[tshile]

So for drug convictions it's unfair? possession or distribution? what about manufacturing? is the crime for possession change depending on amount? what about the type of drug?

i think the way our country approaches the issue of drugs is not only pointless but down right dumb. about as dumb as breaking the law 3 times when you know that there's a three strikes rule on the books. i just don't have sympathy for people that can't learn from their mistakes. these laws are in place for a reason, these people knew they were in place, and now we're all supposed to feel bad for them about their decisions making? sorry, i don't buy it.

as for celebrities, i don't think we can really model the entire country around how they're treated. i'd prefer they be treated like everyone else too, but money buys lawyers and not all lawyers are created equally.

[eaurouge]

Let's stick with drug possession. Up until 2007, first time conviction on possession of 5 grams of crack cocaine, a drug supposedly used predominantly by blacks (supposedly, but not really), would result in a mandatory sentencing of 5 years [1]. If you were lucky and got caught with powder cocaine instead, you would have to have 500 grams in your possession to suffer a similar fate. This was the 100 to 1 sentencing disparity that was reduced to 18:1 in 2010 [2].

That's not all. Roughly 80% of those convicted for possession of crack cocaine are black, only 10% are white [3][4]. Yet crack cocaine usage within both races is about the same [5].

If you analyse conviction rates vs use for different classes (rich vs poor), I bet you'll find similarly outrageous numbers.

1. http://famm.org/Repository/Files/FS%20Brief%20History%20of%2... 2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Sentencing_Act 3. http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2010/08/03/data-show-rac... 4. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/17/racial-disparity-dr... 5. http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/quicktables/quickconfig.do?34481-...