cannabisnews.com: Separating The Weed From The Chaff





Separating The Weed From The Chaff
Posted by CN Staff on August 10, 2002 at 15:28:47 PT
By Jimmy Boegle 
Source: Las Vegas City Life 
Nevada now knows what to call it: Question 9. Now, all the state needs to do is figure out what to make of it."It," of course, is the initiative that would amend the state Constitution to legalize three ounces or less of marijuana. And here's what we do know: Since the Secretary of State's Office on July 9 determined the signature drive to get the initiative on the ballot was successful, an increasing number of law-enforcement wonks have been coming forward to claim, essentially, that this initiative is a bad, ugly thing that will result in all sorts of heathen behavior and wanton crime if passed. 
The people behind the pot petition have countered that these law enforcement officials are full of it and that Nevadans think cops should be worrying about murderers, not stoners.And in the middle of the fray are state officials, who are preparing Question 9's ballot language in as fair of a way as possible while bracing for the possibility that the question could put them in blatant violation of federal law, resulting in all sorts of drama.To top it off, all indications are that the vote is going to be reeeeaaaly close come November.Gosh. Putting politics and pot together is kind of interesting, ain't it?Pot's bad. No it's not. Predictably, Question 9 has the collective underwear of many law enforcers and prosecutors in a bunch.Two days after the initiative's ballot certification by the secretary of state, Drug Enforcement Administration Director Asa Hutchinson asked a crowd in Reno: If the ballot question is approved, "what kind of tourism will Nevada attract?" Hutchinson apparently forgot that Nevada already attracts tourists who like to gamble and see adult-themed shows and occasionally sneak into a rural county to legally boff a prostitute.Then, Office of National Drug Policy Director John Walters showed up in Las Vegas and claimed, according to the Las Vegas Review-Journal, that Question 9 would make Nevada the "vacation spot for drug traffickers." He also claimed that the pot of today is stronger than the pot that Baby Boomers smoked when they were kids. Looking at some of the freaky stuff Boomers came up with in the 1960s, we're skeptical.This was followed by a vote by the Nevada District Attorney's Association to oppose Question 9, with some folks using the age-old argument that marijuana is a gateway drug to more serious drugs.Stewart Bell, the Clark County District Attorney who is not running for re-election but is instead running for a District Court seat this year - and who, it should be noted, did not participate in the Nevada District Attorney's Association vote - is more reasonable about things."We believe that having possession of a small amount of marijuana as a misdemeanor protects the community without treating it more harshly than it deserves," he said, choosing his words carefully since he won't be the D.A. when and if the initiative goes into effect - although he could be a judge, and judges are not supposed to take public positions on such issues. "We support the current law," he said.Billy Rogers, a representative of the pro-pot group Nevadans for Responsible Law Enforcement (a name that gives some police officers fits), which is funded by the Washington, D.C.-based Marijuana Policy Project, called these claims by prosecutors and law enforcement officials "disinformation campaigns" and, appropriately, "smoke screens." "Ultimately, most Nevadans don't think that it's appropriate to waste tax dollars on going after people who possess a small amount of marijuana," said Rogers, who works for the Marijuana Policy Project. "They'd rather the police use their resources on criminals such as murderers and rapists." Where Rogers got the idea that Nevada cops are focusing on catching tokers in favor of catching killers, we aren't sure.Long story short: Both sides are a little full of it, which is to be expected, seeing as politics is involved.Stop the madness Amidst all the rhetoric sits the state, which is in the unenviable (yet somewhat amusing) position of trying to present Question 9 fairly and impartially to the public, even though the whole darned thing is illegal according to federal law. "We're kind of in a monitoring phase," said Gina Session, a senior deputy attorney general.The attorney general's office is not taking a position on the issue, although it certainly has some concerns. Tom Sargent, a spokesman for the office, said he personally had some problems with how some of the signature-gatherers for Nevadans for Responsible Law Enforcement misrepresented the effort as being primarily over medical marijuana. That's not the case; medical marijuana is already legal in the state. While Question 9 does have a medical marijuana element (it would make the state set up a marijuana distribution system for patients), it's only a small part of it. But now that the question is on the ballot, that's moot."It would be unbecoming for us to sound off too early on whether this is a good law or a bad law," Sargent said, adding that the office could lobby the Legislature one way or another if the amendment is passed this year and in 2004, making it part of the state Constitution. If that happens, the 2005 Legislature would be mandated to make the appropriate changes to state law.For now, the state's job is to make sure that the ballot language for Question 9 is as fair and noncontroversial as possible. Susan Morandi, a deputy secretary of state for elections, is finishing up a draft of that language. After her office signs off on the language, she said, the attorney general's office will take a gander. Any suggestions will be sent back to the Secretary of State's office, which will finalize the language and then send it to the county clerks to place on the November ballot. The language should be finalized by the first week of August, she said."It's very important to be able to make the language understandable and accurate so citizens are fully able to understand what [the initiative] is going to do," Morandi