Bellatrix

Daley Hints at Change for Illinois Drug Laws

Sunday October 03, 2004 8:54pm | ABC 7 News

CHICAGO (AP) - Mayor Richard Daley, a former prosecutor, runs the nation's third-largest city with a pragmatic, law-and-order style.

He wears his hair short, and you'll never catch him in a Grateful Dead T-shirt. So when he starts complaining about the colossal waste of time and money involved in prosecuting small-time Marijuana cases, people take notice.

"This is absolutely a big deal," said Andy Ko, director of the Drug Policy Reform Project for the American Civil Liberties Union in Washington state. "You've got a mayor in a major American city ... coming out in favor of a smart and fair and just drug policy."

What Daley did was to say late last month that a police sergeant was on to something when he suggested that it might be better to impose fines between $250 and $1,000 for possession of small amounts of Marijuana rather than prosecute the cases.

Bellatrix; I've said it before but it bears repeating - the only reason cops like decrim is because it makes Marijuana prohibition even more profitable for them. What's to stop a cop from just taking that $250 to look the other way? Or to selectively target certain people? The decrim these guys are talking about gives the cops the discretion of judges, which is not at all what they're jobs are supposed to be.

"While officers are doing everything to keep the streets safe, the offender gets arrested and is walking the street in just a few hours," Donegan wrote in his report. "To me, this is a slap in the face to the officers." Both police and defendants know it's rare for anyone arrested for a small amount of Marijuana to get the maximum penalty in Illinois: 30 days in jail and a $1,500 fine. Pat Camden, a Chicago police spokesman and a former officer, said he couldn't remember a single case.

Bellatric; a slap in the face to the officers? What about the otherwise innocent people who are getting hauled off by the cops?

Leonardo Nevarez, 23, wasn't worried when an officer found what he said was half a joint in his pocket in August. He pretty much knew he would be ordered to attend a drug-education class.

Bellatrix; perhaps it would be better to call it "drug propaganda" or "drug misinformation" classes. Get in line for re-education!

About the only question he had last week when he went to court was whether the arresting officer would show up. If he didn't, the case would be dismissed.

"Yeah, I was hoping he wouldn't be there," Nevarez said. "He was there."

Nevarez said he could have sought a delay in the case, as some defendants do, in the hopes that the next time the arresting officer would be absent. But after talking briefly to a public defender, he entered a plea, the judge ordered the class, and Nevarez went home.

The case had taken up the time of police officers, court clerks, a judge and an attorney.

Chicago wouldn't be the first city to reduce the penalty for possessing a small amount of Marijuana.

In Seattle, voters passed an initiative requiring law-enforcement officials to make personal-use Marijuana cases their lowest priority. In California and Oregon, possession of a small amount of Marijuana is a misdemeanor punishable by a $100 to $500 fine. In Colorado, it doesn't even rise to the level of misdemeanor; it's a petty offense with a fine of no more than $100.

Some observers say Daley's statements have added weight because of the mayor's background.

"As a former prosecutor, nobody is going to say he's soft on crime," said Dick Simpson, a political science professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago and a former city alderman.

Chicago officials are a long way from making permanent changes. Police spokesman David Bayless said the department has yet to determine the accuracy of Donegan's report, which concludes the city could have collected more than $5 million in fines last year.

Still, Daley's comments alone could have a wide impact.

"This will make it easier for other officials to say the same thing," Simpson said. "I can imagine mayors in other cities coming out agreeing that this shouldn't be treated as a high crime."

Bellatrix; these guys are on the right track, but for the wrong reasons. Drug legalization is about giving the authorities less power over our actions and our bodies, not more. And just as much time will be taken up by cops writing tickets and judges hearing cases for those who can't pay their fines - and those people will end up in prison or forced re-hab anyways.

__________________

Marijuana.com Community Posting Guidelines
Marijuana.com Article Submission Guidelines

FREE MARC EMERY

xxdr_zombiexx

Chicago mayor speaks out on pot laws

CHICAGO (AP) — Mayor Richard Daley, a former prosecutor, runs the nation's third-largest city with a pragmatic, law-and-order style. He wears his hair short, and you'll never catch him in a Grateful Dead T-shirt.

[zombienote: Why, O why, must every reporter think they are being cute to bring up tie-dye when somebody talks about cannabis reform? Why not bring up Carl Sagan? Morons.]

