cannabisnews.com: No on Question 2





No on Question 2
Posted by CN Staff on October 21, 2008 at 08:02:10 PT
Globe Editorial
Source: Boston Globe
Boston, MA --  Proponents of Question 2 on November's ballot say their goal is to keep people who are busted for marijuana possession from running up criminal records, which in turn could hurt their chances to get jobs and scholarships or even adopt children down the road. But the ballot measure, which would decriminalize the possession of under 1 ounce of marijuana, is a poor solution to the problem. The Globe recommends a no vote on Question 2.
If the ballot measure passes, people caught with marijuana would be subject to a $100 civil fine - the rough equivalent of a stiff parking ticket. (Offenders under 18 would also be subject to education and community-service requirements.) But an ounce of marijuana isn't a trivial amount - it's enough for dozens of joints - and the civil penalty would not escalate for subsequent offenses.Anyway, it's not the case that jails are clogged with those whose only crime is possessing a trace of marijuana. Under current law, possession is punishable by fines of up to $500 and jail sentences of up to six months. But judges are required to place first-offenders on unsupervised probation, and records are sealed after six months. Ultimately, the offense doesn't appear on the record.The state's Criminal Offender Record Information database does have significant flaws; CORI reports can be hard to interpret, often contain confusing data, and can end up barring even rehabilitated offenders from working in crucial sectors of the state's economy. This can have disastrous consequences particularly in poor, minority communities with high numbers of ex-cons. For this reason, the Globe has supported efforts by Governor Patrick and community leaders to reform the CORI system.If proponents of Question 2 really want to fix the CORI system, they ought to focus on what information goes into the database and who should have access to it. If their aim is to liberalize the state's drug laws, they should make that argument openly.Instead, proponents of Question 2 are using the blunt instrument of a public vote to make a significant change within a complex system of laws. This ballot measure is bad public policy. Voters ought to reject it.Newshawk: Sam AdamsSource: Boston Globe (MA)Published: October 21, 2008 Copyright: 2008 Globe Newspaper CompanyContact: letter globe.comWebsite: http://www.boston.com/globe/Related Articles & Web Site:Committee for Sensible Marijuana Policyhttp://www.sensiblemarijuanapolicy.org/Reefer Madness Continueshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread24239.shtmlDAs Fight Bid To Ease Penalty for Marijuanahttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread24236.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #4 posted by FoM on October 21, 2008 at 10:52:43 PT
fight_4_freedom 
You have a great attitude! Never lose it!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by fight_4_freedom on October 21, 2008 at 10:43:34 PT
Yes....the excitement builds with each 
passing day FoM! I get to go deliver a yard sign to an owner who has agreed to put a sign up outside of her business. Which just so happens to be right across the street from the city police department :)Today is going to be a good day.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by FoM on October 21, 2008 at 10:37:32 PT
fight_4_freedom 
Thank you for the link. It's getting closer to November 4th. Anticipation fills the air!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by fight_4_freedom on October 21, 2008 at 10:01:43 PT
Yes on 2 ad
http://sensiblemarijuanapolicy.org/videosHere's a new ad t.v. MPP is airing in MA.Yes on 2 in MA and Yes on 1 in MI!
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment