Isn't this bad spin?.............?

Cocaine becomes crack cocaine right at the end of the supply chain, ie crack cocaine has spent 90% of its time as powder.

So its logical not differentiate but to just concentrate stopping the supply of cocaine.

The fact that larger perecentage of crack users are African-Americans is incidental anyone who deals with this subject is surely aware that crack is bad whoever takes it.

Why would it punish the African American community worse? You are implying that they bear a heavier burden with this new law than a different group of people. Why is that the case? Do they use it more than another form of drug? Is that any different than saying the new health care bill, or the new taxes on the wealthy is penalizing the white community, or the oriental community, or some other community.

Personally, I think there should be stiff penalties for any drug use. I also think there should be much stiffer penalties for other crimes and the death penalty should be brought back out and dusted off for crimes of murder.

shouldn't the punishment be related to the perceived "scourge" associated with the drug, not necessarily the drugs effects on the users.

So, if crack is deemed more of a "scourge" then higher penalty seems reasonable, and if not, then sentence it the same as powder or less, whatever is appropriate.

Race should have nothing to do with it. Why should it?

O is a crack user, but that had nothing to do with it. His use is protected by law.

What you didn't understand was that the effects of Crack and powder Cocaine have been scientifically proven to be similar, not different as they were assumed to be when these laws were passed in the 1980's. There is no reason for continuing the disparity in sentencing, unless you just don't like the "looks" of the people using Crack. Getting people out of prison who shouldn't be there is a good thing.

I don't want to discount the importance of discouraging our citizens from indulging in crack cocaine.

However, we have bigger fish to fry right now. The entire country is going broke, and we're continuing to spend money we don't have at a much faster rate than we've ever spent it before. Our current administration spent more in its first 18 months in office than the Bush Administration spent in its entire eight years. And both administrations have consistently spent more each year than they've taken in. In recent years (post-1980), only the Clinton administration was successful (part of the time) in taking in as much money as it spent.

If we don't reign in spending, it's not going to matter what the sentences are for crack cocaine. No one's going to serve out their sentences because we won't be able to afford to jail them (like what's happening in California right now).

I would much prefer that our administration do something about the out-of-control spending. I have yet to figure out why people who know that THEY can't spend more than they take in, and who work for COMPANIES who know they can't spend more than they take in, can think that somehow, magically, their GOVERNMENT can spend more than it takes in. It just doesn't work.

Yeah, that's nice. Now, why aren't we decriminalizing the possession of marijuana? REAL ISSUES!!!

Oh, and to hell with anyone who takes either side of the gay marriage issue, too.