said.This is important - and potentially controversial. The language on several recent initiatives, including the medical marijuana initiative (in 1998 and 2000) and the so-called "Protection of Marriage" initiative (in 2000 and this year) has been called into question for fairness.The Secretary of State's Office also went the extra mile to help fairly educate the public on the issue, recently holding televised public forums in Las Vegas and Reno (on July 23 and July 22 respectively). Beyond the question language, the state's role now can be summed up in one word: wait. Wait and see if Question 9 passes. Wait and see what the federal law is in 2005, when the Legislature will have to deal with it if it does pass. (There are some whispers in Congress to make marijuana laws more of a state issue than a federal issue.)"Lots of questions are unanswerable until this is passed, if it's passed," Morandi said.It's gonna be close All indications are that Question 9's fate will come down to the wire. A recent Las Vegas Review-Journal/Mason-Dixon poll showed that 44 percent of those queried supported the question, while 46 were opposed. The remainder was undecided.That's close, folks.Rogers, of Nevadans for Responsible Law Enforcement, thinks those results were a bit off. He accurately points out that the pollsters only mentioned that "possession of 3 ounces or less of marijuana by a person aged 21 or older would not be a cause for arrest," and that it did not mention that it would be illegal in public, to minors, and so on."We're doing much better than an even race right now," Rogers said, predicting that Question 9 would pass. He also promised that his group would "educate the public" on the issue between now and November. How, exactly, that "education" will be done will be determined closer to Labor Day, he said. Bet on an advertising/media campaign.But there are also some problems that could hinder Question 9. One surfaced this week, when a group of Clark County prosecutors came forward to say the initiative could weaken DUI prosecutions, because the proposed amendment says that "driving dangerously" while under the influence of marijuana would be illegal. That one word, "dangerously," could let stoned drivers off the hook if they were pulled over for something non-dangerous, the prosecutors claim. And make no mistake about it - one or two faulty words in a law can indeed create crippling loopholes.Another potential Achilles' heel for Question 9 is the three-ounce provision. While Rogers has been brilliant at claiming that three ounces is a "small amount" of marijuana - newspapers and TV, for the most part, have ignorantly gone along with this - that's debatable. By Rogers' own admission, that's the equivalent of three to four packs of cigarettes, or 60-80 joints. (Some say that three ounces could make even more joints than that.) Considering that only the biggest stoners use pot more than once or twice a day, this is enough for weeks - or even months - for virtually all potheads.When asked why the line was drawn at three ounces, Rogers said that's often the standard used by law enforcement on what is a small amount of pot (although an informal CityLife poll of stoners disagreed). However, in Nevada, that line has been set at one ounce.In any case, the next three months are going to be quite interesting in the state. Expect a ton of rhetoric from both sides - and expect a nailbiter come Election Day. Related Article:Holy Shit! Cops Endorse Marijuana Initiative!By Jimmy BoegleAugust 08, 2002They don't care much for Dario Herrera these days, but the members of the Nevada Conference of Police and Sheriffs are cool with weed.OK, so that's warping the truth a bit.Here's the unwarped truth: On Aug. 6, NCOPS, the state's largest law enforcement organization (an umbrella group for police unions) endorsed Question 9, which would legalize the possession of up to three ounces of marijuana for people 21 years old and up. However, according to NCOPS President Andy Anderson, it isn't that cops are pot supporters; they feel they have more important things to worry about."Violent crime is on the rise and terrorism remains a real threat," said Anderson in a news release. "Our priorities have changed, and with our limited resources, so should our laws."He also accurately pointed out that most folks arrested for pot possession are never prosecuted anyway."As law-enforcement officers, we are duly sworn to uphold the law, even by arresting people for small amounts of marijuana, knowing that most of these cases won't be prosecuted," he said. "Many of these people are law-abiding citizens except for the possession charges."Billy Rogers, a spokesman for pro-pot group Nevadans for Responsible Law Enforcement, was elated, calling the agreement historic. He may be right. Polls have shown that Nevada voters are split evenly - 48 percent of voters supported the measure, with the same amount opposed, in the most recent poll, by the Reno Gazette-Journal - and this stunning endorsement can only help the initiative's chances.The board of NCOPS - which recently made headlines by revoking its endorsement of Dario Herrera in the District 3 congressional race because of his numerous controversies - voted 9-0 to endorse the measure. However, the Las Vegas Review-Journal, in a brilliant piece by Jane Ann Morrison, reported that Metro's police union does not support the measure, even though its NCOPS representative voted for it. Morrison reported that the rep, Mick Gillins, somehow thought it was a medical marijuana measure. How in the hell he could think this remains unclear.Source: Las Vegas City Life (NV)Author: Jimmy Boegle Published: August 1 & 8, 2002Copyright: 2002 Las Vegas City LifeContact: obrien lvpress.comWebsite: http://www.lasvegascitylife.com/Related Articles & Web Sites:NRLEhttp://www.nrle.org/Marijuana Policy Projecthttp://www.mpp.org/Nevada Blazes Trail for Legal Marijuana http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread13689.shtmlMove To Legalize Marijuana in Nevada Has a Chance http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread13144.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Post Comment