Jim Carnell is editor of Pax Centurion and Area A-1 representative of the Boston Police Patrolmen’s Association. His opinion piece, “Everybody mustn’t get stoned”, appeared in the Boston Herald following the passage of Question 2, decriminalizing personal amounts of marijuana:
Everybody mustn’t get stoned – BostonHerald.com
If beer-swilling idiots park themselves in public view, they can still be arrested for drinking in public while the same cretins smoking doobies are essentially given a free pass.
This “free pass” is a $100 fine and confiscation of your doobies. The “beer-swilling idiots” usually aren’t arrested unless they are being obnoxious, as “beer-swilling idiots” tend to be. If the “cretins” smoking doobies are being obnoxious, they can still be arrested under all sorts of public order laws.
As most citizens know by now, Massachusetts ballot Question 2, concerning the so-called “decriminalization” of marijuana was recently approved by an overwhelming 65 percent.
This binding measure, funded in large part by billionaire George Soros, (!!!) featured television commercials starring retired, ex-Boston police supervisors wearing little gold badges on their lapels who expressed their support of this initiative while portraying themselves as “former street cops.”
Many starry-eyed nitwits wearing rose-colored glasses, who obviously comprise the majority of our electorate, fell hook, line and sinker for this.
It’s nice to see a public servant with such respect for the public he serves
Well, congratulations, general public! You’ve basically approved, whether you realize it or not, the public use of marijuana, openly and in front of you, your children and tourists.
Because we are so fond of encounters with police officers, giving up our weed, and paying $100 fines. Tell me how this mass public use of marijuana begins in Massachusetts when it didn’t happen in the other twelve decriminalized states?
[U]nder this new law, things will change dramatically. First and foremost, nobody in America is required to carry official identification of any kind. Police officers encountering a group of people openly smoking marijuana on Boston Common, for example, could merely ask individuals for their personal information. It is widely anticipated by experienced police officers that Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck and John Doe will be receiving the vast majority of these new civil violation notices.
Well, I’m no lawyer, but my scant bit of Googling brought me a Supreme Court case called Hiibel v. Nevada, that I think ruins your argument. According to this 2004 CNN report:
The Supreme Court has again given police greater power to stop and question suspects, ruling Monday that a Nevada cowboy could not refuse to give his name to officers who tried to question him along a roadside.
He was arrested after he told a deputy that he didn’t have to reveal his name or show an ID during an encounter on a rural road in 2000. Hiibel was prosecuted, based on his silence and fined $250. The Nevada Supreme Court sided with police on a 4-3 vote.
In its ruling announced Monday, the justices upheld Hiibel’s misdemeanor conviction. Writing for the majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy said, “Asking questions is an essential part of police investigation. In the ordinary sense a police officer is free to ask a person for identification without implicating the Fourth Amendment.”
According to an AP report, justices were told that 20 states have similar laws to the Nevada statute upheld by the high court: Alabama, Arkansas, California, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont and Wisconsin.
So if you really are having trouble with cannabis hooligans, ask for their ID. If they don’t produce it, ask for their names. If you suspect they’re lying, take them into custody under the same law that caught the Nevada cowboy.
Furthermore, under current Boston police rules and regulations, the seizure of any amount of illegal drugs, regardless of whether an arrest is made, requires the completion of lengthy reports detailing the incident, the seizure and the chain-of-custody of the drugs involved, absolutely removing the officer from the streets for a minimum of several hours.
Um, is it possible to change current Boston police rules and regulations to reflect changing times? Like, if a Boston officer catches someone with fine-only amounts of marijuana, he need only destroy the marijuana in the presence of another witnessing officer. Or, are you telling us that Boston police have been taking this much time processing small amounts of marijuana even when they were allowed to arrest people, because if you are, thank you for helping me make the point about the idiocy of criminalizing marijuana.
So John Q. Public, don’t be shocked when you’re confronted with the pungent, public smell of cannabis on the Common. And don’t be outraged when the police appear to do nothing because effectively you’ve handcuffed your police. Great job, Massachusetts! Ever wonder why we’re the laughingstock of the nation?
It wouldn’t have anything to do with the editorial opinions of its law enforcement, would it?
Loading ...
Amazing! This cop has some issues. Let’s hope that the majority of police officers will respect the public’s wishes when more change occurs. Yeah right!
To the editor,
Am I the only one who is troubled to learn that a public servant like Jim Carnell has such a low opinion of those he’s paid to protect? (“Everybody musn’t get stoned,” November 8).
Let me get this straight. According to Mr. Carnell, those two million Massachusetts voters who decided in favor of Question 2 are “starry-eyed nitwits,” and those 100 million Americans who have ever tried pot are “cretins.”
Oh yes, and let’s not forget, the author’s home state is now a national “laughingstock” because its voters chose to enact a common sense pot policy that is nearly identical to the laws in Mississippi and Maine. Sorry Jim, but the joke’s on you!
Sincerely,
Paul Armentano
Washington, DC