# Crack Cocaine vs Powder Cocaine distinction in our laws is a terrible policy **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 15, 2008, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810 "2008-11-15T03:40:31Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2008, 12:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/61 "2008-11-17T12:11:44Z")
> [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > I am unclear on two things: > > 1: Do you hold that the law is deliberately racist, or incidentally so? And was there no input from experts on the black community affected before, during or after the legislation was effected? > > 2: What is your preferred remedy? 1. It is incidentally racist. That is sort of the nature of institutional racism; it relies on unconsidered actions or decisions that make assumptions without a conscious attempt to inflict harm. I doubt that anyone involved in this situation is acting from anything but the best intentions. 2. I’d like to see the distinction between crack and powder dropped in the law rather than simply “permitting” some judges to use their heads and modify sentences. I’d like to see the money expended on chasing this drug all over the cities redirected to more useful law enforcement efforts. If we have to be stupid enough to make drug use illegal, then raise the “dealing” levels to the bushel or something that will ensnare only the top importers and distributors and stop messing with the penny-ante stuff that makes great headlines and has no serious effect society. (I suspect that the equalization of penalties for all forms of cocaine will probably go a long way toward the second point, since it tends to be little more than chasing the funding anyway.) Black leaders were involved, to some extent, when the laws were passed. Many of them heartily embraced the decision to go after crack harshly. However, that was 22 years ago, before rumors of instant, unbreakable addiction had been shown to be nonsense and during the period when the new and expanding crack business was first raging through the streets like 1920s alcohol pedlar wars. We now know that the effects of crack were overhyped while the drug business has settled down with inter-gang feuding over crack no worse than for than any other drug. However, having built up the hype, no politician and few community leaders are willing to get themselves called “pro drug” by calling for changes in the laws and enforcement. ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2008, 12:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/62 "2008-11-17T12:55:19Z")
Thanks. I agree with most of your sentiments except the “institutional racism” part. Perhaps that’s another thread. An incidental effect of a well-meaning law passed in cooperation with the cohort it most affects cannot be construed to be racist against that cohort. It’s a completely underserved and inflammatory modifier. It seems to me the core remedy is to stop making drugs illegal, but perhaps that’s another thread also. ---
**Author:** ![mks57](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b9bd4f/32.png) [@mks57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mks57)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2008, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/63 "2008-11-17T15:20:40Z")
> [@neutron\_star](#): > > Out of curiosity, what would be the reason for using cocaine - with the stigma that comes with it - over some other topical? Why does anybody use it at all? I used to have eye drops that contained cocaine. I had terrible problems with allergies as a child, and those eye drops were the only thing that would make the itching and irritation go away. I think I was allergic to everything on the planet. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2008, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/64 "2008-11-17T15:27:48Z")
> [@Chief\_Pedant](#): > > Thanks. I agree with most of your sentiments except the “institutional racism” part. Perhaps that’s another thread. An incidental effect of a well-meaning law passed in cooperation with the cohort it most affects cannot be construed to be racist against that cohort. It’s a completely underserved and inflammatory modifier. Only if one chooses to ignore the meaning of the phrase “institutional racism.” When someone sees the word “racism” and rears back in a defensive posture without considering that the phrase is simply descriptive, then we get all sorts of people scrambling to deny that certain effects can be racist (_i.e._, negatively affecting a group based on race), without there being anything malicious involved. There was a recent story in the Cleveland Plain Dealer about such a phenomenon. _If you’re arrested for drugs, you’re more likely to get a second chance if you’re white_: [Part 1](http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/10/race_and_drug_use.html), [Part 2](http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/10/in_cuyahoga_county_youre_much.html). Now, this does not appear to be an action that targets blacks for some nefarious purpose. The system that results in this discrepancy has been in place for several decades, including the period when the County Prosecutor was the late Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones, a woman who was an outspoken champion of black rights. More likely is that simple unconscious decisions are made granting whites more leeway than blacks on a case by case basis where an individual (prosecutor) looking at an individual (accused criminal) simply feels more “trusting” of a white person than a black person. There is no plan. There is no overt malice. There is simply a socially imbued “feeling” that leads to decisions that are discriminatory. It is my opinion that the same sort of unconscious evaluations are made at a lot of other levels–including the choices to fund law enforcement programs. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2008, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/65 "2008-11-17T16:00:24Z")
