What you have failed to comprehend is that regardless of the colour of skin, the laws are applied equally. So if a white person sold crack, he received the same sentencing that a black person would... same if a black person sold cocaine, he received the same sentencing that a white person would.

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere

I think you should perhaps flick the chip off your shoulder before venturing out into the world.

This is totally true and on the surface is sounds good. But that's not taking into account what majority uses what drug. Crack cocaine is a Ghetto drug used by minorities, sold to them by minorities mostly . Powder cocaine is a drug used by middle or upper class white people, sold to them mostly by the same middle class whites.

The only way to make it fair is to punish ALL cocaine dealers equally, regardless of what form of coke is being sold. Thus a ounce of powder/crack get sentences under the same guide lines to the same time.

The only way to make it fair is to punish ALL cocaine dealers equally, regardless of what form of coke is being sold. Thus a ounce of powder/crack get sentences under the same guide lines to the same time.

If the law was slanted the other way(as if that would ever happen in our life time), and white people were being sent to jail and minorities were gettng probation and drug rehab

If I'm comprehending your statement correctly, you are saying that white cocaine dealers are getting probation and rehab sentences? I really don't believe this. Not for dealers. Maybe possession charges, but selling / distribution? I don't think so. I would like to see a cite or two from a reliable source to support that statement.

Find me ONE law on the books in America that puts more WHITE people in jail than minorities.

But that's not taking into account what majority uses what drug. Crack cocaine is a Ghetto drug used by minorities, sold to them by minorities mostly .

I am reasonably confident that there are more whites jailed for insider trading, than any other group.

Cocaine Sentencing Has Racially Discriminatory Consequences

Unfortunately, the difference in the cocaine weights that trigger mandatory sentences for crack and powder cocaine has racially discriminatory consequences. Nationwide statistics compiled by the Commission reveal that the race of those prosecuted for crack offenses has predominately been African American. In 2000, 84.7% of crack cases were brought against African-Americans, 9% against Hispanics and only 5.6% against Whites. Caucasians, however, comprised a much higher proportion of crack users: 2.4 million Caucasians (64.4%), 990,000 African Americans (26.6%), and 348,000 Hispanics (9.2%).[ii] For powder cocaine, the disparities are somewhat different. Of all powder cases brought, 30.5% were against African-Americans, 50.8% were against Hispanics and 17.8% were against whites.[iii]

The Reasons for the Sentencing Differences are Unwarranted
Three reasons are often cited for the gross distinction in the penalties between powder and crack cocaine: addictiveness, violence, and accessibility due to low cost. All three reasons fail as a justification for the l00:1 ratio in punishment between two methods of ingesting the same drug. The Commission has been aware for many years that there are no scientific or medical reasons to justify the disparity.

Disparate treatment in sentencing between crack and powder cocaine users is not justified on the basis of the greater alleged addictiveness of crack. Research has proven that crack is not more addictive than powder cocaine. In her 10-year study of the developmental and behavioral outcomes of children exposed to powder and base cocaine in utero, Dr. Deborah Frank testified before the Commission that ""the biologic thumbprints of exposure to these substances"" are identical.[iv] While there are differences in the manner in which the body absorbs base versus powder cocaine, since Cocaine hydrochloride (powder) can easily be transformed into crack by combining it with baking soda and heat, it is irrational to apply a stiffer penalty between cocaine which is directly sold as crack, and cocaine which is sold in powder form but which can be treated by the consumer and easily transformed into crack.
Furthermore, the myth of the ""crack baby"" has been debunked. Dr. Frank testified, ""There are no long-term studies, which identify any specific effects of 'crack' compared to cocaine on children's development. Based on years of careful research, we conclude that the 'crack baby' is a grotesque media stereotype, not a scientific diagnosis.""[v]

Likewise, there is no research to indicate that the use of crack cocaine creates more violent behavior than using powder cocaine. A comparison of powder to crack cocaine offenses indicates that in 91% of all powder cases and in 88.4% of all crack cases there is no bodily injury. Threats were present in 4.2 % of powder cases and 3.7% of crack cases. Bodily injury occurred in 1.4% of powder cases and 4.5% of crack cases and death occurred in 3.4% of both powder and crack cases.[vi] Furthermore, according to Dr. Glen Hanson, there is ""very little research on the role that drugs of abuse, such as stimulants like cocaine or amphetamine actually play in violence."" Dr. Hanson concludes, that, ""research has not been able to validate a casual link between drug use and violence.""[vii]

Neither are excessive penalties for crack cocaine justified by its low price and accessibility. To apply draconian penalties for first time possession of crack on the basis of its low cost discriminates on the basis of class, especially in light of the fact that powder cocaine, in spite of its greater cost, is a drug abused more in this country.[viii] Furthermore, higher penalties for crack cocaine guarantee that small time street-level users will be penalized more severely than larger distributors who possess powder cocaine before it is transformed into crack. This type of drug abuse policy, which disproportionately impacts lower income people, is neither logical nor effective.

