On the ballot this November in Massachusetts, voters will have the opportunity to become the 13th state to decriminalize personal possession of marijuana. The initiative, known as Question 2, would make possession of an ounce or less of marijuana a civil fine of $100, and those under 18 have to complete a drug education program and community service, or else the fine goes as high as $1,000.
Most of all, the offense would not be listed in the Criminal Record Information System (CORI) database. Drug warriors like to say “nobody goes to prison for marijuana“, but the harm from a criminal arrest is bad enough. Once you’re in this CORI database, it’s a red flag that hurts you in getting jobs, housing, loans, security clearances, and more. Plus there is the time and money – about $30 million a year – that Massachusetts wastes busting people for small amounts of pot.
Since the measure is enjoying huge support in the polls, the drug warriors have banded together to mount a media offensive. And by “offensive”, I mean the offensively repugnant stench of reefer madness…
Ballot Question 2, a proposal to decriminalize marijuana, stirs debate – The Boston GlobeChelsea Police Chief Brian Kyes strongly opposes the ballot proposal, viewing it as a step backward in the fight against drug abuse. “It definitely sends the wrong message to kids,” he said. “By decriminalizing this offense right now and making it basically the equivalent of a traffic violation, you are sending the message that it’s OK, that it’s not so bad.”
Translation: if you don’t arrest a teenager and put a big “druggie” black mark on his permanent record, he’ll smoke pot! If you don’t ruin his life, how will he ever learn that marijuana will ruin his life?
Never mind that we arrest them now and put the “druggie” mark on their records, but they still seem to be smoking it… let’s go back to the traffic violations. You know, relative to their age group, teenagers speed more than the rest of us. Maybe that’s because we only treat it like decriminalized marijuana. Maybe we need to be arresting teenage speeders and putting them in the CORI database. Don’t you think a speeding teenager driver is more harmful to society than joint-smoking teenager?
But Middlesex District Attorney Gerard Leone said the ballot measure “derails all the good and hard work we’ve done on behalf of kids and communities. . . . All the question does is provide another mind-altering substance on the menu of options for our kids to use. . . .”
Because right now, marijuana is not on the menu of options for teenagers. No teenagers use it now, but if you decriminalize it, suddenly many teenagers will use it. Uh, right. Explain again how changing the penalty for marijuana from criminal arrest to civil fine increases supply or availability of marijuana?
“It’s a virtual certainty that if Question 2 passes, there will be an increase in marijuana use and it will happen amongst our kids.”
Because right now, teenagers who are afraid of being arrested will be more than willing to pay a $100 fine, spend weekend fun time at a drug education course and more weekend fun time performing hours of community service. Teenagers love that stuff. Never mind that the government has reported numerous timesthat decriminalization of marijuana has no bearing on use of marijuana.
“We know it’s a gateway drug, and we know kids who use marijuana use it in combination with alcohol or other drugs, and step up to other, more potent drugs,” Leone said.
Never mind that the government has reported numerous times that marijuana is in no way, shape, or form a“gateway” drug.
“We also know the strain of marijuana on the streets is now nine or 10 times more potent than it was a decade ago.”
“The” strain? Let’s see, the Drug Czar’s own propaganda from the Potency Monitoring Project (table 4) says that the overall average THC in all strains seized for 2007 was 8.12%. So, if it’s ten times more potent today, then in 1997, you’re telling me weed was only 0.8% THC and we were all smoking industrial hemp? The government report says weed was 4.53% THC in 1997. So, maybe, if you stretch it, you could say “twice as potent”. But even that’s not accurate, because marijuana’s potency varies widely, and more potent weed is harder to get and more expensive.
Essex lawyer Jonathan W. Blodgett agreed that Question 2 “absolutely sends the wrong message, particularly to young people.” “If this passes, we will see more car accidents and more industrial accidents because people will have absolutely no incentive not to smoke marijuana.”
Because, again, people love paying $100 fines. And, again, people are already smoking marijuana, so apparently the current incentive not to smoke marijuana isn’t working.
Also opposed to the ballot question is Amy Harris, clinical director of [an] outpatient substance abuse clinic in Chelsea… Harris said decriminalization would lead to greater availability of marijuana in the form of “blunts, the cigar-sized marijuana cigarettes now prevalent among young people.
Now decrim not only increases supply and availability, it changes the method people use to smoke! If it is only a $50 fine, do you think everyone will switch to four-foot bongs?
She said such heavy consumption of the drug puts youth at risk for cancer and psychological damage.
Even heavy, long-term use of cannabis does not lead to increased incidence of head, neck, or lung cancers, and we’re talking about much greater concentration and frequency of use than most normal smokers. A tiny minority of people genetically prone to some forms of severe psychological disorders might have a problem using cannabis, but arresting them, depriving them of educational and employment opportunities won’t help that situation.
Decriminalization would also have the effect of “sanctioning the drug so youths can emulate what the adults are doing,” she said.
Why does every policy we have either have to “sanction” something or “reject” something? We’re talking about changing the penalty for marijuana possession. There is still a penalty! You are still sending the message that you do not approve of this activity, but now you’re saving police time and money. Do you think not arresting and instead fining someone for pot sends the message that you think it’s perfectly OK to smoke pot?
[...] signatures to be placed on the Massachusetts ballot for the 2008 presidential election. There was some opposition to the proposal,including Governor Deval Patrick and Attorney General Martha Coakly [...]
thankfully it passed! i just wanted to add this: i think that the reason marijuana is a “gateway drug”, is because of how it’s presented to us. we have it drilled into our heads at a young age that marijuana is just as bad as all the other harder drugs, and is worse than alcohol or cigarettes, which we’re taught aren’t great, but as long as you’re of legal age, they’re somewhat acceptable. going into our preteen and teen years, we’re looking at pot like it’s as bad as cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, etc.: harder drugs that are truly bad for your body and cause you to act seriously out of character. these years are when most of us begin to experiment, usually alcohol first, but a lot of people obviously get into pot at a fairly early age. so now, you have a young kid who gets stoned for the first time, sees that it doesn’t make him lose weight, or cause his teeth to fall out, and he doesn’t end up in the hospital or die. nothing that drastic happens, he probably just feels mellow. now he might think to himself, “wow, DRUGS don’t really mess you up as bad as everyone said! they were just bullshitting us!” now he’s not afraid to experiment with the harder drugs that actually can mess his life up badly. anti-drug people actually cause the problem by warping or perception of drugs, there’s no levels of severity. maybe if d.a.r.e. made a distinction between weed and all the other stuff, kids would be better prepared to know what they should and shouldn’t mess with. i don’t know, just a concept i thought i’d throw out there…
Marijuana was legal when Ronald Reagan was a kid. I’m sure he lit up once or twice in his younger years and he became President. People need to start thinking for themselves and educate themselves about the wonders of marijuana.Obviously, the landslide victory for Question 2 shows that the times are changing and people are unafraid to speak their minds. Required reading for all: THE HEMP MANIFESTO.