Filed under: Hemp&Law, hemp in general | Tags: Boston, cannabis, drug, ganja, hashish, hemp, marijuana, Massachusetts, Middlesex, pot, skunk, weed
Boston, MA — For the first time in years there is good news on drugs: Marijuana use among Massachusetts teens has declined significantly since 2001.
It’s good news because kids who smoke marijuana are more likely to do poorly in school and engage in violence. It’s good news because drivers who’ve smoked pot are 10 times more likely to be injured, or to injure others, in car crashes. It’s good news because marijuana is more carcinogenic than tobacco, and young people who smoke pot are more likely to use other illegal drugs.
Unfortunately, there is a radical effort underway to undo this progress. Question 2 on November’s ballot will decriminalize marijuana use and turn possession of an ounce or less of marijuana into a fine similar to a traffic violation. For kids under 21, the penalties will be reduced well below penalties for alcohol possession.
A vote for Question 2 will begin a slippery slope resulting in several negative consequences. It will increase addiction to marijuana and other drugs, as we know that pot is a powerful gateway drug. It will result in increased related crimes, and additional taxpayer costs to combat them, as we know that drugs are the root of much of the violence that erodes communities. And it will result in increased instances of impaired driving.
This measure also will result in other unaddressed problems. For instance, there are no regulatory reviews in place to assure that these newly decriminalized drugs are safe, and we know that marijuana is now exponentially more potent than a decade ago. More disturbingly, the measure does not address the fact that if young people want to buy pot, they will still need to buy it from illegal drug dealers. We can not think of many more dangerous, combustible situations than that.
Proponents of Question 2 have two central arguments. First, that existing laws unfairly punish those caught with an ounce or less of marijuana. That is simply untrue. Current law mandates that first-time marijuana offenders receive no more than probation and have their record wiped clean if there are no further violations. In Suffolk and Middlesex counties last year, no defendants were sentenced to jail for a first-time marijuana offense alone.
Their second claim is that enforcement of marijuana laws leads to expansive police costs. That is also false. A survey of our busiest courts revealed that marijuana prosecutions account for only a tiny fraction of cases, and many of those also involved other violent crimes that so frequently accompany drug abuse. To claim that officers are out trolling the streets for marijuana users, at great cost to taxpayers, is not reality.
And despite their best efforts to paint an ounce of marijuana as innocuous, the fact is that one ounce of marijuana is worth about $600 and represents about 60 individual sales.
In communities throughout the state, law enforcement and neighborhood and faith-based organizations work together to improve public safety. Question 2 is a misguided approach that threatens to derail much of that important work.
We cannot afford to take a step back in our efforts to combat drug addiction and reduce violence in our communities. And we absolutely can not afford to send mixed messages to our kids about the seriousness and dangers of drug abuse.
Gerry Leone is the Middlesex district attorney. The Rev. Jeffrey Brown is co-founder of Boston Ten Point Coalition.
Source: Boston Globe
Filed under: Hemp&Law, hemp in general | Tags: Boston, cannabis, ganja, hashish, hemp, marijuana, Massachusetts, medical cannabis, medical marijuana, pot, skunk, weed
Boston, MA — Activists who want joints sold over the counter like cigarettes are bankrolling a Bay State pot referendum backers claim will simply clear the air of piddling marijuana cases choking the court system.
The Committee for Sensible Marijuana Policy, which placed Question 2 on the November ballot, collected from the Marijuana Policy Project $200,000, about 30 percent of its total. Indeed, about 90 percent of the $635,000 the committee has raised comes from people who live out of state.
On its Web site, the marijuana project’s mission statement states clearly: “Adults who use marijuana should be able to obtain it from legally regulated establishments and not from illegal drug dealers.”
Woody Kaplan, a Hub real estate developer and self-styled “provocateur” who donated $10,000 to the state ballot initiative, also backs the call for legal pot sales.
“I believe taxing and regulating is a much better way than what the ballot question proposes,” said Kaplan, who held a $250-a-head fundraiser for the Marijuana Policy Prject earlier this month.
“This is government making a choice that something that is clearly destructive – alcohol – is OK, but somebody smoking marijuana isn’t,” Kaplan told the Herald.
