Cali smoke
- 302
- 0
Vote possible on marijuana fines
Monday, March 23, 2009
By MIKE PLAISANCE
[email protected]
SPRINGFIELD - Someone caught smoking marijuana in public would face escalating fines of between $100 and $300 on top of an existing state fine of $100, under a measure the City Council could approve tonight.
But a civil liberties lawyer said last week that toughening the state's new marijuana law is unnecessary and unwanted.
The lawyer also said that a former New Jersey state trooper who belongs to the group, Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, will oppose the measure in the pre-meeting speakout.
The meeting is scheduled at 7:30 p.m. in City Hall.
Supporters see the measure as a way to plug a hole in a state law that took effect on Jan. 2 which decriminalized possession of an ounce or less of marijuana. The law took effect after voters overwhelmingly approved ballot Question 2 in November.
But left unclear, supporters of the measure say, is the city's response if people not only have a marijuana cigarette, which would constitute decriminalized possession under the new law, but also begin smoking joints on street corners or in parks.
Councilor James J. Ferrera III proposed the additional fines to help police deal with such cases.
"We're working across the city to enhance the quality of life for all the residents of the city of Springfield," he said on Friday.
Question 2 allows cities and towns to add such penalties.
Three council approvals, or steps, are required in order to adopt an ordinance. The first two came on Feb. 2 and March 2, both by voice vote.
Third approval requires a roll-call vote.
William C. Newman, director of the Western Massachusetts office of the American Civil Liberties Union, has urged the council to reject the marijuana measure.
"There's not a problem; Question 2 has been in effect for almost three months now, and no one has indicated there's any problems in Springfield," he said.
Police Sgt. John M. Delaney has said that marijuana use is a minor issue here. But Commissioner William J. Fitchet supports the ordinance proposal the City Council is considering.
Delaney said the measure would help police deal with marijuana possession under the new state law, the intent of which is unclear.
Newman said that adding fines to the new law is unnecessary - because public pot-smoking is hardly rampant and existing laws cover whatever does arise - and unwanted, because voters approving Question 2 have declared pot possession a minor concern.
"It's passing a law and increasing a penalty for a problem that doesn't exist," he said.
Newman said that former New Jersey State Police Detective Jack A. Cole, of Medford, will urge the council to reject the marijuana measure.
"A tremendous amount of the staff time and funding for law enforcement is wasted arresting non-violent drug users who hurt no one but themselves," Cole said.
Cole was with the New Jersey State Police for 26 years, including undercover narcotics work, according to a biography on the group's Web site. Law Enforcement Against Prohibition consists of current and former members of law enforcement who say that drug policies have failed.
More than 66 percent of voters in Springfield approved Question 2, mirroring the 65-percent statewide passage.
Source:
Monday, March 23, 2009
By MIKE PLAISANCE
[email protected]
SPRINGFIELD - Someone caught smoking marijuana in public would face escalating fines of between $100 and $300 on top of an existing state fine of $100, under a measure the City Council could approve tonight.
But a civil liberties lawyer said last week that toughening the state's new marijuana law is unnecessary and unwanted.
The lawyer also said that a former New Jersey state trooper who belongs to the group, Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, will oppose the measure in the pre-meeting speakout.
The meeting is scheduled at 7:30 p.m. in City Hall.
Supporters see the measure as a way to plug a hole in a state law that took effect on Jan. 2 which decriminalized possession of an ounce or less of marijuana. The law took effect after voters overwhelmingly approved ballot Question 2 in November.
But left unclear, supporters of the measure say, is the city's response if people not only have a marijuana cigarette, which would constitute decriminalized possession under the new law, but also begin smoking joints on street corners or in parks.
Councilor James J. Ferrera III proposed the additional fines to help police deal with such cases.
"We're working across the city to enhance the quality of life for all the residents of the city of Springfield," he said on Friday.
Question 2 allows cities and towns to add such penalties.
Three council approvals, or steps, are required in order to adopt an ordinance. The first two came on Feb. 2 and March 2, both by voice vote.
Third approval requires a roll-call vote.
William C. Newman, director of the Western Massachusetts office of the American Civil Liberties Union, has urged the council to reject the marijuana measure.
"There's not a problem; Question 2 has been in effect for almost three months now, and no one has indicated there's any problems in Springfield," he said.
Police Sgt. John M. Delaney has said that marijuana use is a minor issue here. But Commissioner William J. Fitchet supports the ordinance proposal the City Council is considering.
Delaney said the measure would help police deal with marijuana possession under the new state law, the intent of which is unclear.
Newman said that adding fines to the new law is unnecessary - because public pot-smoking is hardly rampant and existing laws cover whatever does arise - and unwanted, because voters approving Question 2 have declared pot possession a minor concern.
"It's passing a law and increasing a penalty for a problem that doesn't exist," he said.
Newman said that former New Jersey State Police Detective Jack A. Cole, of Medford, will urge the council to reject the marijuana measure.
"A tremendous amount of the staff time and funding for law enforcement is wasted arresting non-violent drug users who hurt no one but themselves," Cole said.
Cole was with the New Jersey State Police for 26 years, including undercover narcotics work, according to a biography on the group's Web site. Law Enforcement Against Prohibition consists of current and former members of law enforcement who say that drug policies have failed.
More than 66 percent of voters in Springfield approved Question 2, mirroring the 65-percent statewide passage.
Source:
