This should not be surprising. With things like zoning blacks are fleeing San Fran, as they can not afford to live there. But other than chasing blacks out of town and jailing them like nobodies business, San Fran really like blacks, at least across the bridge in Oakland.

The real important question is this: "Why are those blacks guilty of drug offenses committing drug offenses in the first place?"

They wouldn't have to do the time if they didn't do the crime.

Jay...is this a post acknowledging it would not be news regarding Republican discrimination against African/Americans (and all non-slave immigrants from Africa)..
But that Dems are allegedly the party of non-discrimination?

and Dodo..
I would be surprised if no one you know any one who has committed a drug offense...

...how about there was a "War on Petty Tax Cheats?

If you never fudge..you'd never have to face a judge...

In all seriousness, here's why liberal jurisdictions lock up a higher ratio of blacks.

Jay...is this a post acknowledging it would not be news regarding Republican discrimination against African/Americans (and all non-slave immigrants from Africa).. But that Dems are allegedly the party of non-discrimination....nogo

When the most liberal Mecca in this country is in keeping with incarceration rates of the rest, then I it is fair to say....... "HYPOCRITES!!!!"

So when a liberal says we (as a country) are racists because there are higher percentages of races other than white jailed, then we can say "why don't we start in the liberal land of San Francisco".

So yes nogo, you are perceptive.

I live in the SF bay area, so I see it first hand. All the libs here love black people (their best friends are black, don'tcha know), but when it's time for little Moonflower to go to school they don't want black kids anywhere around.

I haven't run into the other conservative yet, so I don't have anything to compare against.

Liberals treat minorities as plantation hands. "Don't worry about anything, we will take care of you. You are unable to take care of yourself." The sad part is that most believe this. ww

Jody, that was a very interesting read. I particularly found this quote of his worth contemplation: When a questioner stated, "One study found that conservatives had stronger self-admitted and implicit biases against blacks than liberals did. Do you care to comment?" he answered, "Of course, some might say that one man's bias is another's perspicacity."

There's a multitude that one can glean from his answer, from the simple to the complex.

I'd like very like much to have seen his breakdown by county rather than state for a clearer picture.

Nogo,

It was a post by Jayson, not Jay (public school education?).

"An average citizen who uses drugs in San Francisco..."

I guess that explains the SF's problems right there.

Wildlife has it mostly right. It's more accurate to say this: 'Don't worry about anything, we will take care of you, whether you like it or not, using somebody else's money, whether they like it or not. You are unable to take care of yourself.'

In every jurisdiction with which I am familiar, the vast majority of people who go to prison for "drug offenses" are people selling drugs, not people using them. Even where someone is jailed for "possession" of drugs, it is usually for a very large quantity; sufficiently large to suggest that the person is part of the distribution chain rather than a mere user. So if, for example, blacks or hispanics form the vast majority of the sellers, they can be expected to form the vast majority of the drug prisoners.
Unfortunately, in stories of this sort, the distinction between "drug offenses" as a whole and drug-selling offenses is almost always blurred, rendering the comparisons meaningless. This story is an example -- it says up front that rates of drug use are "similar," but explains nothing about who is likely to be incarcerated or whether there are differing rates of drug sale
The activists who are quoted in these articles presumably know better and are being disingenuous, to put it politely. The reporters who write the articles and their editors are ignorant and incurious.