cannabisnews.com: Voters Will Be Asked To Decriminalize Marijuana Voters Will Be Asked To Decriminalize Marijuana Posted by FoM on October 24, 2000 at 08:12:57 PT By Lisa Chow Source: Eagle-Tribune Georgetown - Calling it a "traumatic experience for everyone," Steven S. Epstein, founder of the Massachusetts Cannabis Coalition, listed what he believes are "overly punitive" sentences against marijuana users. Mr. Epstein, a lawyer who lives in Georgetown, said depending on their record, those charged with marijuana possession could face probation or up to two years in jail and be fined up to $2,000. They could also have their driver's license suspended for up to five years and lose other privileges, such as federally guaranteed student loans. He calls arresting and criminally prosecuting marijuana users "a waste of resources." Mr. Epstein feels so strongly about the issue that he hopes to turn around the state laws against marijuana possession, changing it from a criminal offense to a civil violation. With the help of 290 registered voters, Mr. Epstein managed to get a nonbinding question on the Fourth Essex Representative District Ballot. On Nov. 7, voters from Boxford, Precinct 2 in Georgetown, Hamilton, Ipswich, Manchester by-the-Sea and Wenham will be able to weigh in on the issue. The question asks: "Shall the representative of this district be instructed to introduce and for legislation that would make possession of marijuana a civil violation, like a traffic ticket instead of a criminal offense, and requiring the police to hold a person under 18 cited for possession until released to a parent or legal guardian, or brought before a judge?" Republican state Rep. Bradford R. Hill, who is running against Libertarian Francis Mackay-Smith, said if he were elected, it would take a "huge majority" for him to propose marijuana decriminalization to the state legislature. "Eighty percent of the people would have to say, 'Brad, go do this,' " he said. But, Rep. Hill added, "I'd be very surprised if it passes at all." In a recent interview, Rep. Hill said he received 13 calls from people "absolutely against this." "They consider it a mind-altering drug like alcohol," he said, that can affect driving and cause accidents. Mr. Mackay-Smith, however, said he would support such a measure if elected to the Legislature, and if voters agreed with Mr. Epstein. Speaking of Vice President Al Gore, President Bill Clinton and Texas Gov. George W. Bush, he said, "All three admitted to using marijuana . . . Would they be better off now having served a five-year jail sentence?" he asked. "I don't think so." If the question passes, Mr. Epstein would give a draft of the proposed legislation to whoever wins the state House seat. He said the proposed law would impose a fine of $300 to those found in possession of the drug. People charged with intent to distribute would be treated as they are under current law. Opponents to the question have argued marijuana is a gateway to stronger drugs, such as cocaine, and that decriminalizing marijuana use is the first step to legalizing the drug. They say if penalties are relaxed more young adults will be encouraged to use marijuana. Mr. Epstein disagrees. He points to Dr. Lynn Zimmer's and Dr. John P. Morgan's book, "Marijuana Myths Marijuana Facts" to back his arguments. In this 241-page book, the two authors try to dispel the idea that marijuana is an addictive, gateway drug, and that it impairs memory and cognition. But Rep. Hill said about Mr. Epstein, "He thinks it's recreation. Clearly, it is not." Rep. Hill believes there are "bigger issues" to deal with, such as prescription drugs and open space. "It's probably on the low end of the priority list," he said. Note: Fourth Essex District will vote on a nonbonding marijuana decriminalization question on Nov. 7 Note: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml Source: Eagle-Tribune, The (MA) Author: Lisa Chow Copyright: 2000 The Eagle-Tribune Address: P.O. Box 100 Lawrence, MA 01842 Fax: (978) 687-6045 Contact: letters eagletribune.com Website: http://www.eagletribune.com/ Feedback: http://www.eagletribune.com/submit/letter.htm Related Articles & Web Sites:MassCannhttp://www.masscann.org/Marijuana Myths Marijuana Factshttp://www.marijuanafacts.org/Legalizing Pot Gets High Priority at Rallyhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread7061.shtmlMarijuana Festival Promotes Drug Legalization http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread7059.shtmlGrass Roots Campaignhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/3/thread3070.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #1 posted by DankethMcHerbal on October 27, 2000 at 18:00:53 PT: Decriminalization I sincerely hope that the voters of Massachusetts vote for this initiative. I do not live there, but it would be a small and necessary victory for us non-violent cannabis consumers everywhere.While those that argue that marijauna is a mind-altering substance like alcohol are correct to a certain degree, this argument is invalid, because alcohol is a far more powerful mind-altering substance than pot is.Also, those that argue that marijauna is a gateway drug are wrong. The ONLY reason it can be considered a gateway drug is the fact that it is illegal. If it were legal, people could buy it off of the black market, and therefore would not be exposed to more powerful drugs such as heroin and crack. Then you have the argument that decriminalization is the first step towards legalization. Yes it is. Their argument against it is MY argument FOR it. Anti-Marijauna laws are unjust and unconstitutional. Locking up non-violent people with violent criminals (and in many cases, allowing violent criminals to run free in order to lock up non-violent people), is NOT justice. It is causing MORE violent crime. The constitutional rights that are violated every day are: freedom of choice, the right to privacy, and freedom of religion. We all know about the supreme court decisions on abortion: Pregnant women can terminate their pregnancies because they have the right to chose what they want to do with their own bodies, and I can understand this in rape cases or if the mothers life is at stake. However, for some reason, the government feels they have the right to tell the rest of us what we can't do with our bodies? The most sickening thing about this is, these days, partial-birth abortion (legal infanticide) is considered socially acceptable, but smoking weed is bad???? The priorities of the United States government are completly backwards. Freedom of privacy is violated because of all of the unreasonable search and seizures done by police, as well as all of the drug-tests people are subjected to every day. Freedom of religion is violated because there are several Earth-based religions that marijauna is a major part of (eg.Rastafarian, some forms of Wicca, and even some forms of Christianity). I did not mention Native American religions, because Native Americans are allowed to use it, because it has always been a large part of their culture. I have several other pro-cannabis arguments, but this post is already running kinda long. I'm sure many of you agree with me on this issue. Later, Danketh [ Post Comment ] Post Comment Name: Optional Password: E-Mail: Subject: Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message] Link URL: Link Title: