Assembly Bill Would Let Cops Focus on Violent Crimes
TRENTON, NJ -- A bill to decriminalize possession of less than an ounce of marijuana was introduced in the New Jersey General Assembly with bipartisan support on Wednesday. The bill, which is being endorsed by a group of police and judges who once waged the "war on drugs," comes less than a month after Connecticut legislators passed similar legislation decriminalizing marijuana.
Jack Cole, a 26-year veteran of the New Jersey State Police and board chairman for Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, said, "As a former undercover narcotics detective in New Jersey, I now know that all the time and resources I spent arresting people for marijuana offenses over the course of my career didn't accomplish anything good. In addition to being a waste of money that should have been spent solving and preventing violent crimes, these arrests in many cases ruined otherwise productive people's lives. The marijuana decriminalization bill is a great first step to undoing some of the damage wrought by the failed 'war on drugs.'"
The New Jersey bill, A4252, would remove criminal penalties for adults who posses less than 15 grams of marijuana. It is sponsored by Assemblymen Reed Gusciora (D) and Michael Patrick Carroll (R) with 15 additional co-sponsors.
Harvard University economist Jeffrey Miron estimates that New Jersey currently spends more than $183 million every year enforcing its marijuana prohibition laws. In 2009, 22,439 people in New Jersey were arrested for possessing less than 50 grams of marijuana.
Rachel Cotrino, an attorney and Board member at NORML NJ, said, “In addition to imprisonment, offenders of the current law face loss of driving privileges from six months to two years. This unreasonably punitive measure causes many, otherwise law abiding citizens, to lose their jobs because they cannot get to work. Offenders also face eviction from their leased premises or loss of public housing. It is time to decriminalize the individual user and remove the current penalties that stifle our community and economy.”
Fourteen states in the U.S. have decriminalized the possession of small amounts of marijuana by adults.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) represents police, prosecutors, judges, federal agents and others who want to legalize and regulate drugs after fighting on the front lines of the "war on drugs" and learning firsthand that prohibition only serves to worsen addiction and violence. More info at http://www.CopsSayLegalizeDrugs.com.
# # #
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 29, 2011
CONTACT: Tom Angell - (202) 557-4979 or media@leap.cc
Showing posts with label marijuana decriminalization. Show all posts
Showing posts with label marijuana decriminalization. Show all posts
Thursday, June 30, 2011
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Hawaii state Senate sends five cannabis bills to the House
On Tuesday, March 8 the Hawai'i state Senate overwhelmingly passed five cannabis bills and sent them to the state House.
SB 1460 - decriminalization of one ounce: 24-0-1 (Shimabukuro was excused)
SB 58 - increases plants, dried ounces, patient-caregiver ratio, clarifies transportation language: 24-0-1 (Shimabukuro was excused)
SB 175 - moves program from Public Safety to Health: 24-1 (Kouchi voted "no")
SB 1458 - licenses compassion centers, producers and infused products makers: 24-1 (Slom voted "no")
SB 113 - creates a 3-year research program: 23-2 (Slom and Kouchi voted "no")
Testimony was also overwhelmingly in support, and included letters from LEAP's Neill Franklin and Jay Fleming.
The challenge will be getting hearings scheduled for these bills in the more conservative state House of Representatives. Last year the Senate passed three bills, but all eventually stalled. One reason was the police chiefs of the four counties lobbied the head of the Judiciary committee successfully and no public hearings were held.
This year, the conservative road block is expected to be Public Safety and Military Affairs chair Aquino. There are hopes that at least some of the bills will get hearings.
It should be noted that several weeks ago Maui Police officers were photographed in front of Walmart handing out a fliers opposed to the current legislation...while in uniform (and on the tax payer's dime)!
Pretty incredible. They are clearly in a bit of a panic, and are pulling out all the stops. The ACLU sent a letter to the Maui Police and Corporation Counsel, and we assume they are no longer using that tactic.
It comes down to getting hearings scheduled. And, once scheduled, we will need people to submit testimony.
More to follow.