Daniel R. Lewis, 62, of Coral Gables, Fla. – the scion of the Progressive Insurance fortune and a self-confessed former toker – also would like to see grass legalized and regulated.
“I think it’s a relatively harmless drug, as compared to alcohol,” said Lewis, who gave $5,000 to the pot project.
The group also counts among its backers actor Jack Black, talk show host Bill Maher and former wrestler and Minnesota Gov. Jesse Ventura, and uses Hugh Hefner’s Playboy Mansion for its lavish fund-raisers.
If passed, the ballot initiative would make having an ounce or less of marijuana a civil offense punishable by a $100 fine. Minors’ parents would be notified, and the kids would have to complete a drug awareness program.
Middlesex County District Attorney Gerard Leone slammed the pot activists as out of touch and predicted the measure would be a gateway to weaker drug laws.
“Question 2 will allow a foot in the door to people with a misguided, radical agenda,” Leone said.
Whitney Taylor, campaign manager, pointed to a Suffolk University poll that showed 72 percent of voters support the ballot question.
“They are not out of the mainstream,” Taylor said. “They are the mainstream.”
Kaplan, a 66-year-old board member of the Godless America PAC, which “mobilizes nonbelievers for political activism,” said he’s heard it all before.
“Same-sex opponents said if you allow same-sex marriage, people would marry dogs,” Kaplan said. “Yeh, right. It’s just fear tactics, and it’s absurd.”
Filed under: Hemp&Law, HempTherapy, hemp in general | Tags: Boston, cannabis, ganja, Georgetown, hashish, marijuana, Massachusetts, medical cannabis, medical marijuana, pot, skunk, weed
Boston, MA — Georgetown lawyer Steven Epstein supports the November state ballot question on decriminalizing possession of small amounts of marijuana, seeing use of the drug as a matter of personal liberty.
“We formed the government to protect the individual in the exercise of their rights, amongst which is life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” Epstein said, adding that people should be free to exercise those rights as long as they do not harm others.
But Chelsea 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.”
As the decriminalization measure, Ballot Question 2, begins to stir debate around the state, voices on both sides are being sounded in this region.
The measure would replace the state’s criminal penalties for possession of an ounce or less of marijuana with civil penalties enforced through citations.
Offenders would be subject to forfeiture of the drug and a $100 fine – for those under 18, the $100 fine would be contingent on their completing within a year a drug awareness program with a community service component. Otherwise, the fine could increase to as high as $1,000.
The offense would not be listed on the individual’s Criminal Record Information System (CORI) record.
“People should vote yes on Question Two because it’s a simple, commonplace reform based on successful laws from 11 other states,” said Whitney A. Taylor, campaign manager for the Committee for Sensible Marijuana Policy, the ballot group advocating a “yes” vote.
“We waste $30 million a year in police resources enforcing the current marijuana possession laws.”
Taylor said her committee neither promotes nor condones marijuana use. Endorsers of the question range from the American Civil Liberties Union to lawyers, professors, police officers, and marijuana legal reform groups.
“Marijuana remains illegal under Question 2,” she said, arguing that the measure actually provides for more certain consequences for offenders under age 18.
While first-time offenders are rarely sentenced to jail, Taylor said inclusion of their arrest on their CORI report can “create huge barriers to getting a job, finding housing, and getting school loans.”
Epstein, who as a lawyer has represented many clients charged with marijuana possession, said offenders are “labeled criminals for doing something that over half of us have done at least once in our lifetimes,” a label that “follows you around” because of the CORI listing. He also said that enforcement of the existing law is arbitrary.
A founder and spokesman for Massachusetts Cannabis Reform Coalition, Epstein noted that advisory questions calling for decriminalizing marijuana have passed in all 31 legislative districts where they have been on the ballot.
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. . . . 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.”
Leone and his fellow district attorneys are members of the Coalition for Safe Streets, a group opposing the question that also includes police chiefs, local officials, and clergy members.
“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.
“We also know the strain of marijuana on the streets is now nine or 10 times more potent than it was a decade ago.”
