Pubdate: Tue, 16 Sep 2008
Source: Boston Globe (MA)
Copyright: 2008 Globe Newspaper Company
Contact: http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/write/
Website: http://www.boston.com/globe/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/52
Author: Adrian Walker, Globe Columnist
Cited: Question 2 http://sensiblemarijuanapolicy.org/
Cited: Middlesex District Attorney Gerard T. Leone http://www.middlesexda.com/
Cited: Boston TenPoint Coalition http://www.bostontenpoint.org/
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/opinion.htm (Opinion)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?161 (Marijuana - Regulation)

A QUESTION OF POSSESSION

What's wrong with a few joints?

Nothing, if you ask the proponents of one of the worst ideas on the 
ballot this year.

Question 2 would make possession of up to an ounce of marijuana a 
civil offense, punishable by a $100 fine. A recent poll suggests that 
the question will win easily. Over 70 percent of voters in the poll 
backed it in a Channel 7/Suffolk University survey.

That isn't a huge surprise. Public attitudes about marijuana use have 
clearly relaxed, to the point where a presidential candidate's 
youthful dalliances with it have been a nonissue in the campaign. 
That doesn't mean this should pass.

Money has poured in to support it, much of it from out of state. 
Billionaire George Soros, who has led the charge to decriminalize 
marijuana possession nationwide, has donated at least $400,000.

The major argument of the proponents is that enforcing marijuana laws 
is a waste of time and public resources. They have produced a report 
arguing, absurdly, that Massachusetts would save $29.5 million a 
year, if only cops would stop chasing pot smokers around.

They might have a point, if police officers were really doing that. 
But in fact, marijuana possession charges are almost always tacked 
onto more serious offenses. In 2007, not one person went to jail in 
Suffolk or Middlesex counties for marijuana possession alone. First 
offenders, by statute, get six months' probation, after which the 
charge is dropped. "The well-financed proponents got a jump on 
providing misinformation to the public ranging from public health 
issues to law enforcement," Middlesex District Attorney Gerard T. 
Leone said last week.

Prosecutors and police are up in arms about Question 2, and they are 
not alone. The Rev. Jeffrey Brown of the Boston TenPoint Coalition, 
who has spent years dealing with crime issues that spring from drug 
use, castigated the backers of Question 2 as out-of-touch 
suburbanites who have no clue about the drug problems in the 
neighborhoods he works in.

"I've heard that the legalization lobby has targeted Massachusetts 
because this is a liberal state," Brown said. "What I need is someone 
to help me in the street, helping these young men and women get jobs 
and educations and rebuilding families. I don't need a bunch of 
suburban folks asking what's wrong with a little marijuana. It's 
amazing that anyone would consider this.

"Does the average suburban person even know how many blunts you can 
get from an ounce? Twenty-eight - we're not talking about a thimbleful."

Whitney Taylor is running the campaign for Question 2. She argues 
that 7,500 people a year get criminal records because of marijuana possession.

"We're not saying that people are going to jail for this," she said. 
"We're saying that arrests and bookings are a drain" on public 
resources. She said 11 states have passed similar laws, with no 
increase in drug use.

The arguments in favor of Question 2 are weak. If people are not 
going to jail for possession, what is the argument for making the law 
even weaker? Turning marijuana possession into a lesser offense than 
speeding will only encourage and embolden drug pushers and their 
customers. Why, exactly, is that a good idea? This is a bad solution 
to something that isn't even a problem.

There will be a range of opinion on this, but I don't like the fact 
that this campaign is being bankrolled and run by people who will 
never to have to deal with its consequences. Soros and his 
organization are based in New York; one of the biggest individual 
contributors locally is Woody Kaplan ($10,000, according to campaign 
finance records) of fashionable Commonwealth Avenue. It's no accident 
that you won't see many people in neighborhoods ravaged by drugs 
signing up for this cause. This is a classic limousine liberal movement.

The public pays so little attention to ballot questions that they 
have become the vehicle of choice for ideas that would never pass in 
the Legislature. This is one that should not fly under the radar. 
- ---
MAP posted-by: Richard Lake