The U.S. Supreme Court decided 7-2 Monday that judges may use discretion for sentences related to crack cocaine, which further addresses the injustice of disparate sentencing guidelines for crack and powder cocaine. Dissenting Justice Samuel Alito said that because of this and another Tuesday decision, “Sentencing disparities will gradually increase.†But if it ever made sense for Congress to consider possessing crack — a drug of the poor — 100 times worse than possessing the same amount of powder cocaine, it no longer does.
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- outlander on Open thread 11/23
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/23
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/23
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/23
- HLP on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- outlander on Open thread 11/23
- outlander on Open thread 11/23
11 Comments
Why would removing some of the cause for disparity, cause more disparity, is Alito talking in tongues?
Phantom, while I’ve not read the dissent, I speculate that Justice Alito’s rationale is something along these lines, namely that by allowing departures from the guidelines (in which Congress created the disparity, not the judge’s discretion) there will be disparity in sentencing not otherwise sanctioned by Congress, removing some of the certainty in federal criminal cases. I would also think that he would have championed the removal of any disparity in sentencing by Congress, the body which created the crack vs. powder cocaine sentencing disparity originally.
This could, of course, be done in merely making the guideline sentences equal for crack and powder cases, by increasing the sentence for the powder cocaine cases, or decreasing the sentence for crack cases such that the same are equal.
It sure takes a lot of words for that legalese language. [giggle} What worries me is that I’m beginning to understand it.
It’s not so simple. When you sell someone crack cocaine, you are essentially putting a loaded gun with one bullet in it to their head, and pulling the trigger. Keep doing that, and your going to kill peole. Crack dealers are KILLING people. The punishments should be more severe.
Why is their such a big deal made about prison space? When I was in the Marines, I lived in holes, ate crap chow, was rained on, endured dessert heat that could kill. Tent cities man. Why is it good enough for our troops, but not our prisoners?
Minefield the F*c@rs in man!!!
I have not tried crack. Anyone on this blog care to share a crack or cocaine experience? I am curious if the high from crack is better or worse than the high from cocaine?
It seems that we’ve lost sight of the reason for the ‘crack’ vs. cocaine sentencing guidelines disparities to begin with. It’s the culture of extreme violence that surrounds ‘crack’. There is so much more collateral damage to the community surrounding ‘crack’ that heavier sentences for dealing in it are reasonable and justifiable, irregardless of the color of the dealer. If it’s so important that sentences for dealing ‘crack’ and cocaine should be the same, let’s increase the penalties for dealing cocaine. I wouldn’t have a problem with that at all.
Quite some time back, I had a neighbor who offered to share some “primo” with me. I guess it was crack–it looked like crack.
The main thing I remember was just how much nothing it did. I didn’t see the appeal. I guess you have to smoke a lot of the stuff, and/or be prone to addiction in the first place.
The notion that the “crack” causes the “culture of violence” is of course ridiculous. It’s about money. Those who don’t have steady incomes and live outside the legal system tend to find other avenues.
Given the well-documented instances of “crack whores,” why don’t we ever hear about the “culture of f###ing”?
P.S. I’ve had powerdered cocaine also (I’ve never bought it, but I’ve experienced the largesse of others). It was an enjoyable sensation.
I’ve known people who messed up their lives with it, unfortunately, simply as a matter of shoving huge amounts of money up their noses, and ignoring their responsibilities. One lost a thriving business.
I won’t get into the long-term health effects–too much of anything is a bad idea.
But, getting back to the subject, people who do the powdered stuff tend to have money, and those who smoke crack don’t.
The “culture of violence” is perpertuated by a society who would rather sweep the latter under the rug.
I had the same experience, Rage.
Years ago when powder cocaine was the “in” thing, I tried it a few times.
It seemed to have absolutely no effect as far as I could tell.
Believe it or not. I had it during a surgical procedure (yes, they use it sometimes to constict the blood vessels and decrease the bleeding)..I laughed during the surgery and had a great time…I probably could have been an addict if I chose to go in that direction.
Cocaine is God’s way of saying you have too damn much money