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Police campaign hard against marijuana decrim in Hawaii
I received this update yesterday from a friend in Hawaii:
The police are getting busy setting up anti-pot rallies or handing out pamphlets on Maui and Kauai:
http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/20110214_Newswatch.html
http://mauinews.com/page/content.detail/id/546161/Police-pan-pot-proposals.html?nav=10
The attached file is what they are passing out on Kauai, and as they have the logos of all police departments, we're sure to see them here soon too.
The police are getting busy setting up anti-pot rallies or handing out pamphlets on Maui and Kauai:
http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/20110214_Newswatch.html
http://mauinews.com/page/content.detail/id/546161/Police-pan-pot-proposals.html?nav=10
The attached file is what they are passing out on Kauai, and as they have the logos of all police departments, we're sure to see them here soon too.
Here is the pamphlet. You may have to click on the images to make them big enough to read:
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
LEAP Testifies for Marijuana Decriminalization in Virginia
LEAP speaker Eric Sterling, former counsel to the U.S. House Judicary Committee and current president of the Criminal Justice Policy Foundation, will testify on LEAP's behalf today in favor of a bill that would decriminalize marijuana possession in Virginia.
Here are his prepared remarks:
Here are his prepared remarks:
Hearing of the Criminal Law Subcommittee of the Committee for Courts of Justice of the Virginia House of Delegates Richmond, Virginia H. Morgan Griffith, Chairman
January 27, 2010
Statement of Eric E. Sterling, J.D.
on behalf of LAW ENFORCEMENT AGAINST PROHIBITION (LEAP) in support of House Bill No. 1134 Marijuana Decriminalization
Mr. Chairman and distinguished Members of the Subcommittee, thank you very much for the opportunity to present the views of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) in support of H.B. 1134, introduced by the highly distinguished, Delegate Harvey B. Morgan.
LEAP is an association of current and former law enforcement officers, prosecutors, judges and criminal justice professionals at every level of government who are speaking out about the failure of our drug policy, and I serve on the Advisory Board. LEAP has 544 members in Virginia.
For nine years during the Reagan Administration, I was counsel to the Subcommittee on Crime of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee. I oversaw federal law enforcement and helped develop legislation regarding drugs, pornography, organized crime, money laundering, military assistance to law enforcement, and other issues. I staffed the enactment of many provisions in the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984, the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986, and the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988. I am best known for my role in developing the mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenses in 1986 after Maryland basketball star Len Bias died from using cocaine. More recently, I am a part-time professor teaching Criminal Justice and Sociology at George Washington University in Washington, DC. I am the President of the Criminal Justice Policy Foundation in Silver Spring, MD.
H.B. 1134 is a very well developed bill to remove the criminal penalty for the possession of marijuana for personal use. The bill maintains society’s disapproval of marijuana use by continuing a civil penalty of up to $500 for such possession, but provides that proceedings be initiated by summons instead of by arrest. It recognizes that marijuana is a substance that can be abused like other drugs and alcohol and it provides that minors who commit this offense can be required to undertake substance abuse screening, testing and treatment.
This bill will produce important efficiencies for the Commonwealth’s law enforcement agencies and could save in the range of $250 to 300 million in police, prosecution and incarceration costs related to marijuana possession, using estimates prepared for the Criminal Justice Policy Foundation by Dr. Jeffrey Miron, Professor of Economics at Harvard University.
According to the 2008 Crime Report from the Virginia State Police, police in Virginia made 19,911 arrests for marijuana offenses in 2008 out of a total of 33,217 arrests for all drug offenses – 60.5 percent (pp. 62-63). Unfortunately, unlike most states and the FBI, this data does not distinguish between simple possession, and offenses of manufacturing and distribution.
These roughly 20,000 marijuana arrests compare to 21,811 reported violent index crimes (p. v). Does marijuana deserve that kind of police and prosecutor attention? No rational analysis of law enforcement resources would make that equivalence. This emphasis on marijuana arrests takes officers off the streets and puts them in booking rooms and courts instead of focusing on much higher priority law enforcement matters.
Of course LEAP, like other law enforcement organizations, does not endorse or condone marijuana use, but that is not the issue here, because to remove the criminal penalty for the use or possession of small amounts of marijuana is not an endorsement or condonation of its use.
