Mayor opposes pot legalization

By George P. Hassett

Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone is against decriminalizing marijuana use. And on Wednesday he and Chief of Police Anthony Holloway called on voters to oppose a ballot question that would make possession of small amounts of marijuana punishable with a fine similar to a traffic violation.

Curtatone and Holloway joined other law enforcement officials - including Middlesex District Attorney Gerry Leone - at the State House to denounce decriminalizing marijuana as “a very real threat to our youth and our communities.” The measure is known as Question 2. Voters will decide on Nov. 4.

“In the past decade we have worked diligently on the local, regional and state levels to curb marijuana use, especially among our youth. The approval of Question 2 in November would undermine all of those efforts,” Curtatone said. “Question 2 poses a very real threat to our youth and our communities. Drug use is a public health, safety and quality of life issue and Question 2 would increase marijuana use while putting more of our youth behind the wheel while high on drugs.  We must send the right message to our youth.  That is why I will continue stand alongside my colleagues from across the Commonwealth and call on all of our residents to vote no on Question 2 in November.”

Supporters of the measure say it would save Massachusetts $130 million a year, according to a report by a Harvard economist, and would allow people with minor marijuana convictions to obtain jobs, housing and school loans that they are currently being denied.

Comments

[JPM]

IF drug use os such a threat then surely alchohol and cigarettes should be banned? The Mayor's logic is all screwed up. I don't smoke any pot or do any drugs, but anyone can see that the criminalisation of possesssion of small amounts of marijuana is ridiculous. They decriminalised the same thing on the UK about 5 years ago.

In the UK they are also now talking about lowering the classification of exstacy to a Class B from a Class A drug.

As this doctor states:

"This year we can expect that three million people will take Ecstasy, an illegal drug. Seven will die from the side effects, a 0.00023% casualty rate. Also this year twenty one million people will smoke cigarettes. One hundred and fourteen thousand will die as a result, a 0.54% death rate. Compared to drugs we allow to be sold over the counter, Ecstasy is really quite safe, and it doesn't matter if you don't want that to be true."

[HumphreyPloughjogger]

In support of a law that makes over 10% of us criminals, they thunder that decriminalization will result in increased use among young people; a concern not supported by experience. http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7564

Passage of similar legislation elsewhere has not led to increased marijuana use or altered perceptions regarding the potential “dangers” of marijuana use. One U.S. government commissioned study of the impact of strict legal penalties on marijuana use concluded that, “decriminalization has had virtually no effect either on the marijuana use or on related attitudes and beliefs about marijuana use among American young people.” http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=3383

[617]

Sorry Joe, I'm voting yes. Why are we tying up the courts for a little pot? This measure does not change the message. We will still tell the kids drugs including pot are bad. THis will not change very much at all. I think it is more of a pride issue for policy makers. They can't let the "potheads" win. I don't even smoke pot.

[Bruce Mirken]

Unfortunately, Mayor Curtatone is wrong on the basic facts. There are 11 states with similar laws, most in place for a quarter century or more. And their impact has been studied extensively. Here's what the National Research Council wrote in 2001, in a White House-commissioned study:

"The issue most extensively studied has been the impact of decriminalization on the prevalence of marijuana use among youths and adults. Penalties for possession of small amounts of marijuana for personal use were significantly reduced in 11 states in the 1970s (Bonnie, 1981b). All of these laws preclude incarceration for consumption-related marijuana offenses, making the offense punishable only by a fine, and most also classify the offense in a category (typically a civil infraction) that does not carry the stigmatizing consequence of having been convicted of a crime— hence the term ‘decriminalization.’

"Most cross-state comparisons in the United States (as well as in Australia; see McGeorge and Aitken, 1997) have found no significant differences in the prevalence of marijuana use in decriminalized and nondecriminalized states (e.g., Johnston et al., 1981; Single, 1989; DiNardo and Lemieux, 1992; Thies and Register, 1993). Even in the few studies that find an effect on prevalence, it is a weak one. …

"In summary, existing research seems to indicate that there is little apparent relationship between severity of sanctions prescribed for drug use and prevalence or frequency of use, and that perceived legal risk explains very little in the variance of individual drug use."

NOTE: The full NRC report is available at http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=0309072735 . The quoted passage comes from pages 192-193.

[Ron Newman]

Add me to the list of Somerville citizens who plan to vote "Yes" on 2. Mayor Joe is justly proud of Somerville's appeal to the creative community (artists, writers, musicians, etc.) Why does he want to waste police time and resources on harassing users of a fairly harmless substance?

[Dan]

I would like to hear Mayor Curtatone provide some factual support for his assertion that reducing penalties for adults caught possessing an ounce or less of marijuana will cause children to use the drug more. It certainly hasn't been the case in the 11 other states that have had similar policies for years.

If the mayor cannot, then he should stop making such irresponsible claims and simply trust voters to consider Question 2 on its merits -- and not on wild fear mongering.

[Keith Saunders]

If drug use of all sorts is indeed a "public health" issue, as Mayor Curtatone states, then why are we using police to enforce policies. It makes about as much sense as putting them in charge of diabetics--arresting those whose insulin levels drop too much. It just makes no sense to go to police when you have a disease. And if one doesn't have a disease or abuse drugs in a way that affects others, then they should be left well enough alone. The decriminalization proposal makes sense.

[Yes on 2, too.]

Another Somerville resident voting Yes on 2. The message it sends to our kids is essentially that you make choices based on available evidence, and criminalization of small possession of marijuana is ludicrous.

[Bang]

Bang the drum louder Joey you should bang as loud for Assembly Square you will need those taxes more.

[Frank]

Kind of reminds me when liquor was prohibited in the U.S.A., 1920 TO 1933.