Racial Disparity Approximately 2/3 of crack users are white or Hispanic, yet the vast
majority of persons convicted of possession in federal courts in 1994 were African
American, according to the USSC. Defendants convicted of crack possession in 1994 were
84.5% black, 10.3% white, and 5.2% Hispanic. Trafficking offenders were 4.1% white,
88.3% black, and 7.1% Hispanic. Powder cocaine offenders were more racially mixed.
Defendants convicted of simple possession of cocaine powder were 58% white, 26.7%
black, and 15% Hispanic. The powder trafficking offenders were 32% white, 27.4% black,
and 39.3% Hispanic. The result of the combined difference in sentencing laws and racial
disparity is that black men and women are serving longer prison sentences than white
men and women.

The only way to make it fair is to punish ALL cocaine dealers equally, regardless of what form of coke is being sold. Thus a ounce of powder/crack get sentences under the same guide lines to the same time.

http://www.prisonpolicy.org/scans/sp/1003.pdf


Racial Disparity Approximately 2/3 of crack users are white or Hispanic, yet the vast
majority of persons convicted of possession in federal courts in 1994 were African
American, according to the USSC. Defendants convicted of crack possession in 1994 were
84.5% black, 10.3% white, and 5.2% Hispanic. Trafficking offenders were 4.1% white,
88.3% black, and 7.1% Hispanic. Powder cocaine offenders were more racially mixed.
Defendants convicted of simple possession of cocaine powder were 58% white, 26.7%
black, and 15% Hispanic. The powder trafficking offenders were 32% white, 27.4% black,
and 39.3% Hispanic. The result of the combined difference in sentencing laws and racial
disparity is that black men and women are serving longer prison sentences than white
men and women.

Now this is a VERY interesting cite. It would appear that application of the law is racist

Yanno, I find it amusing when someone claims that they're being oppressed because of the colour of skin or religion or whatever for being arrested and jailed for committing a crime.

Easy answer... stop breaking the law.

Crack, an infamous new variation of the drug cocaine, emerged in the 1980′s. Crack is actually cocaine in a rock crystal form, that can be heated, and its vapors smoked. The substance tends to make a “cracking” noise when heated, hence the name. Crack will give an instant feeling of intense pleasure, but the rush only lasts for about 5 to 7 minutes. The user will then experience depression, which can only be alleviated by more of the drug. This begins the dangerous cycle of crack dependancy. Long term use of the drug can cause anxiety, delusions, paranoia, lung cancer, panic attacks, heart disease, and bronchitis.

Racial Disparity Approximately 2/3 of crack users are white or Hispanic, yet the vast
majority of persons convicted of possession in federal courts in 1994 were African
American, according to the USSC. Defendants convicted of crack possession in 1994 were
84.5% black, 10.3% white, and 5.2% Hispanic. Trafficking offenders were 4.1% white,
88.3% black, and 7.1% Hispanic. Powder cocaine offenders were more racially mixed.
Defendants convicted of simple possession of cocaine powder were 58% white, 26.7%
black, and 15% Hispanic. The powder trafficking offenders were 32% white, 27.4% black,
and 39.3% Hispanic. The result of the combined difference in sentencing laws and racial
disparity is that black men and women are serving longer prison sentences than white
men and women.

This is the kind of clueless statements I am talking about. The vast majority of these criminals are drug dealers NOT drug users.Most dealers don't use, if they do they soon become users only or dead.

And even the users have kicked the habit after years in a federal prison. And they will be tested on a weekly basic once out to make sure they stay clean if they are released with probation attached.

But even if they were 12000 addicted people being released. Maybe they can now be treated like their white counterparts were. You know, get sent to rehab over and over again until they get cured or run out of chances. Is white society better off with all those white drug dealers getting sweet heart deals and not being sent off to prison like their minority counter parts were?