-good touchy-feely PC insanity, or what?!?

Question

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070428/ap_on_re_us/crack_cocaine_sentences

Racial disparity my hairy posterior. I'm certainly not defending the use of powder cocaine, but it's simply a FACT that users of powder cocaine do not wreak the societal havoc that crack addicts do.

If we simply must level the two sentences, lengthen those for powder cocaine, don't reduce the ones for crack.

g: That's a load of crap. I don't care WHAT the motivation is. The fact remains that users of powder cocaine do not generally hold up liquor stores, commit drive bys, or carjack people. Throw away the key.

Further, did you completely miss the last part of my question? If it's simply the disparity which bothers you, let's lengthen the sentence for powder cocaine. That wouldn't break my heart.

lltrix: Have you ever even SEEN an inner city? I work in one of the crappiest sections of Detroit. Crackheads commit FAR more than their share of crimes in order to feed their habit. I don't particularly care if it's inhumane or not. Lock them up and throw away the key. Anyways, how stupid does someone have to be to smoke crack for the first time? It's not as if the effects aren't known to every warm, breathing human in the country.

citizenjane: All I can say is "Wow!" We don't agree often, but when we do, we really do! Can I drive the bulldozer?

Answer 1

Crack-cocaine is by far more dangerous than cocaine! The drug that trumps both of them put together times 10 is METH!

I agree though, reducing the crack cocaine sentence is uncalled for! Anyway, why does this have to be reduced to an attack on blacks? Just because blacks tend to use crack more than most, doesn't make the drug any safer or doesn't mean it should carry a lighter sentence so we don't look politically incorrect by oppressing the blackman. Like I said, meth is the worst and it is predominantly used by whites. That drug should carry the highest sentence!

Illtrix, are you seriously that naive to think people who become chemically dependant on heavy drugs like crack and meth only hurt themselves??? They rob stores at gun point, mug people, car jack, commit home invasions and usually end up either seriously hurting or killing someone. Just to score a few bucks to get their fix! How is that just hurting themselves??

Answer 2

Crack heads have no money. The court systems lose money arresting them. Never mind that they steal from working people to support their habits. They cannot afford lawyers and have no money to pay costs of court or fines.
I think we need to fill a football stadium up with crack, pass out lighters and stems at the gate and let them smoke until the croaked. That would solve the problem of getting rid of the confiscated crack and the crack heads at the same time.
They could just bull doze it when it was over and use it for a landfill or something.

Answer 3

Either substance is equally damaging--and similar in its effects. "Crack" simply does its work faster.

But the cold hard reality is that the difference in how these two drugs are viewed is socio-economic. Power cocain is associated with whites--usually of average or above income. Crack is characterized as "black"--and viewed as more destructive without any empirical evidence to back that assertion up.

I'm not suggesting that everyone who holds that view is racist--but that is the source of such distortions. And many of us absorb those ideas from our society without realizing their subtle assumptions.

Also--if this were a unique pattern, I'd be he first to dismiss it. But it is not. If you look at the history you'll find the pattern has been there for over a century: drugs used widely by the poor--especially blacks--are always viewed as "dangerous" while those used by whites (particularly the middle/upper income whites) are portrayed as "relatively mild" in their effects. And there is no scientific correlation to back up the claims.

Answer 4

it's all drugs? the only difference is one is more expensive, so it's used by "higher class" drug addicts... and people with more money usually commit less crime because they have no real needs that can not be met...

are you Whitney Houston? "Crack is whack!"

you may as well say poor people should go to jail longer when they commit crimes, because they "wreak the societal havoc" that rich people do not...

you're waging class warfare, but you don't even know it... or maybe you do?

Answer 5

WOW! are you really that incredibly naive?? Crack is a problem with the user but it is also way down in terms of abuse in this country. No one should get prison sentences of 6 years let alone one year for drug use. They aren't hurting anyone but themselves. If anything they should get mandetory drug counseling and treatment. It would be a hell of alot cheaper for the tax payer to get them off drugs than it would to send them to prison for 6 years. Your way is not only arcane but it's inhuman. Drug abusers do not deserve to be in prison with murderers, thugs, crooks and theives.

Answer 6

tell them "hear,---get a 10 foot pole in the past you touch me returned. this is not familiarity that breeds contempt ; this is undue familiarity. You caught on stupid--- or everlasting zoom?

Answer 7

"powder cocaine do not wreak the societal havoc that crack addicts do."

Yeah... Tell that to Dubya and the other rich, white, country-club boys who are ruining our nation.

Answer 8

Poor black people, they're being suppressed in their ability to do an illegal drug. JUST LIKE THE REST OF US!!!

Why is this unfair?

Answer 9

Do they mean male or female crack.

Answer 10

how about we put them both in a cell together with a butcher knife.