As you face a budget shortfall for the next biennium of $4.2 billion you need to change laws that will result in changing police practices to maintain a focus on public safety priorities. For example, on Monday, the Clarke County Sheriff, Tony Roper, reported that his office is planning for a 22 percent cut. The article is available here: http://www.clarkedailynews.com/sheriffs-department-braces-for-virginia-budget-cuts/1472/. Throughout the Commonwealth you are going to need to look for practical ways to save money. This bill deters marijuana use and protects public safety without wasting very scare public safety dollars.
The policy of this bill is the policy recommended by the National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse, chaired by Pennsylvania’s Republican Governor, Raymond P. Shafer in 1972. Following that report, by 1978 Oregon, Alaska, California, Colorado, Mississippi, New York, Nebraska, North Carolina, and Ohio enacted marijuana decriminalization laws. Studies of the comparative prevalence of marijuana use demonstrate that these laws did not result in greater rates of marijuana use than comparable, neighboring states. In a state that many see as a political bellwether, 65 percent of the voters in Commonwealth of Massachusetts approved a state marijuana decriminalization law in November 2008.
## #
Monday, October 5, 2009
Mass. Decrim Has No Effect On Schools
So say some Massachusetts school officials--the same ones who say decriminalization "sends a terrible message to kids." The story by John Hilliard is here (via the Agitator).
This really is no surprise, but it's important for a few reasons. Prohibitionists seem to care more about "the message" than about actual drug use and drug harms. For too many, it's a moral issue and not a policy issue.
I like to ask those who support the war on drugs if they would support legalization if legalization and regulation decreased drug use. I'd say close to half say "no." Better, they tell me, to keep drugs illegal regardless of drug usage rates. Sometimes increased drug use and overdose deaths can be useful, some drug-warriors even say, for having people overdose in the ghetto sends a powerful “message” to others.
Hmmmmmmm. This sort of ends the debate. So it’s not about drugs. It’s about morals and the power and symbolism of the law.
Prohibition is about a conservative world view that sees drugs as evil. And evil needs to be outlawed. Prohibition is about big-government telling people what to do and how to live their lives.
Take Harry Asslinger (oops, honest typo but much too good to delete)--I mean Harry Anslinger. He was very happy, after failing to maintain alcohol Prohibition, to raise the false alarm about marijuana.

Perhaps Anslinger’s greatest accomplishment was to push marijuana from a fringe drug into the mainstream. That's what happens when you call it the evil weed and highlight the moral turpitude of minorities, immigrants, Catholics, liberals, and other city folk who, like Anslinger believed, were destroying the moral fiber of America.
Whatever. Good or bad, those cool cats sure knew how to party!
In my mind, the debate on drug decriminalization comes down to one main issue: in an era of legal and regulated drugs, would drug use increase or decrease? Of course we can't be sure because we haven't tried it. But the evidence strongly suggests the use would not go up and might go down.
System of liberalization and/or decriminalization result in no increase in drug use. Marijuana usage rates in the Netherlands (where it is publicly sold and legally consumed) are lower than in the U.S. Decriminalization in Portugal has also been a success.
How does this work? Lot's of reasons. Forbidden fruit. Distrust of authority. And consider what Diego Gambetta recently pointed out to me: there’s a lot more pressure in social situations to conform and partake in illegal activities than for comparably legal activities.
If a joint is being passed around, you’re expected, especially in young crowds, to smoke a little. This serves two functions beyond social bonding.
1) It shows you're not a cop.
2) You can’t blackmail anybody with your knowledge of illegal behavior since you're guilty too.
There’s a lot more pressure (especially for teenagers) to smoke a joint being passed around than to smoke an offered cigarette. These days cigarettes, regulated and taxed, aren’t even being offered much.
Marijuana decriminalization in Massachusetts has not resulted in a bunch of school kids suddenly discovering the drug and firing up. Hell, the first time I ever saw marijuana was in school, watching a drug deal go down in the bathroom (regulated drugs aren’t sold in school bathrooms). And the best anti-drug lesson I ever got was from the guy who sat behind me in first-period German class. He would also come in late, stoned, and reeking of (tobacco) cigarettes. He never learned any German. But then neither did I.