Essex lawyer Jonathan W. Blodgett agreed that Question 2 “absolutely sends the wrong message, particularly to young people.”
“The question people have to ask is, who benefits from decriminalization. Do we really want kids smoking marijuana? . . . We are all promoting healthy choices in our lives today. This is just a major step back,” said Blodgett.
“If this passes, we will see more car accidents and more industrial accidents because people will have absolutely no incentive not to smoke marijuana.”
Blodgett also said the measure will not reduce police and court costs, noting that in most cases, marijuana possession charges are brought together with more serious offenses.
Also opposed to the ballot question is Amy Harris, clinical director of Chelsea ASAP, an outpatient substance abuse clinic in Chelsea, and coordinator of the Chelsea Mobilization for Change, a coalition that works on substance abuse prevention.
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.
She said such heavy consumption of the drug puts youth at risk for cancer and psychological damage. Decriminalization would also have the effect of “sanctioning the drug so youths can emulate what the adults are doing,” she said.
But Ann Allen, a medical technician from Salem, supports Question 2, calling the proposal “long overdue.”
“It’s just very logical,” she said, noting that it would eliminate the CORI records that now burden offenders, and save money for taxpayers.
Allen said she was introduced to the cause of easing marijuana laws when a friend with cancer – who has since died – had to risk legal sanctions to obtain marijuana to relieve chemotherapy symptoms.
“She felt uncomfortable doing it illegally, like every other person I know that has smoked marijuana as a responsible adult,” she said.
Source: http://www.boston.com/globe/
Filed under: Hemp&Law, hemp in general | Tags: Boston, cannabis, ganja, hashish, hemp, marijuana, Massachusetts, pot, skunk, weed
Massachusetts — This weekend, thousands of demonstrators from Boston and beyond converged at Boston Common to show their support for “Question 2,” a proposition on the Nov. 4 ballot that would effectively decriminalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana in Massachusetts.
Decriminalization of marijuana would certainly free up millions of dollars for a needy law enforcement system. But decriminalization means more to the commonwealth than just freed-up funds and relaxed laws regulating the drug; it means preventing thousands of talented citizens from being from losing career opportunities because of frivolous criminal records.
For nearly a century, the federal government has vilified and outlawed marijuana, and only recently has the practice of anti-marijuana propaganda and prohibition come under individual state scrutiny.
Recreational use of marijuana was brought to the United States by Mexican immigrants in the early 1910s. Then, much like today, Mexican immigration faced prejudice. Marijuana became associated with those who brought it, and politicians acted to stop the encroaching what one PBS documentary called the “marijuana menace.”
Since that time, the drug has faced increasing pressure and political condemnation, and is currently listed as a “Schedule I” – the most severe – substance by federal law, along with such mind-bending substances as LSD and heroin. This headstrong policy history has lead to millions of marijuana-related arrests and billions of tax dollars spent on enforcement.
Currently, a first-time offender of possession of the drug – in any amount – faces up to six months incarceration and/or a $500 fine in Massachusetts. This is more lenient than the federal law, which stipulates up to a year behind bars and a $1000 fine, but laws still provide for imprisonment to those who possess the plant.
Moreover, the commonwealth still has mandatory sentencing laws, all but guaranteeing a trip to jail for otherwise law-abiding, peaceful citizens.
But what may prove most damaging to both the economy and culture of Massachusetts is the long-term effects of the CORI system. The Criminal Offender Record Information system is a streamlined way for potential employers to check the criminal record of any citizen.
Though the system is intended to protect citizens from violent offenders, most companies can access the CORI system for simple background checks through a variety of loopholes and legal methods. Despite growing criticism of the system, companies can — and do — check the record of applicants that were ever convicted of a marijuana offense, no matter the amount of possession.
A simple “background check” may spell disaster for those who have used marijuana. A small-time drug bust decades ago may mean big-time problems for many talented state residents who are looking for honest employment.
With Question 2, Massachusetts aims to become the 13th state to decriminalize marijuana. Decriminalization would reduce the penalty for small amounts of possession to those of minor traffic violations, and would nearly do away with jail time — and costly criminal records — for most users. It’s about time.
Recreational use of marijuana is a victimless crime. Those who choose to get high from the indigenous plant are hurting no one but themselves, if at all. According to the the British House of Commons Science and Technology Committee, marijuana is not only considered safer than the much-abused tobacco in terms of physical harm, but also in terms of physical dependance. Users don’t deflate into a pile on a couch, and their dogs don’t start talking to them, either.
With all the costs facing a continued battle against the drug, decriminalization is a no-brainer for the commonwealth. Freeing up funds for other more pressing law enforcement programs is reason enough. Let’s breathe the economic and cultural benefits of thousands less “criminals” in the commonwealth as a hit of fresh air.
Source: Daily Free Press
Filed under: Hemp&Law, HempTherapy, hemp in general | Tags: Boston, cannabis, ganja, hashish, hemp, marijuana, Massachusetts, pot, skunk, weed
Massachusetts — Thousands of marijuana enthusiasts gathered at Boston Common Saturday afternoon for the 19th annual Freedom Rally to celebrate marijuana and raise awareness about “Question 2″ on the November election ballots.
If passed, “Question 2″ would decriminalize the possession of less than one ounce of marijuana for individuals over 18 years of age, decreasing the maximum fine for possession from $500 to $100 and eliminating jail time altogether. Individuals under the age of 18 must complete a drug awareness program and provide community service along with the fine.
The rally included performances from nearly a dozen musical acts and guest speakers, and was sponsored by the Massachusetts Cannabis Reform Coalition and the Massachusetts chapter of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. Event organizers expected 30,000 to 40,000 people to support the rally in the Common, NORML Executive Director Allen St. Pierre said.
St. Pierre also said he expected between 50 and 100 individuals to be arrested for marijuana possession and other offenses.
“The Boston police are quite adversarial to this event,” he said.
Boston Police Sgt. William Ridge said a number of people under the age of 18 had been arrested and projected that there would be more.
BPD spokesman Eddy Crispin said two individuals were arrested at the rally and 72 were given a court summons.
NORML founder Keith Stroup said the burgeoning number of marijuana users aged 55 and older will help pass the initiative due to their higher voter turnout rates. In order for the initiative to pass, Question 2 needs to get 51 percent. Stroup said he expected voter turnout to be around 60 percent.
“It’s time for this country to move on from this issue,” Stroup said.
Christine Black, the 17-year-old granddaughter of Grammas for Ganja Executive Director Jeanne “Magic” Ferguson, spoke to the crowd about her support for the decriminalization of marijuana after seeing friends being arrested as juveniles for the non-violent crime of marijuana possession and “throwing their lives away” because of it.
Source: Daily Free Press
Filed under: Hemp&Law, hemp in general | Tags: Boston, cannabis, ganja, hashish, hemp, marijuana, pot, skunk, weed
Boston, MA — The distinct odor of burning incense – among other things – hung in the air over Boston Common yesterday afternoon during the 2008 Boston Hemp Fest.
A large crowd gathered, its members enjoying the warm, sunny weather and the diverse offerings of food vendors as they debated political ideas or simply relaxed on the grass.
“I tell you, it’s eclectic. From getting things like nice tie-dye shirts to getting, like, say, falafels and things like that,” said Lee Litif 44, of South Boston, who was decked out in tie-dyed clothes himself, along with sunflower-rimmed sunglasses. “It’s utopia; it really is.”
Litif was happy to express his support for an upcoming ballot question that would decriminalize marijuana possession in the state.
“No doubt. I’m for legalization of marijuana. Legalize gay marrage and legalize abortion, regardless,” he said.
Supporters of both Question 2, the marijuana measure, and Question 1, which would eliminate the state income tax, were out in full force with literature, stickers, and even free fresh fruit to try to lure people to their side.
Arthur Torrey, a libertarian from Billerica, was handing out literature to passersby from a booth. Across the way, a group of socialists were handing out their materials.
“We agree on a lot of social issues,” he said.
A number of people were smoking marijuana and some could be seen inhaling substances from balloons. Police reported making six arrests, but officials last evening did not have specifics on the charges.
Police were not visible walking through the crowds, but flashing blue lights on the perimeter of the Common reminded everyone that they were in the vicinity.