However, the distinction between crack and cocaine is not based on assumptions about race, but assumptions about delivery method and potential for addiction. Crack is smoked; powder cocaine is generally snorted. The more addictive use of the drug is punished more severely. Similarly, injected cocaine is going to tend to be punished more severely, because of the incidental illegality of possession of syringes and so forth. > [@](#): > > Only if one chooses to ignore the meaning of the phrase “institutional racism.” “Racism” is pretty obviously a pejorative; acting all innocent when people react to it is rather disingenuous. Accusations of “institutional racism” are a method of making white people feel defensive. Then the discussion shifts to making them defend themselves against the accusation. Crack is a drug that black folks use at disproportionately hgher rates than whites. Society can either take stronger measures against this more dangerous form of cocaine, in which case white society can be accused of institutional racism for targetting black drug users. Or they can not take such measures, in which case white society can be accused just the same. After all, here is a problem that disproportionately affects black, and The Man is looking the other way. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/66 "2008-11-18T02:13:22Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > I do not look for any specific ratio. However, we are incarcerating up to 25% of young black males. We are not incarcerating anywhere near that many whites, even thought their use is within one and a half percentage points of black use. That has a direct impact on that section of society. And if the numbers are that only 9.8% of black people are using drugs, (per **levdrakon** ’s and my links to government claims), the idea that 25% of them are in the drug trade is ludicrous. If we were making the same effort to imprison white guys, there would be mass demonstrations to change the laws, but since it is a minorirty group, folks just shrug and say “tough.” It is not just “tough,” it is a specific effort to pass feel-good laws and finance enforcement that oh so coincidentally affect people out of the mainstream. Let me ask it this way, why isn’t all this simply attributed to: 1. crack is a more dangerous drug than cocaine 2. this crime is more concentrated geographically, which allows the law to arrest more offenders efficiently 3. crack, especially when usage is high in a particular neighborhood, creates dangers to that community beyond the usage of the drug itself, thus mandating more la enforcement than if the only problem was through direct usage ? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 4:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/67 "2008-11-18T04:51:14Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Let me ask it this way, why isn’t all this simply attributed to: > > 1. crack is a more dangerous drug than cocaine > 2. this crime is more concentrated geographically, which allows the law to arrest more offenders efficiently > 3. crack, especially when usage is high in a particular neighborhood, creates dangers to that community beyond the usage of the drug itself, thus mandating more la enforcement than if the only problem was through direct usage > > ? Because numbers 1 and 3 are not actually true and number 2 relies on the errors of 1 and 3 to rationalize a failure to come up with a rational plan to address real drug problems. ---
**Author:** ![daksya](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/dc4da7/32.png) [@daksya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/daksya)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 5:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/68 "2008-11-18T05:00:28Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Because numbers 1 and 3 are not actually true How is (1) not true? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 5:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/69 "2008-11-18T05:18:04Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > However, the distinction between crack and cocaine is not based on assumptions about race, but assumptions about delivery method and potential for addiction. Crack is smoked; powder cocaine is generally snorted. The more addictive use of the drug is punished more severely. Of course, since crack is not actually more addictive than powder, the purported reason for heavier sentences is based on an error. > [@Shodan](#): > > “Racism” is pretty obviously a pejorative; acting all innocent when people react to it is rather disingenuous. > > Accusations of “institutional racism” are a method of making white people feel defensive. Then the discussion shifts to making them defend themselves against the accusation. Interestingly, this appears to be something you have made up out of whole cloth (unless you are feeling defensive for some reason). The phrase “institutional racism” has been employed for nearly forty years to indicate a situation in which underlying assumptions are allowed to exist without serious analysis that result in negative actions or processes affecti9ng one or another perceived race. It explicitly is employed where the (unconsidered) assumptions occur in a situation where no one is actively attempting to behave in a racist manner, but the assumptions permeate the institution, (be it law enforcement, education, some other institution, or society at large). At no point in this discussion has anyone made a claim that any other person should feel guilty about any actions. I am not sure why you have created this straw man (aside from playing the victim card by pretending that you, as a white person, might be accused of something or another that does not actually appear in this thread). It is my position that any number of people have made erroneous decisions based on misunderstood information that has resulted in inflicting harm on a particular subset of society. I would like to see the errors corrected, but I have made no claim that there is any “white” conspiracy (or even that “whites” are the sole perpetrators of the problem). I note that one aspect of the situation that makes it difficult to resolve is grounded in institutional racism–a very real situation in our society for whch I have provided a separate example to demonstrate my point. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 5:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/70 "2008-11-18T05:19:51Z")
> [@daksya](#): > > How is (1) not true? In what way is 1) true? A cheaper, quicker, shorter high does not make a drug more dangerous. ---
