November 6, 2008 — vol. 44, no 13
More support than expected for marijuana possession
Renel Antoine, a fiscal administrator in Curtis Hall, supports the use of marijuana if prescribed by a doctor, but voted against decrimininalizing the possession up to one ounce of the drug. (St. John Barned-Smith photo)
In an election season full of turmoil, marijuana proved to be a central — and hotly debated — issue among Massachusetts voters. On Tuesday, however, the conversation was more one-sided than many had expected.
Voters in the Commonwealth overwhelmingly expressed their support for Question 2, a ballot measure aimed at softening penalties for people found possessing up to an ounce of marijuana.
As of 1:50 a.m. Wednesday, with 87 percent of precincts reporting, 65 percent of voters chose to weaken the penalties, while 35 percent preferred leaving the law unchanged.
Leading up to the election, many voters were conflicted over the grassroots initiative. Under the current law, the price for simple possession can include up to six months of jail time, a fine of up to $500 and the creation of a Criminal Offender Record Information (CORI) report that could stay on violators’ records for years after the incident.
Under the new reforms, which take effect in 30 days, getting caught with less than an ounce would result in a $100 civil fine and the incident would not be reported to the state’s criminal history board.
District attorneys, police chiefs and sheriffs across the Commonwealth rose up in opposition to the measure before Tuesday’s election, arguing in a statement that any steps toward decriminalizing the drug would send the wrong message to Massachusetts youth. In their statement, they also claimed that because judges seal the criminal records of first offenders, the CORI issue didn’t pose as large a problem as the question’s supporters claimed.
However, Question 2 had many supporters, including the Greater Boston Civil Rights Coalition and the Massachusetts chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
“In Massachusetts, the ‘war on drugs’ has made our prisons overflow, wasted millions of dollars, redirected law enforcement resources away from serious crime, and given career-destroying criminal records to even the most occasional and nonviolent marijuana users,” the ACLU wrote in its endorsement of Question 2. “Taking the possession of small amounts of marijuana out of the realm of state criminal law enforcement would greatly reduce the human and financial costs of continuing the ‘war on drugs.’ ”
The question also sparked division in the religious community.
The Boston Globe reported last week that a coalition of Boston’s prominent black ministers planned to send a letter to their fellow clergy urging them to preach against Question 2. Responding in a statement released Monday, the Washington, D.C.-based Interfaith Drug Policy Initiative announced that 51 clergy in 46 Massachusetts cities and towns had “signed a statement proclaiming, ‘We support changing Massachusetts law so that people who possess under an ounce of marijuana will no longer face arrest or prison.’ ”
Massachusetts was not the only state grappling with its policies on marijuana usage.
In California, voters rejected Proposition 5. Like the Massachusetts question, it would have reduced minor possession penalties to a civil offense punishable by a fine, but would also have shortened parole for most drug and property crimes, and diverted many drug offenders from prisons or jails into treatment programs. In Michigan, voters approved Proposal 1, which would legalize medical marijuana use.
Voters in Arkansas, Hawaii and the city of Berkeley, Calif., also voted on more specific measures ranging from de-prioritizing the prosecution of marijuana-related crimes to eliminating limits on the amount of medical marijuana residents can possess.
In Jamaica Plain on Tuesday, voters seemed evenly split over the measure. Some, like Mary Anne Kenneally, voted not to change the policies, saying marijuana possession should remain a criminal offense.
Others disagreed.
“The criminal justice system is so overloaded,” said Melissa England. “I’d rather [the state] put dealers in jail, rather than the people they are trying to get addicted.”
The CORI issue led some voters to support a change in drug policies. Though Maureen Cunniffe would prefer no one use the drug, she said, “As a parent, [I know] some people make mistakes. Why ruin their lives?”
Other voters also voted yes because of the harshness of the current law. Jack Allen, a technical writer, said he voted yes on Question 2 because he “knew someone years ago who was trying to adopt a child, and [the state] used it against him.”
“It didn’t seem right for smoking a little pot years ago,” he said.
Allen also said he felt the law isn’t very effective now.