[from Peter Moskos's Cop in the Hood]
This really is no surprise, but it's important for a few reasons. Prohibitionists seem to care more about "the message" than about actual drug use and drug harms. For too many, it's a moral issue and not a policy issue.
I like to ask those who support the war on drugs if they would support legalization if legalization and regulation decreased drug use. I'd say close to half say "no." Better, they tell me, to keep drugs illegal regardless of drug usage rates. Sometimes increased drug use and overdose deaths can be useful, some drug-warriors even say, for having people overdose in the ghetto sends a powerful “message” to others.
Hmmmmmmm. This sort of ends the debate. So it’s not about drugs. It’s about morals and the power and symbolism of the law.
Prohibition is about a conservative world view that sees drugs as evil. And evil needs to be outlawed. Prohibition is about big-government telling people what to do and how to live their lives.
Take Harry Asslinger (oops, honest typo but much too good to delete)--I mean Harry Anslinger. He was very happy, after failing to maintain alcohol Prohibition, to raise the false alarm about marijuana.

Perhaps Anslinger’s greatest accomplishment was to push marijuana from a fringe drug into the mainstream. That's what happens when you call it the evil weed and highlight the moral turpitude of minorities, immigrants, Catholics, liberals, and other city folk who, like Anslinger believed, were destroying the moral fiber of America.
Whatever. Good or bad, those cool cats sure knew how to party!
In my mind, the debate on drug decriminalization comes down to one main issue: in an era of legal and regulated drugs, would drug use increase or decrease? Of course we can't be sure because we haven't tried it. But the evidence strongly suggests the use would not go up and might go down.
System of liberalization and/or decriminalization result in no increase in drug use. Marijuana usage rates in the Netherlands (where it is publicly sold and legally consumed) are lower than in the U.S. Decriminalization in Portugal has also been a success.
How does this work? Lot's of reasons. Forbidden fruit. Distrust of authority. And consider what Diego Gambetta recently pointed out to me: there’s a lot more pressure in social situations to conform and partake in illegal activities than for comparably legal activities.
If a joint is being passed around, you’re expected, especially in young crowds, to smoke a little. This serves two functions beyond social bonding.
1) It shows you're not a cop.
2) You can’t blackmail anybody with your knowledge of illegal behavior since you're guilty too.
There’s a lot more pressure (especially for teenagers) to smoke a joint being passed around than to smoke an offered cigarette. These days cigarettes, regulated and taxed, aren’t even being offered much.
Marijuana decriminalization in Massachusetts has not resulted in a bunch of school kids suddenly discovering the drug and firing up. Hell, the first time I ever saw marijuana was in school, watching a drug deal go down in the bathroom (regulated drugs aren’t sold in school bathrooms). And the best anti-drug lesson I ever got was from the guy who sat behind me in first-period German class. He would also come in late, stoned, and reeking of (tobacco) cigarettes. He never learned any German. But then neither did I.
[from Peter Moskos's Cop in the Hood]
Monday, September 7, 2009
Undebatable
Let's close our eyes, cover our ears and shout "Lalalalala!" At least, that's the reaction of one moderator over at realpolice.net regarding a forum member who supports marijuana decriminalization.
Pete Guither has the full write-up on his blog, so I won't duplicate his efforts here. I felt bad for the original poster, who appears to be a college student with a strong interest in policing. I registered an account and sent him a private message to let him know that not all officers are so close minded.
I've certainly taken my fair share of abuse on a similar police forum. These forums represent a small minority of police officers but their hostility likely deters other officers from joining LEAP.
Pete Guither has the full write-up on his blog, so I won't duplicate his efforts here. I felt bad for the original poster, who appears to be a college student with a strong interest in policing. I registered an account and sent him a private message to let him know that not all officers are so close minded.
I've certainly taken my fair share of abuse on a similar police forum. These forums represent a small minority of police officers but their hostility likely deters other officers from joining LEAP.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

