Pubdate: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 Source: Rutland Herald (VT) Copyright: 2008 Rutland Herald Contact: http://www.rutlandherald.com Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/892 Author: Andrew Palmer MIXED MESSAGES ON DRUGS This morning in my paper I read this: "More than 20 speakers took a hard look from multiple angles at Rutland's newly declared war on drugs and violent crime during a packed-house special meeting of the city aldermen on Thursday." Go, Rutland! Then I turn a few pages and read this: "The Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill Thursday that strips jail time out as a possible penalty for most people arrested with small amounts of marijuana (one ounce or less) ... This version would ensure that an arrest does not appear on a person's criminal record -- thereby not putting in jeopardy their ability to secure public housing, job opportunities, or financial assistance." Am I missing something here? In my mind, it seems pretty clear that the two issues are connected. If you look at the drug industry as a business, it makes sense to me that you'd want to market and sell your product where the users have a lesser chance of being penalized for using. So when Vermont scales back prosecuting the use of marijuana, we might as well put a sign up at our state borders reading "Pot Dealers Welcome." Marijuana is often labeled as a gateway drug, and there is truth to this. Chances are when dealers come up to Vermont to sell marijuana, they're going to be carrying other drugs with them. Furthermore I understand that the recent shooting in Rutland involved a small transaction of $40. Now I'm not an expert in the cost of marijuana, but I'm assuming this $40 transaction meets the requirement of less then a ounce. Had nobody been shot, and the police had intercepted the transaction, under this new bill the offender would have "entered a court diversion program ... upon successful completion would result in no criminal record." I also quote from the article: "We need to send a clear message that Rutland is not a place where they (drug dealers) can set up shop. We need to stop them before they get here." I have to be honest. It's not a very clear message. I'm confused. Apparently, Vermont as a state is not supporting Rutland in this effort. Rutland is talking tough, and I hear that. But then the Senate Judiciary Committee is saying if you get caught with "small amounts of marijuana," enter a program, give lip service, get off with no record, try not to get caught again. I am glad to see that two staff members representing Vermont's two senators will be involved. We need to talk about this mixed message at a state level also. Andrew Palmer, Wallingford - --- MAP posted-by: Derek