**Author:** ![mks57](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b9bd4f/32.png) [@mks57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mks57)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 5:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/71 "2008-11-18T05:41:15Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > In what way is 1) true? A cheaper, quicker, shorter high does not make a drug more dangerous. It may make a drug more addictive. Crack always reminded me of that scientific experiment where they inserted an electrode in the pleasure center of a monkey’s brain and connected it to a switch in the monkey’s cage. ---
**Author:** ![daksya](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/dc4da7/32.png) [@daksya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/daksya)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 5:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/72 "2008-11-18T05:50:55Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Of course, since crack is not actually more addictive than powder, the purported reason for heavier sentences is based on an error. There is a possibility that this is true, but the [evidence](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14598014?dopt=Abstract), prima facie, is against you. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 6:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/73 "2008-11-18T06:18:15Z")
> [@daksya](#): > > There is a possibility that this is true, but the [evidence](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14598014?dopt=Abstract), prima facie, is against you. So we have one preliminary study in which the authors admit that they have yet to control for some important variables and from that we should conclude that previous studies in which powder failed to be more addictive than crack should be ignored? ---
**Author:** ![Mosier](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ea924/32.png) [@Mosier](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mosier)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 6:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/74 "2008-11-18T06:38:50Z")
How much association does sale/possession of crack have with other, more violent crimes? Does coke have the same association? I think possession of crack is a bigger offense because cops have noticed more of a trend with crack and Really Bad Stuff happening than with coke. If it’s true that crack has a higher association with Really Bad Crime With An Actual Victim, then I don’t think it would be unprecedented to prosecute crack crimes more harshly than coke crimes. Controlled substances are not all created equal. ---
**Author:** ![daksya](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/dc4da7/32.png) [@daksya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/daksya)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 6:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/75 "2008-11-18T06:54:55Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > So we have one preliminary study in which the authors admit that they have yet to control for some important variables That caveat appears in most of these epidemiological studies on street drugs, if you have gone through many, as I have, and is a standard scientific CYA. It doesn’t connote pragmatic uncertainty. Support for the equivalence argument in journals tend to implicate premorbid susceptibility and socioeconomic factors as the reason for the apparent disparity. But I don’t remember seeing any studies, as opposed to anecdotes, saying that crack is not more addictive. > [@](#): > > and from that we should conclude that previous studies in which powder failed to be more addictive than crack should be ignored? Can you cite _affirmative_ evidence that crack is not more addictive than cocaine? ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 7:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/76 "2008-11-18T07:41:30Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Because numbers 1 and 3 are not actually true and number 2 relies on the errors of 1 and 3 to rationalize a failure to come up with a rational plan to address real drug problems. I can see that others have addressed these claims of yours. I look forward to seeing your further responses to **daksya** regarding evidence that powder cocaine (and I trust you will use the street grade) is as potent/strong/addictive as crack. ---
**Author:** ![jackdavinci](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackdavinci/32/3259_2.png) [@jackdavinci](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jackdavinci)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 11:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/77 "2008-11-18T11:00:22Z")
I’ve heard anecdotes to the effect of crack being way more addictive. But really, the US drug policies are so absurd and not based on any kind of logic already, there seems little point in singling this out over everything else. