Disparities in sentences.
15/3/10 22:01![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
futurebird.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsIn 2005 the Supreme Court case United States v. Booker struck down the provision of the sentencing statute that required judges to impose a sentence within the Federal Guidelines range. So, what impact has the removal of mandatory guidelines had on sentencing?
Many suspected this improvement was due to the mandatory sentencing guidelines. But, whatever the cause, it was excellent news for federal courts. Since 2005, however, after the Booker decision, “those differences appear to have been increasing steadily,'' with black men receiving sentences that were up to 10 percent longer than those imposed on whites, the commission said.
In separate, but related, news House Judiciary Committee is finally going to do something about the sentencing disparities between crack and powder cocaine. The have said that the notorious 100-1 ratio has no basis in science and it hits poor people and minorities especially hard. It is one of the mandatory drug sentencing policies enacted in the mid-1980s, that helped triple the nation's prison population. The new policy still gives harsher sentences for crack (more like 20-1, rather than 100-1)
Reforming the prison system will not be swift or simple. In these two stories we see how sentencing guidelines, for example, can work as a double edged sword. Guidelines may protect minorities from discrimination when comparing people of different races who committed the same crime. But, when very similar crimes (possession of crack vs. possession of cocaine) are aligned along racial and income lines of preference, rigid guidelines can become discriminatory. Judges, are for the most, part happier with fewer guidelines, they feel that they are able to be more fair, giving each case individual consideration. Yet, even among judges, there are some doubts about not having mandatory guidelines. The next article is not about racial discrimination, but it gives a sense of the complexities and pitfalls of sentencing.
What do you think about sentencing guidelines? To they tend to put people in prison for too long-- or can they make the system more fair?
5 grams of crack is about 25 "hits" or a 8-day supply for an addict.
500 grams of coke is 3,000 "lines" or, if we say someone is using 35 lines a day (this would kill many people) this is a 86 day supply.
The purpose of the sentences is to put people in jail who have an intent to sell.
For years, legal experts have argued over the disparity in sentencing between black and white men. The commission found that the difference peaked in 1999 with blacks receiving 14 percent longer sentences. By 2002, however, the commission found no statistical difference.
Many suspected this improvement was due to the mandatory sentencing guidelines. But, whatever the cause, it was excellent news for federal courts. Since 2005, however, after the Booker decision, “those differences appear to have been increasing steadily,'' with black men receiving sentences that were up to 10 percent longer than those imposed on whites, the commission said.
`People who commit similar crimes should receive similar sentences,'' said Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, ranking Republican on the House Judiciary Committee "Unfortunately, without sentencing guidelines for courts to follow, some individuals have received harsher penalties than others despite committing similar crimes."
Disparities in sentences found, BY MARISA TAYLOR
In separate, but related, news House Judiciary Committee is finally going to do something about the sentencing disparities between crack and powder cocaine. The have said that the notorious 100-1 ratio has no basis in science and it hits poor people and minorities especially hard. It is one of the mandatory drug sentencing policies enacted in the mid-1980s, that helped triple the nation's prison population. The new policy still gives harsher sentences for crack (more like 20-1, rather than 100-1)
Reforming the prison system will not be swift or simple. In these two stories we see how sentencing guidelines, for example, can work as a double edged sword. Guidelines may protect minorities from discrimination when comparing people of different races who committed the same crime. But, when very similar crimes (possession of crack vs. possession of cocaine) are aligned along racial and income lines of preference, rigid guidelines can become discriminatory. Judges, are for the most, part happier with fewer guidelines, they feel that they are able to be more fair, giving each case individual consideration. Yet, even among judges, there are some doubts about not having mandatory guidelines. The next article is not about racial discrimination, but it gives a sense of the complexities and pitfalls of sentencing.
Filip questioned whether the return of discretionary sentencing is such a good thing. While excellent legal judgment may be a prerequisite to becoming a federal judge, Filip argued that legal judgment does little to qualify a judge to make the moral judgments that sentencing requires.
