Established in 1986, The Sentencing Project works for a fair and effective U.S. criminal justice system by promoting reforms in sentencing policy, addressing unjust racial disparities and practices, and advocating for alternatives to incarceration.
In a report recently issued, the Sentencing Project addresses disparities in the criminal justice system, juvenile life without parole, the death penalty and its racial implications, and felony disenfranchisement.
Racial disparity pervades the U.S. criminal justice system. African American males are six times more likely to be incarcerated than white males and Hispanic males are 2.5 times more likely. Not only are racial minorities incarcerated disproportionately, they are also likely to be sentenced more harshly than white defendants for similar crimes.
The U.S. government cites a report by The Sentencing Project to suggest that disparities in the prison population may be diminishing. However, this reduced racial disparity largely pertains to women and in significant part is a function of more white women being sentenced to prison, rather than action by the government to reduce current disparities. Racial and ethnic disparities among women remain prevalent, although less substantial than disparities among men.
The War on Drugs has exacerbated racial inequalities in the criminal justice system through discriminatory law enforcement practices and disparities in sentencing laws, including the application of harsh mandatory minimum sentences. While the federal Fair Sentencing Act (FSA) of 2010 reduced the crack/cocaine sentencing quantity disparity triggering mandatory minimum penalties from 100:1 to 18:1, there is still disparate treatment in the sentencing of individuals convicted of offenses involving these two pharmacologically identical drugs.
Because African Americans constitute 80% of those sentenced under federal crack cocaine laws, the disparity in sentencing laws leads to harsher sentences for black defendants for committing similar offenses to those of their white or Latino counterparts convicted of powder cocaine offenses.
Furthermore, the FSA did not alter the harsh federal mandatory minimum sentences imposed for a majority of drug offenses. In 2010, the number of black male offenders convicted of a federal offense subject to a mandatory minimum sentence was nearly double that of convicted white males.
Even though the U.S. Sentencing Commission voted to apply the guideline changes associated with the FSA retroactively, those persons sentenced prior to adoption of the law are still subject to the previous mandatory minimum levels.
While the Supreme Court in Miller v. Alabama, 132 S. Ct. 2455 (2012) held mandatory juvenile life without parole (JLWOP) sentences to be in violation of the Eighth Amendment, there are still about 2,500 individuals in the United States serving such sentences for crimes committed before the age of eighteen.
The United States stands alone in the imposition of such severe sentences; currently no other country imposes JLWOP sentences.
At the time of the Miller ruling, seven states plus the District of Columbia had banned JLWOP and only four states have joined their ranks in the two years since.
Thus, in most states, juveniles may still be sentenced to LWOP as long as it is not imposed as a mandatory penalty.
Additionally troublesome is that only six state Supreme Courts have interpreted Miller to apply retroactively, and at least three state Supreme Courts’ including Pennsylvania, which has the most individuals (472) serving JLWOP sentences, have ruled that Miller is not retroactive.
The racial disparities among those persons subject to these penalties make their use even more problematic. Of the 2,500 individuals currently serving JLWOP sentences 61% are African American, 27% are white, and 12% are “other.”
“The proportion of African Americans serving JLWOP sentences for the killing of a white person (43.4%) is nearly twice the rate at which African American juveniles are arrested for taking a white person’s life (23.2%). Conversely, white juvenile offenders with black victims are only about half as likely (3.6%) to receive a JLWOP sentence as their proportion of arrests for killing blacks (6.4%).”
Additionally, the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act, the nation’s only federal policy specifically designed to handle the nation’s juvenile justice systems, has not been reauthorized in over five years. A reauthorized Act could significantly strengthen the Act’s mandate to address the severe racial and ethnic disparities which plague juvenile justice systems nationwide by requiring states to take concrete steps to reduce and monitor disparities.
While six states have repealed the death penalty in the past seven years, more than 3,000 people remain on death row. In the past ten years 42 people on average have been executed each year and 20 people have already been executed in 2014.
It is also important to note the pronounced racial disparity in death penalty cases. This disparity manifests itself in two forms. First, those convicted of killing whites are more likely to be sentenced to death than those convicted of killing blacks even when controlling for crime-specific variables.
Second, black defendants are more likely to be sentenced to death regardless of the race of their victims.
