Sunday, March 16, 2008


Crack bad. Crack laws also bad.

The Waco Tribune Herald this morning ran an editorial I wrote about about the crack laws (you can see it here). Intriguingly, the other columnists on the page were Attorney General Michael Mukasey (presented in a point-counterpoint format with my piece) and Ted Nugent.

Me, The AG, and The 'Nuge all in the same place-- for only $1.50!

UPDATE: I just noticed that sentencing Uber-Blogger (and lead dog in the sentencing academy) Doug Berman posted a blurb on my op-ed. In other pieces he has noticed Mukasey's bizarre combination of positions on sentencing: On the one hand, condemning leniency for minor-league crack defendants, then promoting leniency for anti-American terrorists. Your DOJ at work!

I know this will completely annoy you, and all of your blog readers, and probably even Ted Nugent but I do not understand why it is bad to sentence them the same way for a little crack as for a lot of it.

Is it because they do not do this for the other drugs?

Is crack mostly used by African Americans, and therefore it is like a law designed to punish them, because they KNOW they use it more?

I agree that the people who like bring a lot of drugs into the US are the people who should really be in jail. As for addicts, I think they need HELP not jail. Probably the end user maybe ends up using it so much that pretty soon they need either more money to buy it, OR maybe they want a discount.

I am NOT trying to be funny here, Osler SERIOUSLY okay, but is it like the following situation?

There is a mom at our preschool who started buying a lot of stuff from Pottery Barn. I mean A LOT. Finally her husband told her that if she was gonna buy so much stuff from there she needed to get a job. SO she DID get a job... at POTTERY BARN.. Well you think that would have helped but with her discount she bought even MORE stuff there. Finally she just had to totally swear off Pottery Barn... She has to quit her job there and also not buy anything else there.

SO she clearly had a PROBLEM but I would not arrest HER I would go after Pottery barn for putting the stuff on the street in the first place...BUT tell me why it is correct to arrest an addict at all, if they bought like some throw pillows or an entire dining room set????

I mean, do they have the same laws for other "stores?" Like would a person who is addicted to shopping at Macy's or Baby Gap not get arrested if they only bought a little?

Don't addicts just need HELP no matter what? Jail cannot possibly help them. The big dealers who really sell a ton of stuff such as the OWNERS of Pottery Barn and Baby Gap... THEY are not addicted They only care about money... THEY should be in jail for making money off of other people's weaknesses...

To me, addicts - the "shoppers" need help. The STORES should be in jail.

I am just trying to understand your position, but it may be a lost cause...

Are you on crack yourself? Or did you not read the article itself? Or both?

The ratio is between powder cocaine and crack, not crack and crack.

Sometimes you write a lot and only think a little.
I DID read both Osler's argument AND the other guy's...

This issue comes up a lot in his blog and I am trying to understand it.

I don't think the average person would understand or even TRY to understand what this was all about.

How am I supposed to know there are two kinds of cocaine????? I mean, if you were never a prosecutor or knew any drug people, or whatever....

I don't EVEN know what I am doing here. I am not in Law School I am not an attorney nor do I use recreational drugs. I do get that it would be easy to think I have been smoking SOMETHING to even participate in this blog.
Whoa there, C!

I agree with Tyd--and Osler--that the small-time users and dealers are not the ones who should be punished. I think Tyd's right, that we don't do enough to treat the addiction and to try to fix some of the causes of addiction, such as poverty.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that crack came about as a way to give a bigger high with less of the drug--the poor man's cocaine, right?

Anyway, it seem to me Mukasey can't possibly have a leg to stand on--so I didn't miss not being able to see his opinion. But I'm dying to know what the Nuge said. It wasn't on the same page, though, unless I missed it.
From the non-substantive side of the issue, best damn pic of you I have ever seen and your hair rocked. Was this taken shortly after I last cut your hair? By all means, update that pic to your Facebook and MySpace photos. Remember Razor reader's, it takes a confident and secure man to compliment another man's do.

Yes, that was right after you and the other neighbors cut my hair-- thus, no doubt, my confident and debonair style. Next time, I will again follow the recipe: Multiple haircutters, in the dark, after margaritas.
You know, I hope in Law School they have a small pat of a class on how to dress and wear your hair and stuff. Or at least what NOT to wear to make the jury take you seriously.

Do they? They should! Not that anyone is gonna wear clown shoes to court, but some people are like really really smart but have no fashion sense.... They would be helped a lot by this.
Hey.... Mine did not have a picture!?!
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?