The US judicial system

[Seth]

I think that the disparity between coke and crack sentencing IS ludicrous. And racist, or at least elitist.

But it's also in response to the level of violent crime associated with crack. And the incredible addictive nature of crack. Cocaine's bad, but crack is hugely addictive.

But on the bright side, crack has massively kept down the prices that prostitutes charge for their services.
So I hear.

Actually I think that's meth these days...

[JimC]

Seth, I don't think that Holland is a failed state just yet...

[Svartalf]

But Hollande is definitely a failure.

[rainbow]

Laws are by state. Many crimes are not federal. Stiff sentences for pot in Kansas and none in Colorado next door. My state nearby has 7 days in jail for pot from one ounce to a pound (about half kilo). Selling pot 1-20 years in jail.

Many states have life in prison for the the third serious crime. Even drugs.

Most states offer deals: rehab or jail.

It would be interesting to know which states have the highest social problems due to drug abuse.

The liberal ones, of course.

Not of course. Can you point to a study that confirms this?

[Seth]

Laws are by state. Many crimes are not federal. Stiff sentences for pot in Kansas and none in Colorado next door. My state nearby has 7 days in jail for pot from one ounce to a pound (about half kilo). Selling pot 1-20 years in jail.

Many states have life in prison for the the third serious crime. Even drugs.

Most states offer deals: rehab or jail.

It would be interesting to know which states have the highest social problems due to drug abuse.

The liberal ones, of course.

Not of course. Can you point to a study that confirms this?

Probably. Anecdotally, California, Oregon, Washington are stuffed to the gills with stoners. Beyond that I really don't give a damn either way. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

[JimC]

Haven't those states decriminalised smoking dope? If so, the "stoners" won't be committing too many crimes...

[Seth]

Haven't those states decriminalised smoking dope? If so, the "stoners" won't be committing too many crimes...

That falsely presumes that the crimes involved are merely getting stoned. They aren't. The crimes are usually the ones they commit in order to take other people's stuff so that they can get high, and that doesn't go away with legalization.

[Sean Hayden]

-nevermind

[JimC]

Haven't those states decriminalised smoking dope? If so, the "stoners" won't be committing too many crimes...

That falsely presumes that the crimes involved are merely getting stoned. They aren't. The crimes are usually the ones they commit in order to take other people's stuff so that they can get high, and that doesn't go away with legalization.

I don't think so. Legalised marihuana (and probably other dugs as well) is not very expensive. Generally, it is when drugs are illegal that they foster crime syndicates to sell them (at high prices), and also crime by addicts to bring in enough money to buy them. I thought your libertarian sentiments would be in alignment with decriminalisation of personal choices like drug use...

(It would also mean many fewer people incarcerated, and therefore a big saving of state expenditure...)

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Haven't those states decriminalised smoking dope? If so, the "stoners" won't be committing too many crimes...

That falsely presumes that the crimes involved are merely getting stoned. They aren't. The crimes are usually the ones they commit in order to take other people's stuff so that they can get high, and that doesn't go away with legalization.

I don't think so. Legalised marihuana (and probably other dugs as well) is not very expensive. Generally, it is when drugs are illegal that they foster crime syndicates to sell them (at high prices), and also crime by addicts to bring in enough money to buy them. I thought your libertarian sentiments would be in alignment with decriminalisation of personal choices like drug use...

(It would also mean many fewer people incarcerated, and therefore a big saving of state expenditure...)

He's not a libertarian. He thinks he is. But he's not. He wants everyone to have complete freedom to do whatever HE thinks they ought to be able to do. That's not libertarianism. It's just self-centredness.

[JimC]

[rainbow]

Laws are by state. Many crimes are not federal. Stiff sentences for pot in Kansas and none in Colorado next door. My state nearby has 7 days in jail for pot from one ounce to a pound (about half kilo). Selling pot 1-20 years in jail.

Many states have life in prison for the the third serious crime. Even drugs.

Most states offer deals: rehab or jail.

It would be interesting to know which states have the highest social problems due to drug abuse.

The liberal ones, of course.

Not of course. Can you point to a study that confirms this?

Probably. Anecdotally, California, Oregon, Washington are stuffed to the gills with stoners. Beyond that I really don't give a damn either way. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

...so a thumbsuck based on nothing but your prejudices.

[mistermack]

I think that the disparity between coke and crack sentencing IS ludicrous. And racist, or at least elitist.

But it's also in response to the level of violent crime associated with crack. And the incredible addictive nature of crack. Cocaine's bad, but crack is hugely addictive.

That's often stated by the authorities but there is no real evidence for it...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crack_cocaine#Addiction

Crack cocaine is popularly thought to be the most addictive form of cocaine. However, this claim has been contested: Morgan and Zimmer wrote that available data indicated that "...smoking cocaine by itself does not increase markedly the likelihood of dependence.... The claim that cocaine is much more addictive when smoked must be reexamined." They argued that cocaine users who are already prone to abuse are most likely to "move toward a more efficient mode of ingestion" (that is, smoking).

The intense desire to recapture the initial high is what is so addictive for many users. On the other hand, Reinarman et al. wrote that the nature of crack addiction depends on the social context in which it is used and the psychological characteristics of users, pointing out that many heavy crack users can go for days or weeks without using the drugs.

Obviously, it's the same drug, so long-time users will probably be just as addicted on both.
But crack cocaine is such an instant hit, compared to most other methods of use, that the first time use makes more of an impression.
And it might not be physically more addictive, but it's instant nature leads to more repetitive use.
I'm certainly no authority on cocaine, but I have known cocaine users, and real crack addicts, and that's the impression I got off them.

It's a bit like comparing cigarettes to cigars. A cigarette is a quick hit of nicotine, a seemingly harmless two or three minutes smoke that gets rid of the craving, whereas a cigar can last an hour, and isn't so suited to repetitive use.

[Tero]

What is the withdrawal from crack like? Like heroin?

[mistermack]

I've go no personal experience of heroin withdrawal, or crack withdrawal.

But a crack addict is in a desperate state of mind, when they really want/need it.
Nothing else matters, at that point, not even their own kids, and they will sell anything, tell any lie, and seem to have no conscience whatsoever, when it comes to getting money for some crack.

The behaviour does seem similar to what you hear about heroin addicts.