When these two factors are taken together, the impact of race on capital sentencing is staggering. As far back as 1990, the U.S. General Accounting Office found that “[i]n 82% of the studies [reviewed], race of the victim was found to influence the likelihood of being charged with capital murder or receiving the death penalty, i.e., those who murdered whites were found more likely to be sentenced to death than those who murdered blacks.”
Such statistical disparities have led many of the most respected American jurists to call for the abolition of the death penalty because of its racially disparate impact, among other factors.
Felony disenfranchisement remains a significant consequence of criminal justice policy in the United States as an estimated 5.85 million persons are ineligible to vote as a result of a current or previous felony conviction.
Over two million of the currently disenfranchised are African Americans as the racial disparities which pervade the criminal justice system are paralleled in the disenfranchised population. One of every thirteen African Americans of voting age is disenfranchised, a rate more than four times greater than non-African Americans.
In the United States, thirty-five of the fifty states impose post-sentence restrictions on individuals’ voting rights. Further, twelve states deny voting rights even to those who have successfully fulfilled their prison, parole, or probation sentences.
While the Democracy Restoration Act, a proposed bill that would restore voting rights in federal elections to those who have been released from prison, would be a way for the government to make inroads even with very restrictive policies in many states, there has been little support in Congress for advancing this legislation.
The scope and severity of disenfranchisement policies in the United States makes it unique in regard to comparable nations. Many industrialized nations impose no restrictions on voting and of those that do they are generally limited only to persons in prison. Several major court decisions have also upheld the right to vote for incarcerated persons.
In 2005 the European Court of Human Rights determined “that a blanket ban on voting from prison violates the European Convention on Human Rights, which guarantees the right to free and fair elections.
The Constitutional Court of South Africa and Supreme Courts of Canada and Israel have similarly upheld the right to vote for people with felony convictions, with the Israeli court recognizing the importance of separating “‘contempt for this act’ from ‘respect for [the prisoner’s] right.’”
The 2014 comprehensive report of the National Research Council, The Growth of Incarceration in the United States, finds that:
“The incremental deterrent effect of increases in lengthy prison sentences is modest at best. Because recidivism rates decline markedly with age, lengthy prison sentences, unless they specifically target very high-rate or extremely dangerous offenders, are an inefficient approach to preventing crime by incapacitation.”
Given these findings, and the disproportionate effect of lengthy prison terms on people of color, what measures is the government undertaking to try to reduce the use of such sentences?
In 2013 the U.S. Attorney General directed federal prosecutors to avoid charging defendants with charges that would lead to imposition of a mandatory minimum penalty in cases where the individual does not have a significant role in the drug trade or significant criminal history, and other factors.
What has been the impact of this policy to date and has it had an effect on reducing racial disparities in prosecution?
Given the injustices and unfairness produced by mandatory sentencing policies, the government should strive to see such policies either repealed or substantially scaled back in scope. In addition, policies such as the Fair Sentencing Act which have corrected injustices in the system should be applied retroactively to persons convicted of relevant sentences prior to adoption of the legislation.
As a result of the 2012 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Miller v. Alabama persons under the age of 18 may no longer be sentenced to life without parole without judicial consideration of less punitive options.
As the states come into compliance with this ruling they should establish a minimum term before parole consideration of no longer than 15 years in prison, based on young people’s capacity to change and to take advantage of rehabilitation opportunities in prison.
This country’s laws are written to promote theft and fraud, and our government supports and endorses stupidity. Fraud and socialism is what this country is all about. Just look at who we elect to state office?
it’s a weird comment since by most measures, the us, perhaps second to switzerland is the least socialist country of the modern, industrial democracies.
Singapore? There are 4 or 5 others.
This country’s laws are written to promote theft and fraud, and our government supports and endorses stupidity. Fraud and socialism is what this country is all about. Just look at who we elect to state office?
it’s a weird comment since by most measures, the us, perhaps second to switzerland is the least socialist country of the modern, industrial democracies.
Singapore? There are 4 or 5 others.
the issue that defenders always raise is of course the prisons have more minorities, minorities tend to be more poor and they tend to commit more crimes.
but when the statistics are analyzed, that first of all is not necessarily true. for instance, drugs are used pretty uniformly, and yet the arrests are higher, the conviction rate is much higher and the incarceration rate is much higher for minorities – even controlling for all sorts of factors such as priors.
across the board even controlling for priors, minorities are more likely to be arrested, more likely to be charged upon arrest, and more likely to be convicted and more likely to serve time and will serve longer time.
