Pubdate: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 Source: Tampa Tribune (FL) Copyright: 2007 The Tribune Co. Contact: http://www.tbo.com/news/opinion/submissionform.htm Website: http://www.tampatrib.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/446 Author: Joseph H. Brown Note: Joseph H. Brown is a Tribune editorial writer. Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/coke.htm (Cocaine) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?199 (Mandatory Minimum Sentencing) DEALERS AREN'T THE VICTIMS One of the first cases the Supreme Court heard when it began its current term involves the sentencing disparity between offenders caught trafficking in crack cocaine versus the powdered form. Under the current law enacted in 1986, a conviction for possessing 5 grams of the highly addictive crack cocaine carries a mandatory minimum sentence of five years, while those caught with powder cocaine have to possess at least 500 grams to receive the mandatory minimum. Because more than 80 percent of those sentenced on the federal level for crack cocaine are black, the justices will decide if the law is discriminatory and whether judges are bound by sentencing guidelines. While I think the law should be changed, it's important to remember two things. First, in most states there is no distinction between the crack and powder forms of cocaine, and the overwhelming majority of drug cases are prosecuted at the state level. Also, many of those who protest the sentencing disparities have conveniently forgotten that they were approved at the time by the Congressional Black Caucus following demands to do something about the crack epidemic that was ravaging neighborhoods in the 1980s. Misapplied Victimology At a town hall meeting in Detroit a few years ago, comedian Bill Cosby put proper perspective on this sentencing imbalance. 'OK, we even it up, let's have a big cheer for the white man doing as much time as the black man. Hooray!' joked Cosby. 'Anybody see any sense in this?' Then he got serious and asked the audience why more of the sentencing protesters weren't out on the stump lecturing about the evils of drug selling and its corrosive effects on communities struggling to revitalize themselves. Then again, that would require some introspection, which has been sorely lacking. Drug-Dealing Is Never OK If the court decides in favor of giving judges discretion in sentencing for crack trafficking, it would be a victory for equal justice. At the same time, it will only scratch the surface of what truly ails us. Going all the way back to the movie 'Superfly,' a 1972 'blaxploitation' movie that glorified drug dealing, I've heard numerous bogus excuses and rationalizations for selling narcotics. It's never OK in my book. Whatever an individual gains from the activity can't be justified because of the toll it takes: neglected children, strung-out fathers, battered mothers, women selling themselves on the street, innocent bystanders caught in the crossfire of turf battles and residents afraid to leave their homes. Crack sentencing policy should be reformed, but you'll still have a hard time convincing me the dealers are the real victims. - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake