Pubdate: Sun, 23 Mar 2003
Source: Columbia Daily Tribune (MO)
Copyright: 2003 Columbia Daily Tribune
Contact:  http://www.showmenews.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/91
Note: Prints the street address of LTE writers.
Author: Randy G. Boehm
Note: Mr. Boehm is the Columbia police chief.
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/pot.htm (Cannabis)

VOTERS SHOULD REJECT MISGUIDED MARIJUANA MOVE.

On April 8, Columbia voters will decide a proposed ordinance that would 
make substantial changes to the way the Columbia Police Department handles 
misdemeanor marijuana offenses.

In my opinion, these changes would be a detriment to Columbia.

The policy the Columbia Police Department has in place allows individuals 
arrested for possession of small amounts of marijuana to be sent to 
municipal court when no extenuating circumstances exist. Examples of 
extenuating circumstances that would cause an offense to be sent to state 
court include an individual with prior convictions, an individual arrested 
for other state charges, or an arrest made in the service of a drug search 
warrant.

The current policy works very well. Individuals arrested for possession of 
small amounts of marijuana are sent to municipal court if no extenuating 
circumstances exist.

The proposed ordinance would remove all discretion from the police officer 
as to how misdemeanor marijuana arrests would be handled. We could no 
longer consider the individual's criminal history.

A known drug dealer with several previous convictions would be sent to 
municipal court, as would an individual arrested for a first-offense 
marijuana possession with no criminal history. Clearly, this would be 
unfair and would not allow a police officer to use discretion and to take 
all circumstances under consideration on each offense.

It should also be noted that this proposed ordinance would relate only to 
Columbia police officers. An individual arrested inside the city limits of 
Columbia by the Boone County Sheriff's Department, the University of 
Missouri Police Department or the Missouri Highway Patrol still would be 
subject to being sent to state court. Again, this would clearly be unfair.

This proposed ordinance would remove discretion from the city and state 
prosecutors. Currently, these offices communicate with each other as to the 
appropriate office to handle a particular case. This system works well.

The proposed ordinance removes discretion from the municipal judge as to 
the amount of fine for marijuana offenses. A first-time offender would 
receive a $25 fine. This is regardless of criminal history. Currently, the 
typical fine for a first-offense misdemeanor marijuana possession is 
between $200 and $300. This obviously would be a significant reduction in 
fine and not in line with the current policy of the municipal judge.

The proposed ordinance also would allow for misdemeanor possession to 
become "legal" in the city of Columbia if used for medical purposes. This 
would be in conflict with state and federal law. Since Columbia police 
officers swear to uphold not just city ordinances but state and federal 
law, a clear, significant conflict would be created.

It should be noted that the proposed ordinance says a doctor's 
"recommendation" would be required to authorize the possession. This 
language is used because a doctor cannot prescribe marijuana use. The Food 
and Drug Administration and the U.S. Supreme Court do not recognize 
marijuana for medical purposes under any circumstances.

An argument has been made that this proposed ordinance would save time for 
Columbia police officers. In reality, no time would be saved. Paperwork for 
a misdemeanor marijuana possession case is the same regardless of whether 
the case goes to city or state court.

Finally, the proposed ordinance would send an improper and conflicted 
message to the youths of our community. The Columbia Police Department 
spends many hours in our schools teaching youths the negative consequences 
of substance abuse. The proposed ordinance suggests that misdemeanor 
marijuana possession is not a serious offense.

I ask the citizens of this community to vote "no" on this proposed ordinance.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Terry Liittschwager