It's often said politicians know how to read the election results, but it's often untrue.
Consider Marlborough, where 62 percent of voters last November agreed possession of marijuana should be changed to a civil offense, punishable by a $100 fine. The tally on Question 2 was similarly lopsided in nearly every Massachusetts city and town.
It's a pretty simple concept. Get caught with marijuana, and you pay a $100 fine. But City Councilor Paul Ferro said Monday the change in law gives the impression marijuana is legal. He wants a higher fine - $300 - for using marijuana in public. City Council will soon take up his proposal, which is modeled on ordinances already enacted in Milford and several other Massachusetts cities and towns.
Now we'll grant that not every pot smoker is a careful student of public policy. Maybe some of them missed the part about the $100 fine. But we expect they don't pay close attention to the actions of the City Council either. So the public education advantage of tripling the penalty is negligible, as is the deterrent value.
The logic behind these proposals seems to be that a $100 fine isn't enough to stop people from firing up their bongs in public. But for the people most likely to commit the offense - young people who don't have a house with a big yard in which to consume their drug of choice - $100 is nothing to sneeze at. It's less onerous than a criminal arrest with the chance of a jail term, but they wouldn't want to fork it over for the dubious pleasure of lighting up in front of a cop.
Police Chief Mark Leonard told City Council's Legislative and Legal Affairs Committee Question 2 "left a lot of us scratching our heads how we would enforce it," but they have since figured out how to write a civil citation. He objects to the idea that someone caught smoking marijuana on the steps of city hall would face the same fine for the 50th violation as for the first. But those fines would add up to $5,000, which you'd think would be enough to convince anyone to take his pleasure elsewhere.
A $300 fine would triple the revenue a citation for smoking pot in public would bring in, and Marlborough, like other Bay State communities, could use the cash. But unless Phish schedules a concert in Ward Park, we doubt the new ordinance will do much to rescue the city budget.
But that's not the point. The point is to let politicians like Ferro demonstrate to the voters how anti-drug they are. We hope the 62 percent of voters who rejected harsh penalties for marijuana use in November are paying attention.
News Hawk- Ganjarden 420 MAGAZINE ® - Medical Marijuana Publication & Social Networking
Source: The MetroWest Daily News
Author: GHS
Contact: The MetroWest Daily News
Copyright: 2009 GateHouse Media, Inc.
Website: Higher Fine For Pot?
Consider Marlborough, where 62 percent of voters last November agreed possession of marijuana should be changed to a civil offense, punishable by a $100 fine. The tally on Question 2 was similarly lopsided in nearly every Massachusetts city and town.
It's a pretty simple concept. Get caught with marijuana, and you pay a $100 fine. But City Councilor Paul Ferro said Monday the change in law gives the impression marijuana is legal. He wants a higher fine - $300 - for using marijuana in public. City Council will soon take up his proposal, which is modeled on ordinances already enacted in Milford and several other Massachusetts cities and towns.
Now we'll grant that not every pot smoker is a careful student of public policy. Maybe some of them missed the part about the $100 fine. But we expect they don't pay close attention to the actions of the City Council either. So the public education advantage of tripling the penalty is negligible, as is the deterrent value.
The logic behind these proposals seems to be that a $100 fine isn't enough to stop people from firing up their bongs in public. But for the people most likely to commit the offense - young people who don't have a house with a big yard in which to consume their drug of choice - $100 is nothing to sneeze at. It's less onerous than a criminal arrest with the chance of a jail term, but they wouldn't want to fork it over for the dubious pleasure of lighting up in front of a cop.
Police Chief Mark Leonard told City Council's Legislative and Legal Affairs Committee Question 2 "left a lot of us scratching our heads how we would enforce it," but they have since figured out how to write a civil citation. He objects to the idea that someone caught smoking marijuana on the steps of city hall would face the same fine for the 50th violation as for the first. But those fines would add up to $5,000, which you'd think would be enough to convince anyone to take his pleasure elsewhere.
A $300 fine would triple the revenue a citation for smoking pot in public would bring in, and Marlborough, like other Bay State communities, could use the cash. But unless Phish schedules a concert in Ward Park, we doubt the new ordinance will do much to rescue the city budget.
But that's not the point. The point is to let politicians like Ferro demonstrate to the voters how anti-drug they are. We hope the 62 percent of voters who rejected harsh penalties for marijuana use in November are paying attention.
News Hawk- Ganjarden 420 MAGAZINE ® - Medical Marijuana Publication & Social Networking
Source: The MetroWest Daily News
Author: GHS
Contact: The MetroWest Daily News
Copyright: 2009 GateHouse Media, Inc.
Website: Higher Fine For Pot?
