Pompo

Brooks: How weed was decriminalized
11/30/08|Metrowest Daily News| by William G. Brooks III, Guest Columnist

The Nov. 4 vote to decriminalize marijuana possession says as much about ballot referendums as it does about drugs. According to material posted on the Web site of the state Office of Campaign and Political Finance, the Committee for Sensible Marijuana Policy (OCPF) raised over $1.2 million in support of Question 2. Over $1 million of that, or just over 83 percent, came from outside Massachusetts. The opponents of Question 2, the Coalition for Safe Streets, a group organized largely by the district attorneys, raised just over $60,000, or about 5 percent of what the proponents raised.

Why the disparity? Again, the OCPF Web site tells the story. Most of the proponents' donations came from George Soros, a New York City entrepreneur who personally donated $400,000, along with several out-of-state pro-marijuana groups whose stated mission is to decriminalize marijuana nationally.

One particularly disturbing aspect of the proponents' campaign was a series of 30-second television ads which featured two retired police officers. In each case, photos of the former officers wearing police uniforms were shown as the men touted the value of civil penalties. One ad promised that the new law would free up officers to go after violent criminals and that a 'yes' vote would "make our communities safer." Both claims are erroneous and, by the way, the OCPF Web site indicates that the Committee for Sensible Marijuana Policy paid the officer $4,000 for this 30-second ad.

So now we are left with a law that makes no sense. Civil penalties will not save the state $30 million dollars each year in criminal justice costs like the proponents promised. In fact, it will cost the state money to develop and administer a drug awareness program mandated by Question 2, and to pay the salaries of the program's instructors. And the new law does not decriminalize only small amounts of pot - it decriminalizes up to an ounce of marijuana or hashish. Non-drug users probably don't realize that an ounce of marijuana generates about 50 joints and sells for about $500.

The proponents led the public to believe that people's lives had been ruined because convicted marijuana users were left with a drug conviction on their record. But under the old law, a person caught for the first time with marijuana was placed on probation for six months, then the case was dismissed and the record sealed.

CORI files accessible to the public contain only information on convictions, so these records were not revealed. What most people don't understand is that the CORI law is actually designed to protect criminal records. Ironically, the new law moves marijuana out of the arena of criminal records and into the civil. There are no protections pertaining to the disclosure of civil records by criminal justice agencies. Under the old law, if a newspaper were to ask a police department for a list of all the people charged with marijuana possession the previous year, the police department would have been legally prohibited from disclosing it. Once Question 2 goes into effect, a police department will be required to disclose such information because it will become a public record under Massachusetts law.

And contrary to the myths promoted by the Committee for Sensible Marijuana Policy, marijuana arrests don't prevent students from getting college loans for life and marijuana smokers don't serve jail time in Massachusetts.

When the new law takes effect, the police will still be able to arrest minors caught with alcohol, but not if they're carrying $500 worth of marijuana. A person under 21 who is convicted of transporting alcohol will still lose his license for 90 days, but a minor who transports marijuana or hashish will not lose it. Getting caught with an open beer in a vehicle carries a $500 fine, but getting caught with marijuana or hash will carry a fine of only $100. High school teachers are already telling us that students are talking about how much easier it will be to smoke weed.

The system that brought about this change in our drug laws is flawed and the public was hoodwinked. Now law enforcement is left to deal with this mess.

William G. Brooks III if the deputy chief of police in Wellesey and the director of the Norfolk County Police Anti-Crime task force for the past 21 years.

LowRider

just like to say this. At the end of the article it says that cops can arrest or even suspend license for underage people. well I'm sure like any new law they usually go back and pass more provisions to a law that is already in effect. so its not really a surprise and i won't be surprised if they do pass some law that says they can suspend someones license for carrying marijuana that's under age.

Also I'm kinda glad the fine is a 100 dollars for marijuana cuzz its probably about the same with cigs. i mean whats the fine for a minor who uses cigs in the state? Also i calculated 136 grams of tobacco in a cartoon of cigs or .68 grams in one cig. that's just over a QP and keep in mind this is tobacco only not the filter or paper.