“If people are going to use [marijuana], they will,” he said.
But some voters said they feared that decriminalizing possession of marijuana would make some Massachusetts residents more likely to use.
“Leave the law the way it is,” Maarten Henkes said. “To liberalize it will mean an increase [in use by] those we really don’t want to have access — principally our youth.”
Renel Antoine, a fiscal administrator in Curtis Hall, agreed.
“If they make it legal, there’ll be more crime, people will use it more openly and it won’t be good for kids,” he said.
Antoine added, however, that he supported the use of marijuana if prescribed by a doctor.
Material from the Associated Press was used in this report.
| Jan 7 6:26am by pot is a drug, but how much harm can it do? [96.237.21.59] | |
listen.....mj is a drug and may not be suitiable for children and teens but so is ciggerettes and alcohol, jus influence them not too smoke it etc. if they end up chooosing to smoke mj, that will be there choice.Everybody grew up knowing ciggeretes and alchohol is bad, but people made there choices.And for all you cops on that mass cop forums, why do you descriminate against mj so much? Its not like it does any harm to you guys.
Ever think about legalizing mj for a day and make alchohol and tobbacco illegal for a day?...what will happen |
|
| Nov 7 21:40pm by Truth [208.105.27.74] | |
If Gay marrage is legal why shouldn't a little marijuana be legal. Marijuana is no worst than alcohol or cigarettes. It should be controled the same way. Its for adults who chose to use it to relax,just as some people smoke a cigarette or have a drink to relax. Marijuana is not for children and teens. Regular Marijuana |
|
| Nov 7 11:03am by CalltoSanity [71.0.199.182] | |
There are substances in your refrigerator and medicine cabinet that are legal and much more addictive and dangerous than marijuana. If you wanna keep kids from drugs you have to legalize them so they can be regulated. Luckliy our grandparents were smart enough to end alcohol prohibition and guess what all the crime disappeared. |
|
| Nov 7 0:51am by Sane Productive Smoker [70.91.195.189] | |
One easy argument for the complete legalization (or at least decriminalization) of Marijuana is that if you took all the "offenders" who have smoked pot more than three times in their lives (to weed out the true innocents) and threw them in jail tomorrow, society as we know it would instantly cease to function. Bad laws promote widespread disrespect for the law. The number of people who regularly smoke ganja is testiment to this simple fact. Pot prohibition was instituted in no small part to discourage "race mixing", especially between the sexes. Perhaps the emergence of President Obama will be one more step in undoing this travesty of society and justice. The recent Massachusetts legal change is most certainly another. All the adult smokers I know, myself included, are productive, industrious, positive and healthy people. Alcohol is MUCH worse from a pharmacological standpoint, and many other standpoints as well, yet there is a massive sector of the economy that blatantly promotes and facilitates its use. Somehow society survives despite the dangers of poisoning and addiction connected to that powerful, highly-addictive, short-acting barbituate (booze). I know personally at least two people who literally drank themselves to death and left 20 - 40 potential years of life on the table because their livers just couldn't take it anymore. I've never even heard of a person killing themselves from pot smoking, let alone know two people personally. Go Massachusetts!! Breathe deeply in your newfound policy intelligence and freedom. |
|
| Nov 6 19:14pm by 206.188.48.41 [206.188.48.41] | |
If we can go to war for money, oil, and just waste human lives needlessly...I can think about pot. If George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Hancock, and Arron Burr could grow it, I can too. If Benjamin Franklin liked getting high after a hard day convincing the French to join the cause against the British, and being bitter about disowning his own son because he was a Loyalist, I can get high too. I'm not doing anything that our Founding Fathers wouldn't have done. Read the older more accurate history books. You know, the ones made from Hemp paper...like our beloved Constitution. Peace. |
|
| Nov 6 15:27pm by James White [71.232.4.167] | |
"First of all congratulations to the people of MA in this victory. Youth Voter - I said the same thing in 1978 when NY got decrim. It's not that simple. Now, we have institutionalized drug testing and all the associated jobs that go along with it (lab techs, drivers, manufacturers and distributors of test kits, sales people, lobbyists, places that offer training to be a lab techs etc, etc.) There is also the corollary industry based on subverting the tests. The entrenched drug prohibition industry is not going away any time soon. There is also a cash based shadow economy of real hard tangible renewable consumables that every once in a while provides critical support to the "good" economy. What about Norml? "Non-profit" doesn't mean "no budget", they have staff that needs to eat just like everybody else. I kinda doubt they've got the short term view as a priority. Indeed, 10 years is the short term when your talking about something that I'm sure many of them consider to be their life's work. Decriminalization and medicinal marijuana are not "loosening up" the laws, they are additional regulations that would have to be repealled in order to have legalization."
