Posted on 12/25/2007 6:04:55 AM PST by 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
OK, I’m convinced, lets raise the powder penalties to match the crack penalties.
Here is what I don’t quite understand: Considering the extreme differences in sentencing, and I’m sure the dealers/users of the crack side are well aware of the disparity, why would any rational person continue to use the variant that will get them far, far more time in jail? It would seem obvious that the crack sentences would just encourage everyone to switch back to powder coke, or cook up their coke themselves, but only sell the powder. If I were a dealer, I’d sell powder and include a free kit to cook up the rock. But I’m sure that would lead to a nightly event where dope fiends run through the hood, on fire from head to toe, having incinerated themselves trying to cook rock. Maybe dealers could sell the powder, but then direct the fiends to another location where the refinement is done for free. But I’m sure all this has been thought through already.
Oh, one other big reasons crack is so popular among street dealers is it’s small size (portability) and inexpensive price (selling small but very potent shots at low prices). Coke is more difficult to carry, and costs more to get a solid high.
Could it be because crack users are more often violent criminals than coke snorters?
" (b) Except as authorized by law, every person who possesses not more than 28.5 grams of marijuana, other than concentrated cannabis, is guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars ($100)."
H&S 11357c gets a little more severe:
"(c) Except as authorized by law, every person who possesses more than 28.5 grams of marijuana, other than concentrated cannabis, shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for a period of not more than six months or by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars ($500), or by both such fine and imprisonment."
In this section, possession of more than 28.5 grams of marijuana can lead to 6 months and a 500 dollar fine. Again, it does not include concentrated cannabis. At the link, you can see the progression of penalties.
I believe hashish would be covered under H&S 11034 under Tetrahydrocannabinols, and possession would be a felony.
(20) Tetrahydrocannabinols. Synthetic equivalents of the substances contained in the plant, or in the resinous extractives of Cannabis, sp. and/or synthetic substances, derivatives, and their isomers with similar chemical structure and pharmacological activity such as the following: delta 1 cis or trans tetrahydrocannabinol, and their optical isomers; delta 6 cis or trans tetrahydrocannabinol, and their optical isomers; delta 3,4 cis or trans tetrahydrocannabinol, and its optical isomers. (Since nomenclature of these substances is not internationally standardized, compounds of these structures, regardless of numerical designation of atomic positions covered).
After a user injects the heroin, it breaks down into morphine in the users system. Funny thing in Kaleefornia though, possession of heroin is a felony. Once it is injected and breaks down into morphine, it is a misdemeanor. The lesson here is to use it before the police grab it.
Otherwise known as job security.
Thank you for bringing up the inconvenient history. When the crack epidemic hit in the late 80s, it was wreaking unbelievable havoc on the inner city. The leaders indeed asked, no demanded, the tough penalties.
They got what they wanted and the epidemic subsided somewhat. Now they and their liberal sycophants are screaming racism.
That’s basically true. A cocaine user with money will be able to purchase the powder at high prices because he can afford it. In theory that should be a good thing because it would make it not affordable to the poor. What some genius came up with though is to take the powder, mix it with baking soda and water and cook it in a pan until it forms a paste, and keep cooking it until it “cracked.” Then the plentiful fragments, “rocks” are sold cheaply, in a smokable form. And thus a miracle is born. Poor people too can avail themselves of cocaine.
Rather than reduce the sentencing for Crack cocain users, why don't they just increase the sentences for Powder cocaine users?
And the government's cure? Pass another law.
And what about the disparity between codeine and another opiate synthesized from morphine — heroin? I guess a racial disparity argument could be made about the two opiates.
Pure cocaine is supposed to be 100% cocaine hydrochloride, but is usually cut with lactose or some other filler.
As an analytical chemist, it seems obvious to me that the drug should be assayed to determine its purity. A kilo of 50% cocaine is the equivalent of a half-kilo of pure cocaine.
The penalties should based upon the equivalent amount of pure cocaine in the perp's possession.
Aint Government grand?
The US Supreme Court just dealt with this issue and said judges had the ability to sentence crack-related crimes down to the level of powder cocaine.
Drug choice is not biologically, inherently determined by race.
duh!
Good point. As you know, it all starts out as opium. From there it gets transformed to morphine, and further to other products like codeine or heroin. Regardless, the law will give you a lot of time to think about it you want to medicate yourself outside of the strictly controlled medical community.
Except that crack-heads are more violent !
Ain’t it though?
Did you forget about people like Pablo Escobar? I doubt if he ever saw crack cocaine.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.