Cops Under Pressure To Deny They Support Legalizing Marijuana

During California gubernatorial debates last week, Meg Whitman was asked about her position on Proposition 19 and marijuana legalization and said: "Every single law enforcement official in this entire state is against Proposition 19."

Former San Jose Chief of Police Joseph McNamara disagrees.

"She's absolutely wrong," said McNamara. "A lot of police officers both retired and on duty are in favor of passing it because they realize that the 'war on drugs' has failed and is going to fail."

For example, McNamara noted, hundreds have joined the advocacy group Law Enforcement Against Prohibition.

"I think she misstated what she believed," he said.

Whitman's office did not immediately respond to a HuffPost query requesting clarification.

One thing is true: California's active-duty police officers can't speak up in favor of legalizing marijuana for fear of losing their jobs.

For instance, scores of former officials recently signed a letter saying that marijuana prohibition only fuels more dangerous crime by enriching Mexican drug cartels who put guns on American streets -- but every member of the California police department waited until after they'd retired to sign.

HuffPost talked with cops who support Prop. 19 about the element of suppression.

"It's difficult, there are all kinds of factors that inhibit police officers from taking a public stance," said David Bratzer, a police officer for the Victoria Police Department in British Columbia who supports legalizing the drug. "They're worried about career advancement; harassment from colleagues or supervisors -- these are all issues that serving police officers have to consider."

Bratzer told HuffPost in an interview Wednesday night that even though many law enforcement officers will agree with him privately, only a handful of cops have been willing to make their opinions known publicly.

"The paramilitary structure of law enforcement discourages police officers from speaking out against the status quo even if that status quo is causing enormous damage in terms of wasted lives and resources," said Bratzer, who was careful to emphasize to HuffPost that his views are his alone and should not be attributed to his police department.

Groups ranging from The National Black Police Association to the California NAACP haveendorsed Prop. 19, arguing that police waste valuable resources targeting non-violent cannabis consumers, while thousands of violent crimes go unsolved. Still most officers wait until they've left their jobs in law enforcement to take a stand.

"I was with the LAPD when Nixon declared the 'war on drugs' over 40 years ago and was one of the 'generals' on the front lines who helped implement that same failed drug policy that is still in effect today," said Stephen Downing, a retired LAPD deputy chief of police.

"By keeping marijuana illegal, we aren't preventing anyone from using it," added Downing in a statement. "The only results are billions of tax-free dollars being funneled into the pockets of bloodthirsty drug cartels and gangs who control the illegal market."

Downing is not the only former police chief who has come out against prohibition.

McNamara, now a research fellow in drug policy at Stanford University, has argued that the 60 percent of the cash that supports violent drug cartels comes from the sale of illegal marijuana.

"I think many veteran officers start out as I did being a drug war warrior," explained McNamara, who, since he began studying drug policy academically, has become increasingly convinced that the problem is prohibition not the plant.

"We were participants in the war on marijuana," he said. "But after a while, I realized that the majority of the cops I hired during my 18 years as a police chief had used marijuana before we hired them."

"I don't personally use it," he said, "but I think it's really stupid to put people in jail for that reason."

Still, McNamara insists there are good reasons for cops not to speak out in favor of marijuana legalization while they're on active duty.

"You take an oath to support the law, not just the laws you agree with," he told HuffPost in an interview. "You're under the authority of elected officials and so you can't speak out on policy issues in opposition to what your superiors say."

If police officers feel they can't enforce a law in good conscience, they can always leave. But often, McNamara said, they don't.

"People don't commit career suicide," he said. "So they do the best they can. Whether they agree with them or not, they have to carry out the laws." When he was a cop, McNamara said he tried to keep things in perspective. "I did, within the area of my discretion, enforce the law with as much common sense as I could," he said.

A poll of 1,067 likely voters released Thursday found 44 percent of likely voters said they plan to vote for Prop. 19, while 49 percent plan to vote against it. That's an 8-point drop in support since September when 52 percent of likely voters said they would vote for it.

"Personally I think it's a shame that more serving California police officers are not supporting reform publicly," said Bratzer. "History will remember this as a failure of leadership at the highest levels of law enforcement in the state."

A Dopey Measure on Marijuana

From Sacramento -- The state Capitol is pathetically dysfunctional. One in eight workers statewide is out of a job. UC Berkeley is arrogantly eliminating baseball. Things are not going well in California. What can we do?

Well, if Proposition 19 passes on the Nov. 2 ballot, we can all go get stoned. Legally. Buy some joints down at the corner convenience store. We can become an even bigger laughingstock to the nation.