Accordingly, judges should take a modest view of their own moral judgment before departing from the norms, Filip maintained.
He noted that information available at sentencing is often slanted, and is a poor guide as to whether a defendant will reoffend. While a defendant might present three letters attesting to his good moral character, the judge has no way of knowing whether dozens of other persons were asked, but refused, to write such letters.
Former judge defends sentencing guidelines
Accordingly, judges should take a modest view of their own moral judgment before departing from the norms, Filip maintained.
He noted that information available at sentencing is often slanted, and is a poor guide as to whether a defendant will reoffend. While a defendant might present three letters attesting to his good moral character, the judge has no way of knowing whether dozens of other persons were asked, but refused, to write such letters.
Former judge defends sentencing guidelines
| Type of drug | Five Year Sentence Without Parole | Ten Year Sentence Without Parole |
| LSD | 1 gram | 10 grams |
| Marijuana | 100 plants/100 kilos | 1000 plants/1000 kilos |
| Crack cocaine | 5 grams | 50 grams |
| Powder cocaine | 500 grams | 5 kilos |
| Heroin | 100 grams | 1 kilo |
| Methamphetamine | 10 grams | 100 grams |
| PCP | 10 grams | 100 grams |
5 grams of crack is about 25 "hits" or a 8-day supply for an addict.
500 grams of coke is 3,000 "lines" or, if we say someone is using 35 lines a day (this would kill many people) this is a 86 day supply.
The purpose of the sentences is to put people in jail who have an intent to sell.
Re: Crack and coke
Date: 16/3/10 15:41 (UTC)If you can purchase a powerfully addictive drug (as addictive as cocaine) but cheaper how would this affect a poor drug addict?
The question isn't 'is one more addictive'. The question is 'why by coke when crack is cheaper and more readily available'.
Re: Crack and coke
Date: 16/3/10 17:58 (UTC)Re: Crack and coke
Date: 16/3/10 18:15 (UTC)Something has to be done about Crack. It's affordability makes it dangerous.
Re: Crack and coke
Date: 16/3/10 19:01 (UTC)Most people who use crack do not become addicted. Few people die from it. So how is this true.
Re: Crack and coke
Date: 16/3/10 19:20 (UTC)http://smoking.ygoy.com/2010/01/30/why-is-crack-cocaine-highly-addictive/
Crack cocaine is one of the most strong and potent illegal drugs available today. It is considered to be one of the most powerful drugs available today mainly because of its ability to create almost immediate psychological dependence.
There is a reason why this drug is so highly addictive. Because it is heated and smoked, it enters the blood stream faster than powder cocaine which is snorted. The smoke enters the blood almost immediately and gives a sudden instant high.
It is addictive even right after the first use as it enters the blood stream and reaches the brain very fast to activate pleasure areas. This sense of euphoria leads to an almost immediate addiction. The high it gives is intense but lasts for a very short while, as less as fifteen minutes. This creates a craving and leads to more and more usage every time as the body develops a tolerance very fast to this drug.
I haven't been able to verify that most do not become addicted. Where did you find this out?
I found some good numbers.
Date: 16/3/10 23:03 (UTC)If most people who used crack became addicted there would be a LOT more crack addicts! The NSDUH survey found that the following percentages of people were still using their substance two years later at levels indicating dependency:
* Heroin 13.4 percent
* Crack Cocaine 9.2 percent
* Marijuana 5.8 percent
* Cocaine 3.7 percent
* Alcohol 3.2 percent
* Pain Relievers 3.1 percent
But these percentages are out of people who were "using their substance two years later at levels indicating dependency" at the start of the two years.
This shows that crack addicts are less likely to break their addiction than coke addicts. That probably implies crack is more addictive. But, also notice that, even of the people who are addicted, most get off of the drug... more than 90%
The way people talk about crack in media and in politics one would think that if you looked at a crack pipe you'd be hooked.
I can't find any numbers about how many people got addicted based on how many tried the drug. That's what's really needed to answer the question.