Only the bad-guys profited {$$$$) from the prohibition.
Same thing happening these days with marijuana.

[Fool on the Hill]

Pretty much everything there is to say on this subject was said in this newspaper, brilliantly, by Bill Shelton about three years ago: http://somervillenews.typepad.com/the_somerville_news/2006/01/blowing_smoke_a.html

I'm not as nice as Bill. So I'll say this:

Joe Curtatone's ignorance is exceeded only by his egotistical ambition. He will use any opportunity to get in front of cameras and grandstand about things that he knows nothing about. He just reads the words and raises his voice.

He had drug dealers as clients in his failed law practice, but he never learned the difference between cannabis and heroin.

[Vote YES]

VOTE YES ON 2. EVERY KID HAS EXPERIMENTED WITH MARIJUANA ONCE IN THEIR LIVES, WHY RUIN A KIDS FUTURE OVER SUCH A LITTLE OFFENSE. IT IS MUCH LESS DANGEROUS A DRUG THAN ALCOHOL AND TOBACCO. WE HAVE PEOPLE DOING MORE TIME IN PRISON FOR DRUG OFFENSES THAN MURDERERS WHICH IS RIDICULOUS. THE GOVERNMENT IS JUST MAD THAT THEY ARE NOT GOING TO BE MAKING A PROFIT OFF THIS DISTRIBUTION AND WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO PUT TAXES ON MARIJUANA.(WELL AT THIS TIME AT LEAST LOL). SO VOTE YES ON 2. BECAUSE THROUGH EXPERIMENTATION PEOPLE THINK MORE VIVIDLY AND HAVE A HIGHER CHANCE IN LIFE THAN THOSE SHUT OUT OF REAL SOCIETY. WHEN YOU ARE CLOSED OUT ON SOCIETY AND ITS HAPPENINGS ALL YOUR LIFE, ONCE YOU HIT 18 YOU WILL BECOME A REBEL WITH A HIGHER CHANCE OF COMMITTING CRIMES. ITS A PROVEN FACT. THIS WON'T STOP THE USE OF MARIJUANA. JUST RESULT IN MORE CLEVER WAYS TO HIDE IT FROM THE POLICE WHICH WOULD LEAD TO WORSE PROBLEMS. AND FOR CURTATONE, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE HOW HE THINKS ABOUT THIS IN 10 YEARS FROM NOW WHEN HIS SON IS THE ONE SMOKING POT LOL. ITS GONNA HAPPEN AND I KNOW HE WOULDN'T WANT HIS KID GETTING ARRESTED FOR THIS OFFENSE. YES ON 2!!!!!!!!!!!1

[Somervillen00b]

Voting YES, sorry Mr. Curtatone. Cops and the legal system should spend their time on more important things then folks who possess small amounts of MJ for personal use.

[Somervillen00b]

Mayor, if you worry so much about MJ as a health issue then you should criminalize cigarette and alcohol possession as well. Of course, nobody wants somebody who is stoned to drive their bus. That would still be illegal!

[JPM]

Exactly, using the mayor's logic we should ban booze because people could get behind the wheel while intoxicated.

Also anytime, you here "for the kids' sake" you should be suspicious. Everyone one of my friends have tried pot and other drugs while growing up...kids do experiment. Guess what, now in our mid 30s we have all gorwn up to be productive members of society with families and other responsibilities...nobody eneded up on skid row. It's all a big scare story bs. I would rather have a quiet night in with my slippers and cup of tea than a night on the town. Also, when is the last time you heard a fight was started because both participants were on pot!!!???

[No]

No more cigars Joey Cakes they are bad for you too, but then they are your pleasure are they not? Don't do as I do, do as I tell you. "I know best"

[Citizen]

Fool,

I agree with you about Mr. Shelton's Blowing Smoke column. A few years ago, a young neighbor died from an overdose of oxycontin. Our whole family was upset, and I went online to learn more about the drug. An oxycontin informational website had picked up Mr. Shelton's article.

I read it and said, "Someone in Somerville is writing articles like this?" That's how I found out about the Somerville News. I guess that a half dozen websites picked up the column from the Somerville News and posted it themselves.

Put me down for "yes" as well.

[Vote YES]

C'mon Joe is arresting people for small amounts of pot really this important. We need our police resouces elsewhere trying to stop real violence in this city. I would rather see anyone go smoke a joint then go out and get hammered in one of our local bars then drive home. Booze is way worse than alcohol and is not a so called gateway drug that was dreamed up by a bunch of uneducated politicians who's main goal is to make prisons the big business they have become.

[Somerspeak]

Well is'nt that the "pot" calling the kettle black? Hey Joe, how about your 3 strikes city solicitor? You did'nt feel strongly about enforcing the drunk driving statutes when you smartly advised him to plead guilty to the first two DUI arrests to avoid the third conviction.

You Joe are one of the most dishonest humans on earth.

[Huh?]

Somerspeak,
I don't think Joe was his attorney on any of those three OUI's.

I remember a time when you used to come up with some of the brightest analyses on this blog. I would like to see that again.

[The Patriot]

Legalize it and tax it. Likewise, do the same for sex workers, like they do in Europe. Then we wouldn't need any
token bailout of $700B, we could use the sin taxes like they do in NH, only on a much larger scale. Spitzer was spending $5K a pop, so Crystal should be ponying up about $2K in taxes in her bracket, and that's for one hour.
WE could probably pay off the $11T national debt in ten years.

[sorry]

HE acts like he never smoke weed before or that he dont know someone that does.

Editor's Note (JN): The (new) Somerville News website is up - you can comment on stories over there. http://www.thesomervillenews.com