NORML doesn't have the money you think. MPP do have some money and they were behind this initiative. MassCann/NORML and other local NORML chapters are run 100% by local unpaid volunteers. I am one of those. This was a huge victory in MA. A VOTER MANDATE. I got arrested for 1 joint in MA and have a CORI for life with no recourse or chance to work almost every job out there. That is madness! And we ended just that. Legalization/medical marijuana, yes. But this was a slamdunk that was guarenteed to help the most people. Don't discount it. It's huge in parochial, hack filled MA. The people asked for it, and demanded it and voted for it. It's way better to pay $100 than get arrested and pay much more and forever like me...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQ2W1kmJrdA |
|
| Nov 6 7:51am by Nunio Bydnis [24.186.60.127] | |
| First of all congratulations to the people of MA in this victory. Youth Voter - I said the same thing in 1978 when NY got decrim. It's not that simple. Now, we have institutionalized drug testing and all the associated jobs that go along with it (lab techs, drivers, manufacturers and distributors of test kits, sales people, lobbyists, places that offer training to be a lab techs etc, etc.) There is also the corollary industry based on subverting the tests. The entrenched drug prohibition industry is not going away any time soon. There is also a cash based shadow economy of real hard tangible renewable consumables that every once in a while provides critical support to the "good" economy. What about Norml? "Non-profit" doesn't mean "no budget", they have staff that needs to eat just like everybody else. I kinda doubt they've got the short term view as a priority. Indeed, 10 years is the short term when your talking about something that I'm sure many of them consider to be their life's work. Decriminalization and medicinal marijuana are not "loosening up" the laws, they are additional regulations that would have to be repealled in order to have legalization. | |
| Nov 5 19:05pm by Who do you trust? [74.85.198.87] | |
Alcohol is made by man. Marijuana is made by god. Who do you trust? |
|
| Nov 5 18:18pm by AHHHH [66.189.68.80] | |
"If they make it legal, there’ll be more crime"
WWWWWHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAATTTTTT????????? |
|
| Nov 5 16:32pm by Youth Voter [136.160.128.68] | |
Wake up bro, the kids want to smoke...the millennial generation is flexing its political muscle and we still have a third of the generation thats too young too vote. My guess is that in ten years the plant will be decriminalized across the country. Marijuana is safer than alcohol and becoming just as common. Its not a bad thing...drug companies pump in a ton of money to keep it illegal...well those days are numbered. |
|
related content
EDITORIAL: Vote Yes on Question 2
"A major advantage of this approach is that the offender would not have a Criminal Offender Record Information (CORI) report," the Banner wrote in its Oct. 9, 2008 editorial. "Although drug abuse is serious, it is even more serious for the petty offender to be precluded from gainful employment because of a CORI." More »
Mass. group raises $219,000 for pot decriminalization
A man charged with drug offenses nearly a decade ago after a Massachusetts Institute of Technology student fatally overdosed on laughing gas contributed $25,000 to supporters of a ballot question to decriminalize minor marijuana possession because he believes changing the law could help avert future tragedies. More »
Soros backs softer pot penalties in Mass.
A measure that would decriminalize minor marijuana-possession cases is
on the ballot in Massachusetts largely because of one man: billionaire
financier and liberal activist George Soros. Of the $429,000 collected last year by the group advancing the
measure, $400,000 came from Soros, who has championed similar efforts
in several states and spent $24 million to fight President Bush’s 2004
re-election bid. More »
