Pubdate: Sun, 07 Oct 2012
Source: Boston Globe (MA)
Copyright: 2012 Globe Newspaper Company
Contact: http://services.bostonglobe.com/news/opeds/letter.aspx?id=6340
Website: http://bostonglobe.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/52
Author: Peter Schworm

POLICE WARN OF DIRE CONSEQUENCES IF MEDICAL MARIJUANA LEGALIZED

With Election Day just a month away, polls show strong public support 
in Massachusetts for a referendum that would legalize marijuana for 
medical use, joining 17 other states.

But prosecutors and police are sounding alarms about the initiative, 
saying it is ripe for exploitation and would lead to more drug 
addiction and crime.

While supporters say the law would strictly regulate who can dispense 
marijuana to people with painful medical conditions, law enforcement 
officials fear the system would be manipulated by drug dealers who 
would use nonprofit treatment centers as fronts for illicit operations.

"To think these establishments will not be fronts for illegal 
distribution and money-laundering, and reduce the street market price 
of marijuana, would be illogical," said John Carmichael Jr., deputy 
police chief in Walpole, where police say they seized a pound of 
medical marijuana being sold illegally in April. "We'll be creating a 
drug market, literally on the street."

Supporters say law enforcement's concerns are greatly exaggerated, 
and that the law would include enough safeguards to deter abuse. 
Access to the drug, they say, would bring relief to thousands of 
patients in chronic pain and provide an alternative to prescription 
painkillers.

'The good that this law will do in treating patients with 
debilitating diseases outweighs the other concerns.'

But authorities point to other states that have approved the medical 
use of cannabis, such as California and Oregon, as cautionary tales. 
Storefront marijuana shops in Los Angeles have drawn frequent 
complaints and a crackdown from federal drug agents, and city police 
say some shops have been taken over by illegal drug dealers.

Such problems give rise to doubts that the government can effectively 
regulate the sale and production of medical marijuana. The state's 
Public Health Department, which under the law is charged with 
overseeing the distribution centers, has not eased such doubts, 
declining to take a position on the law or to say whether it has 
begun to craft regulations for the law.

"This isn't just a referendum on medical marijuana," said Joseph 
Early Jr., the district attorney in Worcester County and president of 
the state's district attorneys association. "It's more than that. The 
experience in other states shows this doesn't work, and we have to 
pay attention."

Statewide coalitions of prosectors and police chiefs oppose the 
measure, known as Question 3, as does the Massachusetts Medical 
Society, which says there is "insufficient scientific information" 
about the safety of medicinal marijuana.

Law enforcement officials, however, are less concerned with the 
medicinal merits than the fear that dispensaries would skirt 
regulations and become easy targets for criminal activity.

"I don't think there are any safeguards you can put on this to 
prevent abuse," said Early, adding that he is "100 percent" certain 
the law will be flouted.

In Oregon, for example, illegal, for-profit distribution of medical 
marijuana has become rampant, according to a recent report by The 
Oregonian newspaper. Federal authorities have identified more than a 
dozen large-scale operations sending medical marijuana to a number of 
other states, the newspaper reported.

The trafficking of medicinal marijuana has also made its way to 
Massachusetts. In Walpole, police arresting three people in a drug 
bust uncovered, among other drugs, a pound of marijuana they believed 
was intended for medical use in Maine, where the prescribing of 
medical marijuana has been legal since 1999.

But supporters say the Massachusetts measure was specifically crafted 
to avoid the problems other states have encountered, and tout it as 
the country's safest medical marijuana law.

It initially would limit the number of treatment centers to 35 to 
enable strict oversight, and requires patients to obtain written 
certification from a physician that they have a "specific 
debilitating medical condition." Patients must have a "bona fide" 
relationship with the physician, to guard against unsanctioned sales.

Treatment centers would have to register with the state Public Health 
Department and pay an undetermined amount to offset administrative 
costs. Under the law, they are barred from hiring anyone with a 
felony drug conviction.

"It's a law that has the advantage of what 17 other states have 
experienced," said Robert Garvey, sheriff in Hampshire County and a 
supporter of the measure. "It has plenty of safeguards to make sure 
that only people who need the drug can obtain it."

The law includes strict criminal penalties, Garvey notes. Selling 
marijuana for nonmedical use would be punishable by up to five years 
in state prison. Fraudulent purchases would be punishable by up to a 
six-month sentence in a house of correction.

Garvey said he believes such penalties are stiff enough to deter 
violators. He sees the measure as a medical issue, and believes those 
with painful conditions such as cancer, Crohn's disease, and ALS 
deserve access to treatments that can ease their suffering.

"The good that this law will do in treating patients with 
debilitating diseases outweighs the other concerns," he said. Garvey 
said that while marijuana is widely available, it is connected to far 
fewer crimes and social problems than alcohol.

Public opinion surveys suggest that many agree. A Suffolk University 
poll of likely voters taken last month found that 59 percent 
supported the proposed law, while 35 percent were opposed. A recent 
Boston Globe poll found that nearly 70 percent of voters backed the measure.

Law enforcement officials say they hope voters will take a close look 
at the law, and they warn of the unintended consequences of approving 
complex legislation through a ballot initiative.

"We've seen more violence around marijuana than a lot of other 
drugs," said Steven Mazzie, chief of police in Everett. "You put more 
marijuana on the streets, you're going to have more violence."

Opponents also question whether the Public Health Department has the 
wherewithal to oversee the centers, especially with so little time to 
prepare. If approved, the measure would take effect Jan. 1.

A spokesman for the state agency declined comment last week.

"This decision would establish an entire separate pharmaceutical 
infrastructure," said Heidi Heilman, president of the Massachusetts 
Prevention Alliance, an advocacy group that opposes the measure. 
"It's a system that is easily exploited. It would allow unscrupulous 
individuals to make a profit."

Gerry Leone, district attorney in Middlesex County, said he opposes 
the ballot question, but remains open to legalization of medical 
marijuana provided that "systemic accountability" prevents abuse in 
obtaining and distributing the drug.

Law enforcement officials say the medical marijuana law represents a 
backdoor attempt to legalize the drug entirely, and they worry that 
it sends a dangerous message to teenagers that marijuana is acceptable.

"It completely undercuts the prevention message," said Robert 
Champagne, chief of the Peabody Police Department. "And it will bring 
a predictable host of social problems. From the view of many people, 
this is not about compassionate medicine."

Champagne said the centers will allow drug dealers to "hide in plain sight."

"I'm not naive enough to believe everyone is going to play fair 
here," he said. "This is big business."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom