Just in time for the Cheech & Chong reunion tour!
According to a Suffolk University poll, 72% of Massachusetts residents look forward to beginning the process of decriminalizing marijuana.
Of the three questions on the Massachusetts ballot this November, only one question — #2 the decriminalization of marijuana — appears all but certain to pass, according to a poll analysis released today by 7NEWS/Suffolk University. Seventy-two percent favored the proposed law, which would replace the criminal penalties for possession of up to one ounce of marijuana to a civil penalty of forfeiture of the marijuana and a fine of $100. Twenty-two percent opposed the proposed law.
“The public may be signaling that pursuing small-time marijuana users is a waste of taxpayer resources,” said David Paleologos, director of the Political Research Center at Suffolk University. “This issue suggests that there is a Libertarian streak in the thinking of Massachusetts voters.”
Tickets to see Cheech and Chong at the Orpheum in Boston
Comments
24 Responses to “Just in time for the Cheech & Chong reunion tour!”
Leave a Reply
The only trouble is that every pot smoker I’ve told about the ballot question has yet to register, hasn’t voted for years, and will probably forget what I told them within hours. It’s a sure bet, though, that if anyone polled them, they’d be part of that 72%.
Despite what so many of the NORML-types would have you believe, it’s already practically decriminalized. What was it, about a month ago when the couple in Fitchburg (Leominster, something like that…) got busted with 20 pounds of weed and were released on personal recognizance?
I have no beef with the decrim. of pot, and I’ll be thrilled if this thing passes (and then is put into effect by the Leg., which has a habit of ignoring the will of the voters) just so that all of the people who insist that “pot” is the reason that rapists, murderers, etc. are set loose by our Judiciary long before they’ve served their sentences will shut their pie-holes.
Marijuana’s share of the percentage of drug arrests has been climbing since our well thought out drug czar, John Walters, began declaring domestic pot growers terrorists last year. There are still plenty of crazy people in positions of power who will do stupid things for budget increases. Prohibition makes that very easy.
http://www.redding.com/news/2007/jul/13/drug-czar-gives-warning/
I read the article. They are dealing with massive organized-crime level drug operations. While “terrorist” is a bit of a stretch, these people (none of whom have been arrested) are obviously not college kids puffing on a doobie or hirsute hipstresses who swear that a hit of skunk is just perfect for their fibromyalgia.
They’re scuzzball drug producers/traffickers, and unless you think that they spend their profits on millions of dollars worth of seeds, you have to know that that money is going somewhere. My bet? That cash goes into drug operations that don’t require thousands of acres of open space.
Consider them the WalMart of weed, and you’ll see it my way.
Oh, I’m baked.
In reality he’s talking about the growers in CA supplying the CA dispensaries, growers who have been under attack on a local level this year and this is helping bring the pain. Remember, according to the Feds CA marijuana law is overridden by federal drug law and this certainly helps maker their case from a PR angle.
But yes we’re talking high level producers, so what? Doesn’t capitalism scale? I certainly don’t consider Wal-Mart a terrorist organization.
Justifying illegality just because you don’t like the law isn’t always noble civil disobedience. It’s often simple selfishness. If the farmers didn’t want to get busted, they’d grow tomatoes. Those dispensaries (pot bars and vending machines) are the product of local rule and as such the local government should sanction the pot fields within their own jurisdictions. Of course if they did that, they’d immediately be subject to Federal penalties, so they don’t do it. Instead, they tacitly encourage criminals to occupy property that belongs to the public.
Anyway, do you anticipate any real changes if the decrim. becomes law? I mean, is weed gonna be more openly available? I’m not sure. With the fines (presumably escalating for multiple offenses?) and the confiscation, people won’t be strolling down Park Ave with a jibber, but I wonder if one might see a few casual tokers outside movie theaters, in parks, walking between bars, etc. as is the norm in a few Euro cities.
Probably depends on actual enforcement. If you’re only carrying a joint or two, then I imagine the benefit of lighting up where you are, rather than going somewhere hidden to smoke, will outweigh the risk of getting busted. Plus, with just a joint you could smoke, eat or toss it by the time a cop got to you unless you’re completely clueless. Of course, then you might get searched, which I don’t think they do for other “civil infractions” (if that’s what the law will make possesion).
Should be interesting.
Dispensaries are the product of CA state law, prop 215 from 1996. Continued federal involvement is based on a shaky commerce clause interpretation.