Disclaimer - - this is just an average for an average size cig also weight is variant on how fresh the tobacco is.


Edit: seems the law has changed, both the seller and purchaser is fined 50 dollars with community service possible..

jpbc99

All the money in the world could not have gottan a ballot question on without 100,000 signatures in massachusetts. The decriminalization of pot happened in this state because over 65% of registered voters are basically sick of cops busting balls for pot. Me, I am personally sickened by anyone who is prejudice against a marijuana smoker. That includes some family members to the point where I don't want to be involved. The people in this state have spoken. Law enforcement officials with vested interest in overtime are the only ones left squacking. That being said, with a wopper for a winner of 65%...there had to be a few blue votes in our favor. Why, because judges are getting sick of pot charges. I can personally attest to that. Prosecutors are getting sick of the pot charges. More so than ever, citizens are getting sick of marijuana charges. Law enforcement are left to deal with "it"..."it" now being crime, not an outlet for a disgruntled individual.

blondie0420

You'd think Mr. Brooks, as a deputy police chief and member of an anti-crime task force for over 20 years, would be a little more knowledgeable on this subject. His article contained a lot of statements that were completely and utterly false. I'd get into them, but honestly, we're all here for the same reason and I'd just be preaching to the choir.

With the results of the vote being what they were, I wouldn't be surprised to see idiots like Brooks replaced by newer, "fresher" faces in the police force. (Or maybe that's just wishful thinking.) It's obvious that the majority of citizens of Massachusetts really are/were sick and tired of the harsh penalties previously on the books for marijuana possession, so since these ill-informed, biased assholes are now in the minority, maybe they'll get replaced.

__________________

Buzzby

The opponents didn't bother to start their campaign until shortly before the election. Almost all of that $60,000 came from the DAs themselves - they didn't get much public support. Massachusetts voters passed decriminalization by a very healthy margin. The people have spoken.

"My job depends on locking people up for smoking pot."

nina

Yes, that is exactly the problem....They're research on Marijuana facts are obviously gotten (well one possibility) by their personal secretary, who probably smokes weed, and is probably sick of looking facts up about it, so she just starts grabbing whatever she can, not cross-referencing, and ^^^^^^^^That is what you end up with. A big ball of wasted breath, on how Marijuana does this, and it does that, and it's BAD!!! Give it a rest US.

Bud Bungy

Wow, pot goes for $10 a joint in Michigan, or $500 an ounce? Must be some o that gold-plated weed I been hearing about.

A meathead narc republican asshole crying over the loss of his best excuse to beat up, abuse, and arrest hippies and young people, imagine that.

I know it's hard to conceptualize, Mr. Brooks, but the People Of Michigan - even the ones with cancer - pay you to enforce the laws, and the law now says people can use Marijuana for medical purposes. You should be supporting the people's will instead of trying to circumvent it. Or maybe the People Of Michigan will decide you're views aren't consistent with their wishes.

Mr. Brooks' inane and inaccurate blatherings might not measure well against the next administration's policies. Hopefully.

Go Michigan!

KWhite

The deputy chief should stiop engaing in a sour grapes bitch sessionand grow the fuck up!

It's a democracy, the people were offered two opposing points of view and they chose one he does not and did not support. Who or how the funding of that came about is a non issue, a red herring, if it were against the law for them to fund it from out of states, you'd have arested the parties responsible. It isn't, quit carping!

Well, you know deputy chief, millions of us didn't support YOUR preferred solution, many of us went to jail through it while youand your brothers in the thin blue line screamed "We only enforce the laws, we don't make them"

The implication was that y'all really didn't want to bust us, but hey, it's a democracy and the legislatures have spoken.

Hey, it's a law- you are law enforcement, so like your alst line says, bud-

Deal with it.

And quit whining, it makes you look lilke a schoolyard puke who really, really trhink the people made a stupid, uninformed decision cuz- They are stupid...

A trap y'all always seem to fall into.

Kelly