Originally Posted by jredmo2
Crack isn't that bad. Well, crack is certainly bad (mmkay), but not as bad as people tend to think. It's basically no worse than powder cocaine. So, when Charlie says that people should only use crack if they can handle it, it's not as wildly crazy as people have said. If you think that people can use powder cocaine recreationally and in moderation, then the same holds true for crack. Crack and powder cocaine are the same chemically -- it's akin to the alcohol in vodka being the same as the alcohol in wine. Sure, it's perhaps a more efficient delivery method of the drug, but if crack is more addictive than powder cocaine, it is only marginally so. And yet crack use is almost universally shamed, while powder cocaine use is somewhat tolerated as acceptable (depending on your disposition, I suppose). The reason crack carries the stigma it does is mainly due to racism, IMO. And the significantly stiffer legal ramifications for crack possession vs. powder cocaine possession are a travesty and a black mark on our society (again, IMO).
Good lord, what drivel.
The rise of crack use by blacks in the 80s correlated with the rise in violent crime in the inner cities. People blamed the drug. Thus you got tougher sentencing. It's really that simple. If anything, the drug was used as a way to shield
black people from racism (eg, "it's not black people's fault that crime is on the rise, it's the drug's fault".
You can read about it here. Then you won't have to rely on your "opinion".