Before providing information on the arrests, Officer James Kenneally, a police spokesman, said the Hemp Fest was “rather orderly.”
Globe correspondents Padraig Shea and Caitlin Castello contributed to this report.
Source: Boston Globe
Filed under: Hemp&Law, hemp in general | Tags: Boston, cannabis, Dea, drug, ganja, hashish, hemp, marijuana, Massachusetts, pot, skunk, war on drug, weed
Boston, MA — Backers of a pro-marijuana ballot initiative charged yesterday that 11 district attorneys from Massachusetts violated campaign-finance laws and twisted the truth about the question.
Whitney Taylor, of the Committee for Sensible Marijuana Policy, said the DAs raised and spent money to oppose the question before forming their Coalition to Save Our Streets. Campaign-finance laws require groups to form a committee before raising and spending money.
Middlesex District Attorney Gerry Leone brushed aside the group’s criticism, calling it a “ploy” to distract attention from critics of the ballot question.
Leone attended a rally on the steps of the State House yesterday with other district attorneys, police, clergy and community organizers to call for the measure’s defeat.
“I’m not sure what the proponents of this question were smoking when they brought this to our state,” said the Rev. Jeffrey Brown. “We don’t need more weed.”
The question would make possession of an ounce or less of marijuana a civil rather than criminal offense, punishable by a $100 fine.
Opponents say such a change in law would essentially normalize the use of marijuana, while supporters say it would reduce a burden on the criminal-justice system by sparing those found with small amounts from facing a criminal record and jail.
Taylor’s group has filed complaints with the Office of Campaign and Political Finance and the attorney general’s office, and against the Massachusetts District Attorneys Association and the public-relations firm hired to handle opposition to the question.
“This was an attempt to keep their organization as covert as they could for as long a possible,” Taylor said. The group also named Essex District Attorney Jonathan Blodgett and Plymouth District Attorney Timothy Cruz individually.
Taylor said state records show the district attorneys began raising money as early as July 18, but didn’t file a statement of organization with the state until Sept. 5.
An official from the Office of Campaign and Political Finance said the Coalition to Save Our Streets was originally formed as a political action committee that the district attorneys used to oppose Question 2. They changed their status to a ballot question committee on Sept. 5, after being informed that they needed to make the switch.
Taylor’s group has raised far greater sums than the district attorneys’ group, according to campaign finance reports.
The district attorneys raised just $27,670, virtually all of it from their own campaign accounts, while Taylor’s group has raised nearly $650,000.
The vast majority of the money raised by Taylor’s group came from outside Massachusetts, including a $400,000 donation from billionaire financier and liberal activist George Soros and $180,000 from the Washington D.C.-based Marijuana Policy Project.
Taylor also faulted the district attorneys for using their state Web site to urge voters to oppose the question, and for misrepresenting the initiative.
In a statement on the Massachusetts District Attorneys Association Web site, the district attorneys say if the question is approved “any person may carry and use marijuana at any time.”
Taylor said if the question passed, possession of marijuana would still be illegal and anyone carrying or using marijuana would face a $100 fine.
Leone called Taylor’s accusations “a weak ploy to try to derail the public’s attention” about the negative fallout if the question failed. He said district attorneys are free to use money from their campaign accounts to support or oppose ballot questions.
At the rally, speakers said easing penalties would threaten recent positive trends in marijuana use among teens. They also said there’s a link between marijuana use and crime, car accidents and workplace safety.
“The same people dealing drugs now will be dealing drugs in the future, except they will have fewer obstacles,” said Suffolk District Attorney Dan Conley. “Why would we put another monkey on society’s back?”
The district attorneys also said that existing law is fair.
Massachusetts law requires first-time drug offenders be placed on probation and that, at the successful conclusion of probation, “the case shall be dismissed and the record shall be sealed.”
If the question is approved, Massachusetts would become the 13th state to lift or ease criminal penalties on marijuana possession.
Source: Providence Journal
Filed under: Hemp&Law, hemp in general | Tags: Boston, cannabis, ganja, hashish, hemp, law, marijuana, pot, skunk, weed
Boston, MA — 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.
Source: Boston Globe