The allegation that poverty causes crime comes from the Marxists, I’m told. If this is so, where was all the crime during the Great Depression?
Drugs may be used uniformly, I haven’t looked that up (sources?); but how and where they are used varies quite a bit. When someone in Davis buys $20 of pot in their living room or garage, it is discrete. When you hang out on a corner at 2AM in New York, Oakland, or Fresno, wearing gang paraphernalia (whether you are in a gang, or not), you’re asking for trouble. If you want police to go into frat party’s at random colleges to bust kids for underage drinking, be my guest. It has happened once or twice.
I’m also aware that a large percentage of the so-0called “homeless” are on drugs. I’ve seen a few in Davis that look like tweakers (meth).
The black-on-black crime statistics were interesting to look at because it took the racial component away.
poverty is one factor among many. i haven’t really researched the great depression to see if there was a spike in crime at that time. it may be that if you think about the types of crime people commit now – drugs, theft, etc. – requires someone who can afford to purchase the drugs and someone who has something to steal from.
that said, we know that during prohibition certain crimes increased – bootlegging of alcohol and mob activity.
it’s a complex question.
I think it is clear that there are a variety of social ills that spike when there is not a father in the home.
Poverty is one of them. Young boys, looking for a strong leader, a father, often find the gang as their new home. They repeatedly say that their gang “is like a family”.
“I’ve seen a few in Davis that look like tweakers (meth).”
Is that because they have lost several teeth? Do you realized how expensive dental care is in the U.S.?
Is it because they are walking back and forth, maybe trying to stay warm on a cold, rainy day?
Have you been on meth yourself, or been around meth users? How do you know a homeless person is a tweeker, or someone who just had way too much McDonald’s coffee?
My interaction with one homeless person was enlightening. He works more than half time and is paid under the table. He spends his money on meth. If he wanted to live inside he could but as it is there is more money for drugs. Also, if he wanted to rent he’d need to show a source of income. Since he is paid under the table, he can’t do that. Having no verifiable source of income makes renting difficult. He has friends in the homeless and near homeless community so showers and indoor sleeping are available. Given the circle of friends, I believe there are many like him who choose to spend their money on drugs and really aren’t in the market for permanent shelter they have to spend their drug money on. There are different reasons for homelessness. Some people really want to get off the street. Others are pretty content with the way they live.
I read, but I cannot find the reference unfortunately, that a great big hole in this canard that there is racism in the crime statistics for minorities fails to consider that minority neighborhoods tend to have a much greater incidence of crime, and when law enforcement ignores these areas there is a giant scream from people in those neighborhoods and people on the left that this is proof of racism.
So the police have responded to putting adequate patrols and adequate response teams in these areas… and it is relative to the amount of crime.
This then causes an exponential risk of resident-police encounters in these areas.
Said another way… if you live in an area where there is a lot of crime, you have a higher likelihood of being stopped and interrogated and caught for your crimes.
And there tends to be lower than average crime in low-income Asian neighborhoods, so this shoots another hole in the racism argument.
So we have a race-culture problem of more acceptance of criminal behavior that is exacerbated by itself. And so straight 1-to-1 statistic comparisons are useless and irrelevant.
If we want to fix the problem of over-representation of certain minorities in crime, we would do three things:
1. Invest in MORE law enforcement to dominate these neighborhoods.
2. Reform the education system to better meet the needs of the kids in these neighborhoods. Think boot camps. Think paying the kids to attend and work on campus. Think providing all meals and barracks. Reduce the amount given if having fathered or mothered a child.
3. Invest in enterprise in these underserved economic areas… create more jobs and support internships and apprenticeships to teach career skills to these kids.
“Think paying the kids to attend and work on campus.”
How about thinking about doing this without the punitive “boot camp” aspect. Instead of penalizing people for where they live, why not incentivize them to make where they live a better place.
I agree with Tia’s comment.