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 11:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/78 "2008-11-18T11:47:29Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > I can see that others have addressed these claims of yours. I look forward to seeing your further responses to **daksya** regarding evidence that powder cocaine (and I trust you will use the street grade) is as potent/strong/addictive as crack. I see that you have not actually read the “addresses.” When crack first appeared, there was a lot of hype about “instant addicition” and a lot of other nonsense. The sentencing laws were created in 1986, in part due to that hype. The next year the medical report came back noting that it was nonsense. I keep going to sites exclaiming how excessively addictive crack is supposed to be and none of them actually cite any medical evidence for that. The various government sites addressing drug problems, (NIDA, NCADI, DoJ, and others), refrain from posting that unattributed hyperbole. Believing a legend 21 years after it has been debunked with only a single, tentative and inconclusive report in all that time to support the legend is a bad way to set laws or social policy. ---
**Author:** ![daksya](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/dc4da7/32.png) [@daksya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/daksya)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/79 "2008-11-18T13:25:32Z")
[QUOTE=tomndebb] Believing a legend 21 years after it has been debunked with only a single, tentative and inconclusive report in all that time to support the legend is a bad way to set laws or social policy. [/QUOTE] There’s nothing tentative about the cited study. It is a standard caveat in epidemiology related to hidden populations, not an emphatic one here. Also, when did I ever imply that this study was the only one of its kind? Here’s a 1996 [review](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8918856?dopt=Abstract) of earlier studies. There’s a issue of Journal of Psychoactive Drugs from the mid-70s that was dedicated to the topic of smoked cocaine and its concerns, at least a decade or so before the hype. The difference was recognized even then. You are arguing against basic pharmacology by impying that the route of administration (the reason for 'crack") does not alter the consequences along with the expressed effects. And in cocaine’s case, the change is for the worse. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810/80 "2008-11-18T13:46:07Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Of course, since crack is not actually more addictive than powder, the purported reason for heavier sentences is based on an error. _The Manual of Adolescent Substance Abuse Treatment_, Todd Wilk Estroff, M.D., 2001 (306 pages), pp. 44-45, [The National Institute on Drug Abuse](http://www.nida.nih.gov/Infofacts/cocaine.html), [The US Dept. of Justice](http://www.ussc.gov/crack/APPNDXB.HTM), all disagree with you. Additionally, > [@Dr. Lee P. Brown](#): > > In my opinion, one of the goals of sentencing policy in general should be to eliminate race-based differentials. However, the research does not clearly support elimination of the sentencing differential for powder versus crack cocaine. In fact, the greater availability of crack cocaine, the greater degree of addictiveness of crack cocaine, the impact on many inner city communities, and the greater systemic violence which surrounds the crack trade indicate that some differential may be warranted. > [@Center for Substance Abuse Research](#): > > …compulsive cocaine use will develop even more rapidly if the substance is smoked rather than snorted. > [@](#): > > Crack, because it is smoked and gets into the bloodstream faster than snorted cocaine, produces a more intense high and is generally considered more addictive than powdered cocaine. [Cite.](http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/wireStory?id=4048205) > [@](#): > > However, evidence exists showing a greater abuse liability, greater propensity for dependence, and more severe consequences when cocaine is smoked (cocaine-base) or injected intravenously (cocaine hydrochloride) compared with intranasal use (cocaine hydrochloride) _JAMA 1996 Nov 20; 276(19):1580-8_. [Cite.](http://www.cocaine.org/crack/index.html) > [@](#): > > Cocaine, in any form, produces similar physiological and psychological effects once it reaches the brain, but the onset, intensity, and duration of its effects are directly related to the route of administration and to how rapidly cocaine enters the brain. > > Oral absorption is the slowest form of administration because cocaine has to pass through the digestive tract before it is absorbed into the bloodstream. Intranasal use, or snorting—the process of inhaling cocaine powder through the nostrils—leads to quicker absorption through the nasal tissue. Intravenous (IV) use, or injection, is faster still, introducing the drug directly into the bloodstream and heightening the intensity of effects. Finally, and similar to injection, the inhalation of cocaine vapor or smoke into the lungs is also a very effective method of delivering the drug into the bloodstream. Compared to the injection route, however, smoking produces quicker and higher peak blood levels in the brain –hence, a faster euphoria – and is devoid of the risks attendant to IV use, such as exposure to HIV from contaminated needles. [Cite.](http://www.hhs.gov/asl/testify/2008/02/t20080212b.html) > [@](#): > > I am not sure why you have created this straw man (aside from playing the victim card by pretending that you, as a white person, might be accused of something or another that does not actually appear in this thread). > [@](#): > > I would like to see the errors corrected, but I have made no claim that there is any “white” conspiracy (or even that “whites” are the sole perpetrators of the problem). Speaking of things people are making up from whole cloth, could you please cite where anyone said you had mentioned conspiracy, or said that “whites” were soley responsible? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crack-cocaine-vs-powder-cocaine-distinction-in-our-laws-is-a-terrible-policy/472810.md?page=5)