Monday, October 27, 2008

Vote YES on Question 2

The ACLU of Massachusetts urges a YES vote on Question 2 on the November 4 ballot.

By approving this sensible proposal, we can administer a healthy dose of reform to our state’s ailing and antiquated drug laws.

In Massachusetts, the "war on drugs" has made our prisons overflow, wasted millions of dollars, redirected law enforcement resources away from serious crime, and given career-destroying criminal records to even the most occasional and nonviolent marijuana users. Taking the possession of small amounts of marijuana out of the realm of state criminal law enforcement would greatly reduce the human and financial costs of continuing the "war on drugs."

The new law would create a civil penalty and a system of fines for individuals who are charged with possession of up to an ounce of marijuana. That's an improvement over current law, which treats marijuana possession as a criminal offense. Offenders can face up to six months in jail and a fine of up to $500. Civil penalties would be enforced by issuing citations, the marijuana would be forfeited, and a civil penalty of $100 could be imposed. Eleven other states have similar laws, most in place for decades.

Taking the possession of small amounts of marijuana out of the Massachusetts criminal law enforcement realm would greatly reduce the human and financial costs of continuing the “war on drugs” when the drug is a small amount of marijuana. Maintaining current criminal law enforcement policies also has significant civil liberties costs -- losses to our freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures, to property rights, and to the principles of fairness, equality, and nondiscriminatory treatment.

Massachusetts taxpayers lay out almost $30 million each year just to arrest, “book” and manage preliminary court functions for offenders charged with possession of an ounce or less of marijuana, according to a study by Harvard economist Jeffrey A. Miron. The decriminalization law proposed by Question 2 would save Massachusetts those millions.

And we could save much more valuable human resources, especially our young people. So many individuals in Massachusetts have had their productive lives and opportunities stunted and damaged when they have been branded with “criminal offender record information” (CORI). They’re branded with CORI at the time of arrest; branding doesn’t await formal conviction. Logged into a state database, an individual’s CORI remains there indefinitely, available to employers, landlords, licensing agencies, credit agencies and lenders, and others. The CORI “system” confines its data subjects in a records prison. That’s a hugely disproportionate punishment for possession of a small amount of marijuana.

The ACLU of Massachusetts has long supported drug policy reforms, including the decriminalization law embodied in Question 2. It’s not only sensible -- it’s also practical and protective of our civil liberties.

Please vote YES on Question 2 in the November 4 election, and help us spread the word.

5 comments:

FairnessForAllNotSome said...

I have always been a strong supporter of the ACLU.

But this makes it clear that you are on the side of the rich white people in the suburbs over the real victims of the Drug Wars: the exploited population in the inner cities who go to prison for decades while the whites in the suburbs get rehab and more rehab.

Amazingly, Rush Limbaugh said that blacks go to prison for drug "crimes" that whites don't go to prison for.

This atrocity is just making that truer.

Pretty bad when Limbaugh is more honest than the ACLU.

Chris Ott said...

We do realize that there are other important aspects to this problem, but we were not alone in our support for Question 2. For example, the Bay State Banner said, "Common sense calls for a 'yes' vote on Question 2" in this editorial.

fairnessforallnotsome said...

I'm supposed to be impressed that The Bay State Banner agreed with you? I'm supposed to be impressed that you "realize" the other problems, but do nothing about them?

I haven't seen ONE editorial or letter to the editor about the REAL problem: mostly minorities going to prison for supplying the majority of drug USERS who are affluent whites in sububs.

Here's a quote from the Bay State Banner that you linked:

"A major advantage of this approach is that the offender would not have a Criminal Offender Record Information (CORI) report."

But of course those PROVIDING the marijuana to this now-innocent person WILL got to prison and WILL be subject to CORI forever, ruining his or her life forever to make sure that the drug USER suffers no consequences at all.

" Although drug abuse is serious, it is even more serious for the petty offender to be precluded from gainful employment because of a CORI"

But the "petty offender" is no longer an "offender" at all!

One the other hand, the future of those accomodating the "petty offenders" is of NO INTEREST! Also note that many users are also sellers. So if they are caught with two ounces for two customers they go to prison, but if they have an ounce for themselves they don't!

But we know that selling marijuana is STILL considered a SERIOUS crime that means those who sell the marijuana will still be subject to and the Bay State Banner made sure of that.

To try to get more votes, the editorial even makes it clear that those selling or even possessing more than an ounce of the drugs needed to sell to the now-innocent buyers will go to prison and be subject to CORI.

They even BRAG that those under 21 who are caught with more than an the ounce needed to sell to ONE customer will have even MORE SEVERE punishments and will be treated as "inveterate juvenile delinquents" thereby making sure their lives are ruined forever.

"The proposed policy would not change the criminal provisions for trafficking, selling, growing or driving under the influence of marijuana. Civil penalties are even more severe for minors. They will be treated as inveterate juvenile delinquents."

So as more and more "innocents" want more and more one-ounce-at-a-time marijuana, the drug dealers will continue to fill up our already bloated prisons and find it impossible to ever get most real jobs, for selling to "innocents"!

Surreal.

fairnessforallnotone said...

"In Massachusetts, the "war on drugs" has made our prisons overflow, wasted millions of dollars, redirected law enforcement resources away from serious crime, and given career-destroying criminal records "

"career" destroying. Says it all.

What about all those who don't have "careers"?

Who is this aimed at? I think that's obvious.

fairnessforallnotsome said...

This says we must not have: "career-destroying criminal records "

No bias there, eh? I guess that we must rescue those who have CAREERS and the rest? Oh, well we should THINK about it and REALIZE they might have a problem but not now. More important things to do! Gay marriage is soooo much more important than filling up the prisons with more black men who are likely to be the suppliers to the important whites with CAREERS!

(Have I been banned here by the uhmmm, ACLU or what? Can't even repoly to Ott? Who has a CAREER?)