People who like to punish enjoy punishment. They are the same folks who joke about slapping and spanking young children. They are the folks who joke, “this hurts me more than it hurts you”. They come to work & brag about spanking their toddlers. They are the folks who enjoy boxing and football, even though their kids who participate are more likely to suffer severe head injuries.
Some folks just enjoy punishment. Maybe they were slapped, as toddlers. Who knows. Who cares. Physicla violence is wrong. Period.
Some of these folks also call themselves Christian, but I cannot find one passage in my Bible that says “Jesus slapped the little children.”
1. Invest in MORE law enforcement to dominate these neighborhoods.
I’d rather spend my tax dollars on firefighters than cops, given my experience with CA cops.
When the firefighters banged on my door early in the morning, they were trying to help me, not harass me.
During the Los Angeles riots after the Rodney King/racist cops trial, where did California law enforcement go? Did they go to the small businesses in L.A. low income areas, and try to help them? Or did the CA cops stay in the safe wealthy mostly-white neighborhoods to protect those citizens?
During Katrina, who was helped first?
the issue that defenders always raise is of course the prisons have more minorities, minorities tend to be more poor and they tend to commit more crimes.
but when the statistics are analyzed, that first of all is not necessarily true. for instance, drugs are used pretty uniformly, and yet the arrests are higher, the conviction rate is much higher and the incarceration rate is much higher for minorities – even controlling for all sorts of factors such as priors.
across the board even controlling for priors, minorities are more likely to be arrested, more likely to be charged upon arrest, and more likely to be convicted and more likely to serve time and will serve longer time.
The allegation that poverty causes crime comes from the Marxists, I’m told. If this is so, where was all the crime during the Great Depression?
Drugs may be used uniformly, I haven’t looked that up (sources?); but how and where they are used varies quite a bit. When someone in Davis buys $20 of pot in their living room or garage, it is discrete. When you hang out on a corner at 2AM in New York, Oakland, or Fresno, wearing gang paraphernalia (whether you are in a gang, or not), you’re asking for trouble. If you want police to go into frat party’s at random colleges to bust kids for underage drinking, be my guest. It has happened once or twice.
I’m also aware that a large percentage of the so-0called “homeless” are on drugs. I’ve seen a few in Davis that look like tweakers (meth).
The black-on-black crime statistics were interesting to look at because it took the racial component away.
poverty is one factor among many. i haven’t really researched the great depression to see if there was a spike in crime at that time. it may be that if you think about the types of crime people commit now – drugs, theft, etc. – requires someone who can afford to purchase the drugs and someone who has something to steal from.
that said, we know that during prohibition certain crimes increased – bootlegging of alcohol and mob activity.
it’s a complex question.
I think it is clear that there are a variety of social ills that spike when there is not a father in the home.
Poverty is one of them. Young boys, looking for a strong leader, a father, often find the gang as their new home. They repeatedly say that their gang “is like a family”.
“I’ve seen a few in Davis that look like tweakers (meth).”
Is that because they have lost several teeth? Do you realized how expensive dental care is in the U.S.?
Is it because they are walking back and forth, maybe trying to stay warm on a cold, rainy day?
Have you been on meth yourself, or been around meth users? How do you know a homeless person is a tweeker, or someone who just had way too much McDonald’s coffee?
My interaction with one homeless person was enlightening. He works more than half time and is paid under the table. He spends his money on meth. If he wanted to live inside he could but as it is there is more money for drugs. Also, if he wanted to rent he’d need to show a source of income. Since he is paid under the table, he can’t do that. Having no verifiable source of income makes renting difficult. He has friends in the homeless and near homeless community so showers and indoor sleeping are available. Given the circle of friends, I believe there are many like him who choose to spend their money on drugs and really aren’t in the market for permanent shelter they have to spend their drug money on. There are different reasons for homelessness. Some people really want to get off the street. Others are pretty content with the way they live.
I read, but I cannot find the reference unfortunately, that a great big hole in this canard that there is racism in the crime statistics for minorities fails to consider that minority neighborhoods tend to have a much greater incidence of crime, and when law enforcement ignores these areas there is a giant scream from people in those neighborhoods and people on the left that this is proof of racism.
So the police have responded to putting adequate patrols and adequate response teams in these areas… and it is relative to the amount of crime.
This then causes an exponential risk of resident-police encounters in these areas.
