Pubdate: Wed, 08 Oct 2008
Source: Milford Daily News, The (MA)
Copyright: 2008 The Milford Daily News
Contact:  http://www.milforddailynews.com
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/2990
Author: Sarah Menesale
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/pot.htm (Cannabis)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/decrim.htm (Decrim/Legalization)

DA SPEAKS OUT AGAINST MARIJUANA DECRIMINALIZATION

Mary Jane, pot, weed, ganga -- call it what you want,  but
Massachusetts voters will decide on a burning issue  in the Nov. 4
election that's caused quite a stir  between advocates and opponents
of current marijuana  laws in the commonwealth.

Essex District Attorney Jonathan Blodgett talked about  his opposition
to Question 2 -- which would  decriminalize possession of small
amounts of marijuana  -- at a meeting Friday morning with reporters
and  editors in Beverly. His opinions differ sharply with  those of
Georgetown's Steve Epstein, a well-known local  advocate of reducing
the penalties for marijuana  possession.

"Ballot Question 2 would undoubtedly have a negative  effect on
children. It will facilitate young people  smoking grass," Blodgett
said.

Blodgett focused on what decriminalization would mean  and the dangers
of marijuana during the informal  question-and-answer session.

"There's no question this is a baby step [for  supporters]. Their
ultimate goal is the legalization of  drugs," he said of Question 2,
which he said is being  backed by Hungarian-born American financial
guru and  political activist George Soros.

If Question 2 passes, it is binding legislation and  will go into
effect eight weeks after the election.

Question 2 on the Nov. 4 statewide ballot asks voters  to approve or
deny a proposed law that would, "replace  the criminal penalties for
possession of one ounce or  less of marijuana with a new system of
civil penalties,  to be enforced by issuing citations, and would
exclude  information regarding this civil offense from the  state's
criminal record information system."

Offenders age 18 or older would be subject to  forfeiture of the
marijuana plus a civil penalty of  $100. Their parents would also be
notified of the  offense and the option to complete a drug awareness 
program. Offenders under the age of 18 would be subject  to the same
forfeiture and, if they complete a drug  awareness program within one
year of the offense, the  same $100 penalty.

The proposed law would define possession of one ounce  or less of
marijuana as including possession of one  ounce or less of
tetrahydrocannibinol ("THC"), or  having metabolized products of
marijuana or THC in  one's body.

A YES vote would replace the criminal penalties for  possession of one
ounce or less of marijuana with a new  system of civil penalties. A NO
vote would make no  change in state criminal laws concerning
possession of  marijuana. The money received from the new civil 
penalties would go to the city or town where the  offense occurred.

"I would have a better debate with you if the fine was  $2,000. It
would be a more serious discussion. Don't  tell me a $100 fine isn't
going to be a joke for people  who can afford to buy an ounce,"
Blodgett said, noting  that an ounce of marijuana typically sells for
$300 to  $600.

He added, "I don't want the guy next to me drunk on  I-95. And I don't
want the guy next to me on 95  stoned."

Looking for legalization

Georgetown's Steve Epstein disagrees that a move toward  legalization
would be bad policy.

Epstein, an attorney and Georgetown resident since  1987, is one of
the founders of the Massachusetts  Cannabis Reform Coalition, which
was started in 1989.

"I think it should be [fully] legalized. I make no  bones about it,"
said Epstein this week. He says that's  where he differs from the
Committee for Sensible  Marijuana Policy, which is backing Question 2.
That  group is currently not lobbying for further  decriminalization
beyond what is called for in the  ballot initiative, but Epstein
thinks Question 2 should  just be a first step.

Epstein has worked for years to turn simple marijuana  possession by
adults into a civil, rather than a  criminal, offense. He also
supports legal marijuana use  for medical purposes, saying in past
interviews, "If  marijuana dealers were licensed and taxed, they'd
have  an incentive to keep marijuana out of the schools."

Ten other states have legalized marijuana use for  medicinal
purposes.

Blodgett argued that those states' illegal marijuana  use is higher,
saying Alaska is pushing to go back to  criminalizing the possession
of marijuana.

Marijuana use is going to happen, Epstein reasons,  saying, "The cat
is out of the bag."

"All you can do is teach your children and that  moderation is key,"
he said.

Epstein calls current marijuana possession enforcement  arbitrary
because the law grants the arbitrary power to  the police to arrest,
summons or verbally warn the  offender.

"That's one of the key things to me -- the  arbitrariness of
enforcement. It depends on who or  where," he said this week.

Blodgett argued that no one in Essex, Suffolk or  Middlesex counties
is arrested just for possession of  small amounts of marijuana, a
Class D substance. They  are instead summoned to court.

Blodgett said juveniles who are caught with small  amounts of
marijuana are placed in a juvenile diversion  program that consists of
an online course, sessions  with a counselor and possibly community
service.

An adult typically gets six months unsupervised  probation and then
the matter is closed in court,  Blodgett said. They would only lose a
day off of work  to show up to court.

"The criminal justice department is the single biggest  referral of
services," he said, arguing if Question 2  passes people who would
otherwise be in the system and  receiving health services would no
longer have access  when they start getting addicted.

Proponents of Question 2 say the bill would help those  caught with
marijuana from being denied jobs and  volunteer opportunities because
the charge would no  longer show up on a CORI check.

It now says you've been charged with a crime and it's  been
dismissed.

"If that's the issue, we're talking CORI reform. The  governor has
proposed changes. It's an active  discussion," Blodgett said.

'Not an open door'

Epstein argued that more than 10 percent of people over  the age of 18
use marijuana each month.

A conviction may result in incarceration in jail, loss  of license,
loss of a permit to carry, and more,  Epstein reasons.

"Prohibition fails to keep marijuana away from children  more
effectively than regulation of alcohol and tobacco  keeps alcohol away
from children. It appears the wiser  course for Congress and the state
legislature to tax  and regulate this agricultural commodity while 
prohibiting it to children as we do tobacco and  alcohol," Epstein
wrote in a 2005 guest column.

He argued controlling the industry and charging fines  similar to a
parking ticket for possession of small  amounts of marijuana could be
a revenue maker for  states.

"It's not an open door for dealers. If someone is  caught with a lot
of small packages, or a lot of cash,  it's indent to distribute and
they can be arrested," he  said.

It would still be a crime to grow marijuana, possess  marijuana with
the intent to distribute and to operate  a motor vehicle while under
the influence of marijuana.

"No one should drive while impaired," Epstein said, but  cites a study
that found smoking pot leaves the body  impaired on a similar level as
taking Nyquil.

Blodgett stated that levels of THC in marijuana have  risen to 30
percent, calling the marijuana found on the  streets today, "Not your
father's Oldsmobile."

The stronger varieties tend to come from Canada across  the border and
can be laced with stronger drugs.

Blodgett asked why proponents of the bill would want to  be part of
the "dumbing down of America," asking who  would benefit from this
legislation.

"This is a drug dealers' protection act. This will  seduce more kids
to smoke and buy marijuana," he said.

The district attorney's office spends as much time on  prevention as
they do in persecution of drug-related  crimes, Blodgett explained.

"We're in the schools. We're helping kids make good  decisions," he
said.

He argued decriminalizing any amount of marijuana, no  matter the
size, is a bad health policy.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Larry Seguin