Pubdate: Thu, 21 Oct 2010
Source: Marblehead Reporter (MA)
Copyright: 2010 GateHouse Media, Inc.
Contact:  http://www.wickedlocal.com/marblehead/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/3395
Cited: Massachusetts Cannabis Reform Coalition http://www.MassCann.org
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/topic/Massachusetts+Cannabis+Reform+Coalition
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?261 (Cannabis - United States)

MARBLEHEAD VOTERS TO BE POLLED ON MARIJUANA

Marblehead -- Movies making light of potheads and "getting high" have 
become commonplace, but a ballot question Marblehead voters will be 
asked for a serious opinion on Nov. 2 as to whether marijuana should 
be legalized.

Posed as Question 4 on the ballot, the non-binding referendum will 
ask voters in the 7th Essex (Salem) and 8th Essex (Swampscott, 
Marblehead and part of Lynn) if they think their lawmakers should 
enact legislation that would allow the state to regulate the 
taxation, cultivation and sale of marijuana to adults.

Steven Epstein, a Georgetown resident and the founder of the 
Massachusetts Cannabis Reform Coalition, is responsible for having 
gotten the necessary support to put the question on the ballot. His 
organization is under the umbrella of the National Organization for 
the Reform of Marijuana Laws, or NORML, a D.C.-based advocacy group.

New Jersey, Rhode Island, California and 11 other states, plus the 
District of Columbia, have legalized marijuana for medical use. 
Further, a California ballot measure this year would make it legal 
for those over the age of 21 to grow small amounts of the drug for 
recreational use.

In 2008, Massachusetts voters chose to reduce the penalty for 
possession of less than an ounce of marijuana in the state to a $100 
fine. Marblehead voters decided to enact a local marijuana bylaw in 
2009 relating to public usage of the drug.

According to Marblehead Police Chief Robert Picariello, since the law 
went into effect, there have been 31 citations issued for marijuana 
violation, a number does not distinguish between violations of the 
local and state law.

Supporters of the legalization of marijuana have argued that by 
regulating its sale could bring in billions of dollars in revenue to 
the state, as alcohol sales do.

They also argue that exposure to drug-prevention programs and the 
threat of criminal legal sanctions play little if any role in 
determining whether or not Americans use pot.

Supporters also say that studies fail to demonstrate conclusively 
that marijuana is a "gateway" drug, which leads to use and abuse of 
more dangerous illicit drugs.

Marblehead Counseling Center Executive Director Paul Crosby, who 
explained he "cut his teeth" in the realm of alcohol addiction, said 
he does not necessarily think the drug should be legalized except 
strictly for medicinal purposes.

"I'm for the legalization of marijuana for medical purposes; I do 
believe it should be regulated such as getting it through a drug 
store," Crobsy said. "It should not be for kids under 21, just like 
alcohol, because I've seen too many kids get stalled up for getting 
psychologically hooked."

However, Crosby added that he doesn't think that marijuana is as 
addictive a substance as alcohol. Furthermore, tobacco is the most 
addictive substance of all, he added.

"Nicotine is the hardest addiction to kick," Crosby said.

As for the gateway-drug argument against legalization, Crosby said 
while he's seen some evidence of marijuana addiction in teenagers, 
there is less evidence of that in adults.

"There still is a substance, DNC, in marijuana that although not 
physically addictive, becomes psychologically addictive in people," he said.

He added that extensive marijuana use can result in a reduction in 
ambition, although he added, "You have to smoke a lot."

Holding a similar opinion on the matter is Marblehead's state Rep. 
Lori Ehrlich, D-Marblehead.

"I will vote no on a wholesale legalization, but I would be 
interested to see a proposal here in the Commonwealth similar to the 
models in California and Washington, D.C.'s example of permitting 
medicinal use," she stated in an e-mail. "In light of the successful 
passage of the last ballot initiative, which dramatically changed 
enforcement, I think it's time to take a more careful look at the 
direction we are heading for even non-medicinal purposes. It seems to 
be the will of the voters to bring this underground and illicit 
economy to the surface so we should make sure that we have an 
opportunity, as a state, to ensure the safety of the product and 
regulate it in a way that we can address the many downsides of drug use."

Ehrlich's opponent, Republican Kate Kozitza of Swampscott, called the 
issue a difficult one for her as a physician and as a psychiatrist 
who has seen many patients over the years "who have destroyed their 
lives through alcohol and drug dependency."

"That being said, certain substances pose more harm to society at 
large than other substances," she said. "For instance, even when 
consumed in even in the smallest quantities, substances like heroin 
and methamphetamine are highly addictive, pose public health and 
safety threats, and significant criminal behavior can be directly 
attributed to addiction to both substances. On the contrary, 
marijuana, while problematic in the way alcohol can be, does not 
wreak havoc, directly or indirectly, on society."

She added that she does not believe marijuana to be a "gateway drug."

She continued, "The Commonwealth already elected to decriminalize the 
possession of modest amounts of marijuana, freeing up strained police 
forces and jails to concentrate more on violent offenders."

Legalizing marijuana, she argued, would further alleviate this strain 
and would save the taxpayers "tens of millions of dollars per year in 
costs relating to the prosecution of marijuana-related offenses."

Meanwhile, Chief Picariello is vehemently against the initiative.

"I don't think we should be legalizing marijuana -- especially for 
the purpose of revenue. It's a drug," Picariello said. "I believe 
it's harmful and is not something we want to put in the hands of our 
kids. I'm all for it staying illegal."

As for Board of Health member Michelle Gottlieb, she said that the 
issue is not something the board has discussed so she didn't feel 
comfortable commenting. But she did say that she is glad 
public-policy questions like these have a chance to go before voters.

"It's an important way to educate people about these types of 
issues," Gottlieb said. "It's incumbent on people to look at the 
risks and benefits of such an initiative... It takes the pulse of the 
community for future legislation." 
- ---
MAP posted-by: Richard Lake