Said another way… if you live in an area where there is a lot of crime, you have a higher likelihood of being stopped and interrogated and caught for your crimes.
And there tends to be lower than average crime in low-income Asian neighborhoods, so this shoots another hole in the racism argument.
So we have a race-culture problem of more acceptance of criminal behavior that is exacerbated by itself. And so straight 1-to-1 statistic comparisons are useless and irrelevant.
If we want to fix the problem of over-representation of certain minorities in crime, we would do three things:
1. Invest in MORE law enforcement to dominate these neighborhoods.
2. Reform the education system to better meet the needs of the kids in these neighborhoods. Think boot camps. Think paying the kids to attend and work on campus. Think providing all meals and barracks. Reduce the amount given if having fathered or mothered a child.
3. Invest in enterprise in these underserved economic areas… create more jobs and support internships and apprenticeships to teach career skills to these kids.
“Think paying the kids to attend and work on campus.”
How about thinking about doing this without the punitive “boot camp” aspect. Instead of penalizing people for where they live, why not incentivize them to make where they live a better place.
I agree with Tia’s comment.
People who like to punish enjoy punishment. They are the same folks who joke about slapping and spanking young children. They are the folks who joke, “this hurts me more than it hurts you”. They come to work & brag about spanking their toddlers. They are the folks who enjoy boxing and football, even though their kids who participate are more likely to suffer severe head injuries.
Some folks just enjoy punishment. Maybe they were slapped, as toddlers. Who knows. Who cares. Physicla violence is wrong. Period.
Some of these folks also call themselves Christian, but I cannot find one passage in my Bible that says “Jesus slapped the little children.”
1. Invest in MORE law enforcement to dominate these neighborhoods.
I’d rather spend my tax dollars on firefighters than cops, given my experience with CA cops.
When the firefighters banged on my door early in the morning, they were trying to help me, not harass me.
During the Los Angeles riots after the Rodney King/racist cops trial, where did California law enforcement go? Did they go to the small businesses in L.A. low income areas, and try to help them? Or did the CA cops stay in the safe wealthy mostly-white neighborhoods to protect those citizens?
During Katrina, who was helped first?
“African American males are six times more likely to be incarcerated than white males” – isn’t it true that there is disproportionally more crime committed in this group? In fact, aren’t most of the murders within this group black on black?
I believe a Rand Corporation study 20 years ago said that by the time we have finally caught a criminal, they have committed an average of 20 crimes. We know that few crimes are solved. On top of this, multiple crimes are often plead down to 1 or 2 lesser charges in a plea deal before trial.
Crack and cocaine may be technically the same, but the reasons these laws were passed were due to the tremendous violence that seemed to surround this drug; and its extremely addictive nature. I debated people on the left about this 20 years ago. I told a well-know Bay Area African American liberal that I’ve known many white folks who buy marijuana or cocaine, but I’ve never heard of a single white person buying crack. He told me I was wrong. Fifteen years later, he was raising your same complaint. There was tremendous violence and mayhem around crack.
I know someone who committed a felony, has turned their life around, and votes.
There is an easy solution to all of the issues you pinpoint regarding drug use. Don’t do drugs! Problem solved.
Many of these problems are a result of the fracturing of the traditional Black Family. Thank you, Federal Government.
I agree that the sentencing disparities for similar crimes (not the crack / cocaine difference) is a problem. However, soft peddling the difference in the commission of crimes is also troubling. I’ve heard a statistic (which I haven’t confirmed) that 95% of crimes in New York City are conducted by people who are brown or black. But this is not the makeup of New York. The commission of crime is disproportinal.
Lastly, for those who might think I am racially “insensitive”, any time you want to discuss the meth explosion in the white community, be my guest. This is also a significant problem, and one of the reasons why so many industries have turned to illegal immigrants … when so many blue collar works have become tweakers.
“isn’t it true that there is disproportionally more crime committed in this group? In fact, aren’t most of the murders within this group black on black?”
the statistical analysis i’ve seen both in my office and elsewhere suggests that difference in crime rate alone does not account for the disparity in sentencing.