Best case scenario, nothing changes. No public napping, no cupcake smash and grabs and no smoking in public. If the decriminalization bill functions properly and all parties involve stick to the spirit of the law, it will simply be a baby step towards full decriminalization and regulation. Will it save billions of dollars overnight? No. But will it show people that prohibition is silly once they see that most of their jazz cigarette fears are based on poor education? Probably. Prove to people that the wheels will not fall off the civilization bus, so to speak and we’re going to free up a lot of dollars for better uses down the line.
C’mon, Buck. You don’t have to pretend you believe in all the NORML hyperbole anymore. There will be pretty much zero impact on law enforcement, budgets, etc. and we both know it. Personal use marijuana is virtually NEVER the cause for imprisonment in MA. It’s an easy charge to get continued without a finding, a dismissal, or at worst some drug-education dealy. While common sense told me this, I did check with my brother (15 year cop) and a buddy (closer to 20 years, now a detective) and they completely confirmed my beliefs. In fact, you might be shocked by some of the things they’ve seen swept under the rug in drug cases (not just weed).
That’s what I just said. Nothing changes. You really have a hard time working off script, huh?
Budgets will actually be huge though. Take a look at the federal grants that incorporate drug programs, not just in LE, but all aspects of municipal funding.
Off script? What the hell are you talking about?
Not everyone needs talking points and anecdotal apocrypha to make their points, weed-boy.
This is the crime we should be worried about.
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/0821081books1.html
Opraholics on a bender will do anything to get a fix.
And asking your brother how his day at work was isn’t anecdotal?
We agree nothing will change, that’s the point. Prohibition encourages selective enforcement and a culture of fear. We know this so why keep around laws that do nothing?
Oh jeez, the “culture of fear”? Give it a rest.
And no, asking my brother wasn’t anecdotal (not in the sense that a story on a pro-pot website is, at least). He has explained it many times and his accounts are unvarnished. I guess I could have more direct experience if I went and deliberately got myself arrested for holding pot, but I’ll pass.
The fact is that all of the panicky yelps from the pro-potters about a prison state, or medicinal extracts, or hemp textile applications, are hooey. They want to smoke pot, end of story. All of the rest is garbage and if it weren’t for the backdoor politics (which you seem to buy into) involved, they’d all admit it.
Those are not facts, they’re opinions and poorly formed ones at that.
used to grow a 1/4 acre on state land up in Maine for a few years…we would have to carry in the water like they do in third World countries..so much fun as a young entrepenuer in the 70’s..one day me and my buddy Tim who owned the lot next door did the mile hike only to find the plants all cut down…business card left on a cut stalk - “Courtesy of the Maine State Police”
There used to be a great Pot Rally on the steps of the state house in Albany, NY that I used to go to before all the great Dead shows at the ole Knickerbocker in ther late 70’s and early the 80’s & early 90’s…it was so much fun watching the knuckleheads get carried away cause they lit up in front of the coppahs…
Apparently the mayor of Denver is asking the police to decrim. pot for the duration of the Dem. National Convention.
Great, a stoned Michelle Obama is exactly what this country needs.
Buck, even the “High Times” types admit that all of these legalization movements are designed to do one thing: make it easier for them to smoke pot. Quit buying into the silly sales pitch and enjoy your dope.
I’ll do both, thanks!
Fine by me, just remember that there is a qualitative difference between being the guy who hands out the Kool-Aid and being the guy who drinks it.
The local paper down here has an AP wire story about the pot ballot question in MA. Provided that the numbers are accurate, it’s telling that all of the supposedly dedicated pro-potters were able to raise only $20,000 and George Soros paid the other $400,000 to get the measure on the ballot.
I assume this is the wire story:
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hQsksgZ-IN6nYS3jJ2NcqpufBlLgD92QQPS00
Sounds about right.
If MA residents are only willing to pony up a few cents per person, then I wonder how many will actually vote for it.
There’s something odd (”Sven-ish”, even) about foreign financiers writing public policy for MA, but I really do hope it passes. Watching the Leg. try to weasel around actually implementing the legislation will be a familiar, but entertaining, exercise.
[...] in part to 71% of Bay State residents already showing their support for Question 2 in last months Suffolk University poll. Here’s the item as it appears on tonights agenda. Request the City Council of the City of [...]
[...] in part to 71% of Bay State residents already showing their support for Question 2 in last months Suffolk University poll. Here’s the item as it appears on tonights agenda. Request the City Council of the City of [...]