cannabisnews.com: Seattle Marijuana Initiative Criticized Seattle Marijuana Initiative Criticized Posted by CN Staff on July 28, 2002 at 12:53:37 PT By Associated Press Source: Associated Press Opponents of a proposed Seattle initiative aimed at relaxing enforcement of marijuana laws say it would create more work for police and create legal hurdles for prosecutors. Initiative 75 would not change marijuana laws but would ask city police to make personal marijuana possession by adults their lowest priority. It also would require police and the city attorney's office to report marijuana prosecutions to a Marijuana Policy Review Panel -- an 11-person panel that would be created by the City Council. The panel would evaluate the effects of the initiative after five years. Lt. Gov. Brad Owen criticized the measure, saying it would create more paperwork for police and legal hurdles for prosecutors and give suspected marijuana offenders a legal loophole by allowing them to say police placed too high a priority on their cases. "The implication is that there are hundreds of thousands of people in jail because they smoke a joint on Friday night," Owen told a Seattle newspaper. "I have confidence that law enforcement has not made marijuana arrests of casual pot smokers a high priority in the city of Seattle." The city attorney's office said less than 150 of its 17,000 misdemeanor criminal cases last year were for marijuana possession. That's an indication that police do not place priority on marijuana laws, said Kathryn Harper, spokeswoman for the city attorney. Members of the Sensible Seattle Coalition filed 19,600 signatures Monday in support of Initiative 75, about 2,400 more than needed to get on Seattle's Nov. 5 ballot. The signatures are now in the hands of the King County Elections office, where they are being screened to ensure they are from registered voters. The initiative would still need City Council approval before making it to the ballot. Councilman Nick Licata has endorsed the initiative, saying available data indicate marijuana is not an addictive drug. Other City Council members did not immediately comment on the measure. While Licata agrees that police don't put excessive resources into marijuana-possession arrests, he likes that I-75 would reinforce its low priority. "I think that it's better to have our limited funds for public safety being directed toward car prowlers and home burglaries, rather than arresting adults for smoking marijuana," Licata said. Police Chief Gil Kerlikowske declined comment on the initiative, a spokeswoman said Friday. Source: Associated Press Published: Saturday, July 27, 2002 Copyright: 2002 Associated Press Related Articles:Marijuana Measure May Be Superfluous http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread13546.shtmlPot - A Special Series - Seattle Weeklyhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread10673.shtmlCannabisNews - Cannabis Archiveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/cannabis.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #5 posted by Dan B on July 29, 2002 at 05:30:51 PT: So What? "The implication is that there are hundreds of thousands of people in jail because they smoke a joint on Friday night," Owen told a Seattle newspaper. "I have confidence that law enforcement has not made marijuana arrests of casual pot smokers a high priority in the city of Seattle." So, what's the problem? If the police are already treating cannabis possession as a low priority, what's the problem with making it official? His argument agrues against his own position. Further, does it matter that the number of people arrested and booked for possession does not reach into the hundreds of thousands? Is the Lt. Gov. actually saying that if only a handful of citizens have their rights violated, that is a-okay? Get real.Dan B [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by freedom fighter on July 28, 2002 at 21:29:48 PT In 1997, total arrests in State of Washington, 25,881 human beings. That's twenty-five thousands, eight hundreds eighty-one folks. In Washington, if one get caught with a possession of 40 grams or less can land one in PRISION for 90 days and be fined 1 thousand dollars. Any convictions of a "misdemeanor" carry a 24-hour mandatory minimum sentence and a mandatory minimum fine of $250. For subsequent convictions the possible prison sentence doubles.That is back in 1997, that in King County where Seattle is at, 4 thousand one hundred and six human beings got arrested. Lord knows how many got arrested in King County in the year of 2001.Sure ain't 150! Is it any question that I find this very dubious since Seattle is the largest city in the county?Let's get one thing straight about this issue. PEOPLE do sit in prisons in that state for carrying a joint in the wallets or behind their ears.Quit fibbing around with the figures and get real!ff [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by Zero_G on July 28, 2002 at 13:44:01 PT Logic?! "The implication is that there are hundreds of thousands of people in jail because they smoke a joint on Friday night," Owen told a Seattle newspaper. "I have confidence that law enforcement has not made marijuana arrests of casual pot smokers a high priority in the city of Seattle." I would point out that this is patently saying the law enforcement can pick and choose the laws they wish to enforce, rather than maintaining vigilance across the board. This is reflected in the concentration on street crime over white collar crime, even though the latter is exponentially a greater drain on the overall economy.Wouldn't it be better to have laws that are universally respected and enforced? [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by xxdr_zombiexx on July 28, 2002 at 13:35:11 PT Beating Government with it's own arm This appears to be an excellent example of an oblique use of authority: creating one thing by demanding another. This measure would clearly seem to reinforce the notion that persecuting pot smoking in and of itself is a profundly trivial law enforcement task (the fact it shouldn't be a law to begin with notwithstanding). Government does nothing if not keep records and create paperwork. Its always introduced as only 1 more thing..but it'll be on top of 35 other things, as if time is elastic. This offers the officer the opportunity to say "F** it" and leave people alone unless there is some substantial reason the intevene.Cannabis prohibition is not a substantial reason. [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by overtoke on July 28, 2002 at 13:26:18 PT: Hemp Fest! I'm going to the Hemp Fest this year! Seattle Hemp Fest [ Post Comment ] Post Comment