“Crack and cocaine may be technically the same, but the reasons these laws were passed were due to the tremendous violence…”
actually you’re part right, but it was mainly the at times hysterical fear rather than actual levels of violence that drove the wave of laws… i was starting my career in the early-80s, so i have some memory about why they put those laws into effect. it’s like now – shootings have not gone up, but coverage of shootings has which has everyone panicking and wanting to pass new laws on guns.
DP wrote:
> the statistical analysis i’ve seen both in my office and elsewhere
> suggests that difference in crime rate alone does not account for
> the disparity in sentencing.
Illegal drug use has always been a low priority crime. White kids in Chico and/or Isla Vista probably use as many (or more) illegal drugs as the Black kids in East Oakland or Oak Park.
The BIG difference is that Black drug dealers tend to shoot people WAY more often than White drug dealers.
No one calls the cops when the rich kid from Atherton is smoking pot, but they do call the cops when stuff like this happens:
“Neighbors of an 8-year-old girl who was shot and gravely wounded while playing on the porch of her East Oakland home expressed shock and outrage Monday over the latest burst of violence that has victimized another young child in the city. The girl was outside with her 7-year-old brother when two men got out of a car on the 1800 block of 66th Avenue and fired as many as 10 rounds while targeting a 47-year-old man walking on the street about 6:25 p.m. Friday, police said.”
http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Outrage-after-Oakland-shooting-of-8-year-old-5490194.php
In white areas you might go years without hearing a gun shot (with the exception of a rich kid who has been pumped full of legal drugs by his parents that don’t care enough to spend any time with the kid going crazy every now and then) while in poor black areas rarely does a day go by when you don’t hear gun shots.
The cops are not busting down doors and throwing black kids smoking pot in jail, they are more often than not going after black kids shooting each other and just happen to find drugs…
I no longer keep any guns, even hunting rifles, in my home. But if my home was in a low income, scary neighborhood, and I was a single woman living alone, and maybe I had a crazy ex-boyfriend bothering me, (even with a restraining order against him), then, yeah, I might have more than pepper spray in my home.
“African American males are six times more likely to be incarcerated than white males” – isn’t it true that there is disproportionally more crime committed in this group? In fact, aren’t most of the murders within this group black on black?
I believe a Rand Corporation study 20 years ago said that by the time we have finally caught a criminal, they have committed an average of 20 crimes. We know that few crimes are solved. On top of this, multiple crimes are often plead down to 1 or 2 lesser charges in a plea deal before trial.
Crack and cocaine may be technically the same, but the reasons these laws were passed were due to the tremendous violence that seemed to surround this drug; and its extremely addictive nature. I debated people on the left about this 20 years ago. I told a well-know Bay Area African American liberal that I’ve known many white folks who buy marijuana or cocaine, but I’ve never heard of a single white person buying crack. He told me I was wrong. Fifteen years later, he was raising your same complaint. There was tremendous violence and mayhem around crack.
I know someone who committed a felony, has turned their life around, and votes.
There is an easy solution to all of the issues you pinpoint regarding drug use. Don’t do drugs! Problem solved.
Many of these problems are a result of the fracturing of the traditional Black Family. Thank you, Federal Government.
I agree that the sentencing disparities for similar crimes (not the crack / cocaine difference) is a problem. However, soft peddling the difference in the commission of crimes is also troubling. I’ve heard a statistic (which I haven’t confirmed) that 95% of crimes in New York City are conducted by people who are brown or black. But this is not the makeup of New York. The commission of crime is disproportinal.
Lastly, for those who might think I am racially “insensitive”, any time you want to discuss the meth explosion in the white community, be my guest. This is also a significant problem, and one of the reasons why so many industries have turned to illegal immigrants … when so many blue collar works have become tweakers.
“isn’t it true that there is disproportionally more crime committed in this group? In fact, aren’t most of the murders within this group black on black?”
the statistical analysis i’ve seen both in my office and elsewhere suggests that difference in crime rate alone does not account for the disparity in sentencing.
“Crack and cocaine may be technically the same, but the reasons these laws were passed were due to the tremendous violence…”
actually you’re part right, but it was mainly the at times hysterical fear rather than actual levels of violence that drove the wave of laws… i was starting my career in the early-80s, so i have some memory about why they put those laws into effect. it’s like now – shootings have not gone up, but coverage of shootings has which has everyone panicking and wanting to pass new laws on guns.