So when he starts complaining about the colossal waste of time and money involved in prosecuting small-time Marijuana cases, people take notice.

"This is absolutely a big deal," said Andy Ko, director of the Drug Policy Reform Project for the American Civil Liberties Union in Washington state. "You've got a mayor in a major American city ... coming out in favor of a smart and fair and just drug policy."

What Daley did was to say late last month that a police sergeant was on to something when he suggested that it might be better to impose fines between $250 and $1,000 for possession of small amounts of Marijuana rather than prosecute the cases.

Sgt. Thomas Donegan determined that nearly 7,000 cases involving 2.5 grams of pot or less were filed last year in Chicago. About 94% were dismissed.

Daley wondered if ticketing offenders might be smarter. "If 99% of the cases are thrown out and we have police officers going (to court to testify in the cases), why?" the mayor said. "It costs a lot of money for police officers to go to court."

The way Daley's thoughts became public was also unusual: There was no public pressure for the mayor to speak out. He was asked by reporters who had gotten wind of Donegan's findings and simply answered their questions.

Police officers are used to spending hours making arrests, writing reports and waiting around in court, only to see the charges dropped or a guilty plea that leads to nothing more than probation or drug-education classes.

"While officers are doing everything to keep the streets safe, the offender gets arrested and is walking the street in just a few hours," Donegan wrote in his report. "To me, this is a slap in the face to the officers."

Both police and defendants know it's rare for anyone arrested for a small amount of Marijuana to get the maximum penalty in Illinois: 30 days in jail and a $1,500 fine. Pat Camden, a Chicago police spokesman and a former officer, said he couldn't remember a single case.

Leonardo Nevarez, 23, wasn't worried when an officer found what he said was half a joint in his pocket in August. He pretty much knew he would be ordered to attend a drug-education class.

About the only question he had last week when he went to court was whether the arresting officer would show up. If he didn't, the case would be dismissed.

"Yeah, I was hoping he wouldn't be there," Nevarez said. "He was there."

Nevarez said he could have sought a delay in the case, as some defendants do, in the hopes that the next time the arresting officer would be absent. But after talking briefly to a public defender, he entered a plea, the judge ordered the class, and Nevarez went home.

The case had taken up the time of police officers, court clerks, a judge and an attorney.

Chicago wouldn't be the first city to reduce the penalty for possessing a small amount of Marijuana.

In Seattle, voters passed an initiative requiring law-enforcement officials to make personal-use Marijuana cases their lowest priority. In California and Oregon, possession of a small amount of Marijuana is a misdemeanor punishable by a $100 to $500 fine. In Colorado, it doesn't even rise to the level of misdemeanor; it's a petty offense with a fine of no more than $100.

Some observers say Daley's statements have added weight because of the mayor's background.

"As a former prosecutor, nobody is going to say he's soft on crime," said Dick Simpson, a political science professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago and a former city alderman.

Chicago officials are a long way from making permanent changes. Police spokesman David Bayless said the department has yet to determine the accuracy of Donegan's report, which concludes the city could have collected more than $5 million in fines last year.

Still, Daley's comments alone could have a wide impact.

"This will make it easier for other officials to say the same thing," Simpson said. "I can imagine mayors in other cities coming out agreeing that this shouldn't be treated as a high crime."

__________________
Torture Good, Healthcare Bad, Marijuana Evil.

There's no money for your issue so long as we're squandering $50 billion a year on the DrugWar. Ben Masel

xxdr_zombiexx

Sanity In Chicago
By Stephen Young, DrugSense Weekly. Posted September 29, 2004 | AlterNet

A major American city proposed Marijuana decriminalization and no one expressed serious opposition. Not even the federal drug czar himself.

Did the drug war slack off a little last week in Chicago? Was it just too tired to fight? Demoralized by Montel Williams?

I thought Montel's show about medical Marijuana, in which he confronted and shamed former deputy drug czar Andrea Barthwell, would be the big news of the week. But while the former czarina stuck to the cruel party line that Montel shouldn't be smoking weed to stop his pain, something else happened.

A major American city proposed Marijuana decriminalization, and no one expressed serious opposition. Not even the federal freakin' drug czar himself.

Maybe things will get back to normal next week, and maybe this proposal isn't as good as it seems, but Chicago's leaders want to stop arresting pot smokers for possessing small amounts. Instead, tickets would be issued. Chicago officials insist they are not talking about decriminalization. It's really a way to get tough on Marijuana.

