A) I think they were misunderstanding (or deliberately misinterpreting) statistics which showed crack use had become more widespread than powder cocaine. More people doing it = "more addictive". Never mind crack had become more popular because it was cheaper and addicts in the 1980s moved towards freebasing because HIV scared people away from using needles.

B) Actually, in the 1970s, it was popular among affluent upper and middle class addicts. Of course, by the 1980s, they had moved on to snorting powder cocaine and crack became the cheaper alternative. Poor addicts hooked on crack were demonized and given harsh mandatory citizens while stock brokers and other rich assholes snorted coke off hookers' tits and everyone looked the other way.

Really, all the young people on this site were lucky to have missed the 1980s.

Ugh, given harsh mandatory SENTENCES, not "harsh mandatory citizens".

I am so fucking old and tired.

B) I think you're thinking of freebase. Crack is a really cheaply made, dirty substitute for freebase and I really don't expect it was used much by anyone who could get the real thing. Pharmacologically they're identical, but it would be like drinking Cossack when you can afford Ketel One - it would be an eccentric choice. But maybe I'm wrong, I'm pretty sure it's a lot safer to make crack so maybe people would cook it for themselves or something, I don't know.