Crack-vs.-powder disparity is questioned (Racial Discrimination Alleged)

Associated Press ^ | December 25, 2007 | Denise Lavoie

[Zakeet]

During some of the bloodiest years of the drug wars of the 1980s, crack was seen as far more dangerous than powdered cocaine, and that perception was written into the sentencing laws. But now that notion is under attack like never before.

Criminologists, doctors and other experts say the differences between the two forms of the drug were largely exaggerated and do not justify the way the law comes down 100 times harder on crack.

A push to shrink the disparity in punishments got a boost last month when reduced federal sentencing guidelines went into effect for crack offenses. Then, earlier this month, the U.S. Sentencing Commission, which sets guidelines for federal cases, voted to make the reductions retroactive, allowing some 19,500 inmates, mostly black, to seek reductions in their crack sentences.

Many think the changes are long overdue.

Crack, because it is smoked and gets into the bloodstream faster than snorted cocaine, produces a more intense high and is generally considered more addictive than powdered cocaine.

But experts say that difference does not warrant the 100-to-1 disparity that was written into a 1986 law that set a mandatory minimum prison term of five years for trafficking in 5 grams of crack, or less than the amount in two packets of sugar. It would take 100 times as much cocaine to get the same sentence.

"There's no scientific justification to support the current laws," said Dr. Nora Volkow, director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

Many defense lawyers and civil rights advocates say the lopsided perception of crack versus cocaine is rooted in racism. Four out of every five crack defendants are black, while most powdered-cocaine defendants are white.

[A_Former_Democrat]

Always victims, never perps.

[muawiyah]

Used to be they thought the crimes were different. Now that we know they are the same it’s long overdue to bring about parity in punishment ~ preferably by INCREASING the time on cocaine powder use.

[Drew68]

That’s not the reality. Crack is coke + baking soda.

Yep! In fact, you can easily mix powdered cocaine with a little baking soda and smoke it off of a sheet of tin-foil and have the same high as crack.

[Drew68]

There is only one reason Crack penalties are under fire: Race. It has nothing to do with anything else and anyone who tells you different is lying.

And race is the one reason why crack penalties were higher in the first place. And anyone who tells you different is lying.

[SouthTexas]

That’s beyond my scope of knowledge. :)

[HIDEK6]

OK, I’m convinced, lets raise the powder penalties to match the crack penalties.

The obvious solution.

Beat me to it.

[Drew68]

That’s beyond my scope of knowledge. :)

Yeah, there used to be a few undesirable folks in my extended social circle.

But it is true. Take 5 grams of cocaine and you are looking at one prison sentence. Mix this five grams of cocaine with a little perfectly legal baking soda and suddenly the prison sentence is 100 times harsher.

[SouthTexas]

Oh I agree, the differential in penalties is nothing but stupid. But as we commonly see, even on this thread, people still think there is a difference, that one is worse than the other.

I haven't run in those circles in many years, so there is no "need to know". ;)

[2harddrive]

Both sentences may be too high. However, I am not sure I support the “Crackhead Equality Initiative”! Should JUDGES make up their own laws?

[Katya]

nah...there are plenty of people who smoke or have smoked crack and are not addicted. Except for drugs like heroin, the addiction rate is fairly consistent across the board...it runs along similar lines for alcoholism...ie. some people are prone to addictions. Btw...I am not a drug user, but am a proponent for sane drug laws, and find the current status a waste of taxpayer funds.