cannabisnews.com: No To Initiative 75: Proponents Use Scare Tactics





No To Initiative 75: Proponents Use Scare Tactics
Posted by CN Staff on September 10, 2003 at 08:14:25 PT
By Tom Carr, Seattle City Attorney
Source: Seattle Post-Intelligencer 
A middle-aged Wallingford couple, having tucked their children into bed, settles down on their couch to watch "West Wing" and light up a joint. Suddenly, a black-clad SWAT team bursts through the door and wrestles the couple to floor. They lie handcuffed on their tasteful Oriental carpet, while their now awakened children scream in terror before being taken away by Child Protective Services.
This scenario is as fictional as President Josiah Bartlett. In a "reefer madness"-like attempt to distort the truth, images such as this are being conjured up by Initiative 75's proponents to scare Seattle voters into swallowing a campaign funded by out-of-state interests that is designed as a test case for a new marijuana initiative.The Seattle Police Department places no special emphasis on the prevention of adult personal use of marijuana, and marijuana cases represent about 1 percent of the city attorney office's criminal caseload. Initiative 75 is not necessary to prevent the SWAT team from breaking down the door.Seattle has a much more important and powerful restraint than any poorly worded initiative: democracy. I would not hold my job for long if I engaged in an activity so at odds with the views of those to whom I am responsible. Even I-75's proponents admit the initiative is not intended to address any problem in Seattle. They are reacting to an effort undertaken by Rudolph Giuliani in New York City to deal with that city's serious crime problems. Giuliani was elected and re-elected by the citizens of New York because a majority believed that his type of strong medicine was needed for their city. Our community has expressed no such desire. In their campaign, proponents resort to a series of lies and half-truths. Lie 1: Initiative 75 will free up police and prosecutors for more important things by "de-prioritizing" marijuana prosecution. Neither the Police Department nor the city attorney's office spends much time on marijuana investigation or prosecution. Thus, I-75 will provide no savings.There will, however, be costs. I expect that in marijuana cases, including felonies, the defense will attempt to prove -- or, worse. make the prosecution disprove -- that marijuana enforcement was not actually our lowest priority. "Officer Jones, now isn't it true that on or about the date of the arrest someone, somewhere in Seattle littered, jaywalked or climbed Wedgwood Rock?" There will be increased police overtime costs and prosecution costs for each case in which we have to defend a motion to dismiss based on I-75. In addition, I-75 sets up yet another commission to study what everyone recognizes is not a problem in Seattle. There is no funding mechanism in the initiative, so the general fund will have to be stretched to cover the inevitable costs associated with the commission's "work."Lie 2: Initiative 75 is necessary to protect those who need marijuana for medical purposes. In an incredibly misleading mailing (paid for by more than $100,000 from outside Seattle) proponents highlight the case of "Ralph" whose "medicine" the city allegedly stole. Ralph's case is, in fact, an interesting example of how marijuana investigation and prosecution works in Seattle. Ralph's neighbors called the police to report a burglary. During the burglary investigation the police discovered a sophisticated marijuana-growing operation comprising more than 70 plants. The police referred the case to King County for felony prosecution and to the city for forfeiture of the house.Ralph asserted that the state's medical marijuana law protected him, even though he did not have the medical documentation required by the Washington courts, and 70 plants is far in excess of the 60-day supply permitted under the law. Nevertheless, because Ralph is truly ill and because it is unclear what constitutes a 60-day supply, the Police Department and my office dismissed the case. (It is also important to note that Ralph was never displaced from home during this entire process.) The fact is that that I-75 does nothing to protect those who need marijuana for medical purposes. State law already does this. Lie 3: Initiative 75 sends the right message about marijuana use in our community. Half the calls by Seattle's youth to help lines concern marijuana. Sixty percent of the city's treatment resources go to help those who abuse marijuana. Initiative75 cannot change the fact that possession and distribution of marijuana is a crime.Preaching the gospel of tolerance for "adult personal use" ignores several parts of the equation. Adult use of marijuana requires that the user either grow or buy marijuana, thereby committing a felony or providing economic incentive for someone else to commit a felony, neither of which is covered by I-75. Whatever protections might be afforded by I-75 they will not extend to those guilty of felonies. Any policy of official tolerance of marijuana crimes, in the absence of a complete reform, sends a confusing and dishonest message to our community, and could actually result in increased marijuana use and arrests.To borrow a phrase, just say no to I-75.Tom Carr was elected as Seattle city attorney in November 2001.Source: Seattle Post-Intelligencer (WA)Author: Tom Carr, Seattle City AttorneyPublished: Wednesday, September 10, 2003Copyright: 2003 Seattle Post-IntelligencerContact: editpage seattle-pi.comWebsite: http://www.seattle-pi.com/Related Articles:Hazy Future for Marijuana Initiativehttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17193.shtmlRally Calls For Reform of Marijuana Law http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17168.shtmlPro-Pot Initiative Gets Political Push http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17089.shtmlWinking at Pot Use is Risky Businesshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17104.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Post Comment