OK guys. Whatever you say. Semantics can be important, and the term decriminalization carries varied meanings and connotations that can confound listeners. But if this was 1978, everyone would be using the language of decrim.

Of course, it's not 1978 and the proposal isn't ideal. Among other problems, the fines as discussed are too high, but from a reformer's perspective, it still looks like a step in the right direction.

It all started last Monday when the Chicago Sun-Times released details on a police sergeant's memo suggesting that fines would be more appropriate than arrest. He argued that judges were dismissing cases for the vast majority of suspects arrested with 2.5 grams or less.

An unstated but central question floated beneath language of bureaucracy: Why spend money arresting potheads, when you can make money fining potheads?

It was a relatively rational idea, but the drug war's central function is to aggressively smash down rationality wherever it rears its confusing head. While other counties and cities have similar schemes in place, American prohibitionists go insane and froth at the mouth whenever they discuss Canadian decrim proposals. I assumed that we would hear little more about the subject in Chicago.

The next day, the chief of police said it was an idea worth consideration. Then Mayor Daley said he didn't have a problem with it. In Chicago, that's all that really matters. Both the Sun-Times and the Chicago Tribune endorsed the idea.

And then two holes within the space time continuum apparently aligned momentarily and we entered some kind of alternate dimension. I'm talking mystical signs of biblical proportions; lambs lying down with lions and that type of thing.

John Walters, the federal drug czar, told the Sun-Times he does not have a problem with Chicago's plan to stop arresting Marijuana smokers! He didn't endorse it, but he wouldn't criticize it. The federal freakin' drug czar!

The reporter was polite and/or ignorant enough not to ask the federal freakin' drug czar why it's OK for Chicago but not for Canada.

Federal hypocrisy aside, Chicago's fines for pot plan sounds OK, but regulation and a mild tax would be much better. Government shouldn't have to depend on people breaking the law to generate revenue when it could depend on people obeying the law to generate revenue.

Better policies, however, will come around in the future. When Chicago fails to fall apart because Marijuana smokers are no longer being arrested, more significant reforms will arrive in the Windy City and elsewhere, particularly if the reforms offer broader revenue streams and decreased costs for local government.

At the very least some obscured truth seems to be ripe for mass recognition across the United States: Using the limited resources of law enforcement to arrest our way toward a pot-free America is a stupid, short-sighted waste. Even the federal freakin' drug czar understands Marijuana arrests are a malicious luxury he can no longer afford to demand.

Stephen Young is an editor at DrugSense Weekly and the author of Maximizing Harm.

[zombienote: Let's give ol' John Walters another week to turn viciously on the mayor of Chicago. Mr. Young is clearly more generous in his assessment of Walters than is warranted.

After all, Marijuana = terror, remember?]

Zilos

at the moment, the cannadian (guessing the US bill is similar) decrim bill if put into place, would just allow the government to focus more on grow-ops (pentalies would be increased for growers), making the war on drugs more effective, while fining pot smokers, which would be more money for the drug war. Therefore the decrim bill doesn't help potsmokers at all.. which explains why the Federal Drug Czar is not against it.

Why not Canada? probly cause in some places like Vancouver, its almost as though its legal (well, sorta, before all the raids) the Czar is obviously worried that the decrim law will just relax the pot environment in vancouver, nomatter what the decrim bill says.

__________________
:: Posting Guidelines :: 420 Lounge :: Hemp Cultivation :: Myths :: Canadian Laws :: U.S. Laws :: Recipes ::

kevstermon

If anyone has heard Mayor Daley speak in public this might be the first thing he's ever said that made sense.

PotShot

That, right there, is the gem.

The problem with Decrim is that it is just a "sneaky" way of taxing it. While it might be better, in some situations, to pay $250-$1000 instead of going to court and maybe jail, at least with current "criminal" laws, we have a chance before a judge.

Makes me think of Judge Dredd.

It's not a war on drugs, its a war on personal freedom, and I do not want to have to be TICKETED for something I should be free to do.

But maybe it is a good thing. Maybe this Decrim idea will spread, build some public awareness. *shrug* And once people understand that the damage cannabis does to society(and individuals--they count too!) is minimal, maybe they will push for regulation for adult use... which is the best policy of all.

But of course, this relies on people being educated, and sensible... so everyone out there DON'T STOP BITCHING!

__________________

Carl Sagan Goodness Richard Dawkins Goodness