DP wrote:
> the statistical analysis i’ve seen both in my office and elsewhere
> suggests that difference in crime rate alone does not account for
> the disparity in sentencing.
Illegal drug use has always been a low priority crime. White kids in Chico and/or Isla Vista probably use as many (or more) illegal drugs as the Black kids in East Oakland or Oak Park.
The BIG difference is that Black drug dealers tend to shoot people WAY more often than White drug dealers.
No one calls the cops when the rich kid from Atherton is smoking pot, but they do call the cops when stuff like this happens:
“Neighbors of an 8-year-old girl who was shot and gravely wounded while playing on the porch of her East Oakland home expressed shock and outrage Monday over the latest burst of violence that has victimized another young child in the city. The girl was outside with her 7-year-old brother when two men got out of a car on the 1800 block of 66th Avenue and fired as many as 10 rounds while targeting a 47-year-old man walking on the street about 6:25 p.m. Friday, police said.”
http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Outrage-after-Oakland-shooting-of-8-year-old-5490194.php
In white areas you might go years without hearing a gun shot (with the exception of a rich kid who has been pumped full of legal drugs by his parents that don’t care enough to spend any time with the kid going crazy every now and then) while in poor black areas rarely does a day go by when you don’t hear gun shots.
The cops are not busting down doors and throwing black kids smoking pot in jail, they are more often than not going after black kids shooting each other and just happen to find drugs…
I no longer keep any guns, even hunting rifles, in my home. But if my home was in a low income, scary neighborhood, and I was a single woman living alone, and maybe I had a crazy ex-boyfriend bothering me, (even with a restraining order against him), then, yeah, I might have more than pepper spray in my home.
South Central from 1975 to 1985 were two different worlds. Trust me.
Also, watch Boyz in the Hood, etc.
TBD wrote:
> South Central from 1975 to 1985 were two different worlds. Trust me.
Many on the right side of the political debate don’t want to talk about the dramatic drop in as the unwanted kids before Roe vs. Wade passed their prime criminal years and less unwanted fatherless kids were around to replace them in the gangs…
Women can use birth control and in addition to their own method, not let a man touch them if he doesn’t know how to put on a condom. Roe vs. Wade is important but abortion can be used as a last resort, not to replace simple birth control.Young women need assertiveness training in elementary, junior high, and hgh school.
Young women need to be taught how to speak up and assert themselves. Then maybe they won’t even feel like having sex until they are at least eighteen and their partner is truly deserving.
South Central from 1975 to 1985 were two different worlds. Trust me.
Also, watch Boyz in the Hood, etc.
TBD wrote:
> South Central from 1975 to 1985 were two different worlds. Trust me.
Many on the right side of the political debate don’t want to talk about the dramatic drop in as the unwanted kids before Roe vs. Wade passed their prime criminal years and less unwanted fatherless kids were around to replace them in the gangs…
Women can use birth control and in addition to their own method, not let a man touch them if he doesn’t know how to put on a condom. Roe vs. Wade is important but abortion can be used as a last resort, not to replace simple birth control.Young women need assertiveness training in elementary, junior high, and hgh school.
Young women need to be taught how to speak up and assert themselves. Then maybe they won’t even feel like having sex until they are at least eighteen and their partner is truly deserving.
Studies, reports, and articles like this ignore the realities on the other side of the issue.
It was Bill Clinton who added 100,000 police officers to the streets,m, and who enforced smaller crimes in big cities in kind of a “broken window” scenario. Crime dropped dramatically.
I think it was this move, or later, when “Stop and frisk” was instituted – and led to a dramatic drop in crime. I believe the murder rate in New York City dropped in half! Half! The fear of getting shot when you went out for a pizza disappeared. Now murders and homicides were more lover spats, or two fellow gang members dueling it out. Crime was no long random, and fatal.
Now the liberals in New York forget this history, and want to do away with stop and frisk, a n approach that has saved the lives of thousands of young black men. Pretty sad.
Studies, reports, and articles like this ignore the realities on the other side of the issue.
It was Bill Clinton who added 100,000 police officers to the streets,m, and who enforced smaller crimes in big cities in kind of a “broken window” scenario. Crime dropped dramatically.
I think it was this move, or later, when “Stop and frisk” was instituted – and led to a dramatic drop in crime. I believe the murder rate in New York City dropped in half! Half! The fear of getting shot when you went out for a pizza disappeared. Now murders and homicides were more lover spats, or two fellow gang members dueling it out. Crime was no long random, and fatal.
Now the liberals in New York forget this history, and want to do away with stop and frisk, a n approach that has saved the lives of thousands of young black men. Pretty sad.
“Many of these problems are a result of the fracturing of the traditional Black Family. Thank you, Federal Government.”
Most families now days are considered fractured, this has nothing to do with being black or the federal government.
“I’ve heard a statistic (which I haven’t confirmed) that 95% of crimes in New York City are conducted by people who are brown or black. But this is not the makeup of New York. The commission of crime is disproportinal.”
This statistic is because the police stopped and frisked black people that were just walking down the street, not white people. If these people had drugs in their pocket they were arrested.
“Lastly, for those who might think I am racially “insensitive”, any time you want to discuss the meth explosion in the white community, be my guest. This is also a significant problem, and one of the reasons why so many industries have turned to illegal immigrants … when so many blue collar works have become tweakers.”
industries turn to illegal immigrants because they can’t find anyone else willing to do the back breaking work for the pittance they pay.
“Many of these problems are a result of the fracturing of the traditional Black Family. Thank you, Federal Government.”
Most families now days are considered fractured, this has nothing to do with being black or the federal government.
“I’ve heard a statistic (which I haven’t confirmed) that 95% of crimes in New York City are conducted by people who are brown or black. But this is not the makeup of New York. The commission of crime is disproportinal.”
This statistic is because the police stopped and frisked black people that were just walking down the street, not white people. If these people had drugs in their pocket they were arrested.
“Lastly, for those who might think I am racially “insensitive”, any time you want to discuss the meth explosion in the white community, be my guest. This is also a significant problem, and one of the reasons why so many industries have turned to illegal immigrants … when so many blue collar works have become tweakers.”
industries turn to illegal immigrants because they can’t find anyone else willing to do the back breaking work for the pittance they pay.
re: sentencing disparities crack vs powder cocaine.
As I understand it; crack has more associated toxicity than powder cocaine, less due to differences in chemistry than to differences in the way it is used (inhaling of crack fumes causes more health problems than snorting). I’m not sure how significant these differences in toxicity are; perhaps that is part of the rationale for higher penalties for crack–that said, it does seem somewhat puzzling that sentencing guidelines are so different (what is the official rationale?).
Meth penalties are comparable to those of crack–crack; the great destroyer of so many poor
young blacks and meth, the great destroyer of so many poor young whites.
re: sentencing disparities crack vs powder cocaine.
As I understand it; crack has more associated toxicity than powder cocaine, less due to differences in chemistry than to differences in the way it is used (inhaling of crack fumes causes more health problems than snorting). I’m not sure how significant these differences in toxicity are; perhaps that is part of the rationale for higher penalties for crack–that said, it does seem somewhat puzzling that sentencing guidelines are so different (what is the official rationale?).
Meth penalties are comparable to those of crack–crack; the great destroyer of so many poor
young blacks and meth, the great destroyer of so many poor young whites.
re: racial disparities in sentencing.
For meaningful comparisons of sentences; must include:
(1) Severity of crime (e.g. for ‘killings’, murder 1,2,3 or manslughter; and aggravating factors)
(2) History of comvictions–how extensive is prior criminal history of the convict? Typically, and for good reasons, sentences tend to be longer for those with a greater number of prior convictions and for more serious prior convictions.
(3) Other factors that go into sentencing.
Without controlling for such factors; which apply to all defendants of all races; comparisons between race groups have little meaning. Yes, these petty details–severity and history!!
re: racial disparities in sentencing.
For meaningful comparisons of sentences; must include:
(1) Severity of crime (e.g. for ‘killings’, murder 1,2,3 or manslughter; and aggravating factors)
(2) History of comvictions–how extensive is prior criminal history of the convict? Typically, and for good reasons, sentences tend to be longer for those with a greater number of prior convictions and for more serious prior convictions.
(3) Other factors that go into sentencing.
Without controlling for such factors; which apply to all defendants of all races; comparisons between race groups have little meaning. Yes, these petty details–severity and history!!