It was tempting here to write again about the Capitol's broken governing system that resulted in another bumbling, bleary-eyed, all-night legislative session needed to pass a 100-day-late budget Friday.
But there's little left to say about this never-ending clown act. Besides, the adopted budget wasn't all that important. The hard decisions were left for the next governor and Legislature.
Prop. 19 is more interesting and would have a greater long-term impact on California.

The ballot initiative, bankrolled primarily by a prospering entrepreneur of the pot industry, would permit local governments to regulate and tax commercial cultivation and retail sales of marijuana. And it would permit all Californians at least 21 to grow and possess their own weed for personal use.
Such activity, however, still would violate federal law.

In California, selling marijuana for non-medicinal use is a felony. But possessing less than one ounce — about a sandwich baggie-full — is a low misdemeanor punishable by a fine.
Starting Jan. 1, pot smoking will be even less of a state crime. Under a bill recently signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, it will be deemed an infraction, equivalent to a traffic ticket.
Since 1996, when voters approved Prop. 215, it has been legal in California to grow, sell and smoke marijuana for medical purposes, subject to local control. A "patient" needs only a doctor's "recommendation," not a prescription.

Merely a quarter of buyers at medicinal pot shops "are truly in need of it because of a medical condition," says attorney George Mull, president of the California Cannabis Assn., which advocates "reasonable regulation of medical marijuana."
Mull opposes Prop. 19, illustrating a split in the marijuana community.
"We think it's kind of goofy to jump ahead to recreational marijuana when we haven't done medical marijuana correctly yet," he says.

"We'd like to see medical marijuana truly made legal. In many areas, you can grow your own but can't sell it. There should be a more incremental approach."
He adds that "this whole [initiative] was set up by folks trying to make millions."
That would be primarily Richard Lee of Oakland, founder of "Oaksterdam University," the nation's first marijuana trade school. Lee says his medical marijuana dispensary, nursery and other pot-related merchandising generate up to $7 million a year, according to a Times article by reporter John Hoeffel.
Lee is in a good position to make a bundle off marijuana legalization. So far, he has spent $1.5 million to qualify Prop. 19 for the ballot and pitch it to voters.
The pitch basically is this: Cops currently waste many millions chasing down nonviolent pot smokers. There's a $14-billion industry that could be taxed to help the debt-ridden state. And marijuana "prohibition" has created killer drug cartels.

Opponents counter that relatively little, in fact, is spent nabbing or prosecuting marijuana users. "There's nobody in jail for possessing less than one ounce of marijuana," says Fontana Police Chief Rod Jones.
State prison data show that fewer than 1% of inmates have been sentenced for marijuana crimes of any kind.
"Long, long ago in the John Lennon era, people got thrown in prison for possession of marijuana," says Cassandra Hockenson, a spokeswoman for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

"Not so much today."
Opponents also point out that there's no marijuana regulation or taxing provisions in the initiative. That would be left to local governments, and there'd be a confusing hodgepodge from county to county.
But Assemblyman Tom Ammiano (D-San Francisco) last week introduced legislation to create a uniform statewide regulatory system. "If 19 passes, we'll be ready," he asserts.
Prop. 19 supporters are united behind the belief that what someone inhales or ingests in the form of muffins or brownies ought to be his business only.
"Let the criminal justice system control people's actions, but not what they put into their bodies," says James P. Gray, a retired Orange County Superior Court judge, who describes himself as a libertarian "flame thrower."

And he adds: "Along those lines, it makes sense to me to strictly regulate and control heroin. It makes as much sense to put Robert Downey Jr. in jail for heroin addiction as it would have putting Betty Ford in jail for alcohol addiction."
Gray has long advocated the legalization of all drugs. "But let's start with marijuana," he says. "Each drug should be decided on its own merit."
Such talk scares Dr. David Sack, a psychiatrist and chief executive of Promises celebrity rehab centers. "Drugs cause tremendous hardships to children and families, and the risk of addiction goes up with exposure," he says.
"Marijuana is clearly addictive, impairs judgment and increases the risk of motor vehicle accidents and interferes with brain development, particularly in adolescents….
"The biggest concern I have is that legalization will create a societal validation that marijuana is not harmful."

Legalizing "recreational" dope would create yet another problem for the state.
Prop. 19 is a crackpot idea. Therefore, California voters just might pass it.
Note: California has enough problems without legalizing pot.


Source: Los Angeles Times (CA)
Author: George Skelton, Capitol Journal
Copyright: 2010 Los Angeles Times
Contact: letters@latimes.com
Website: latimes.com

The Buzz About Proposition 19

California -- Under current state law, the possession, cultivation, or distribution of marijuana generally is illegal in California. Possession of less than one ounce of marijuana is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine, while selling marijuana is a felony and may result in a prison sentence. In November 1996, voters approved Proposition 215, which legalized the cultivation and possession of marijuana in California for medical purposes.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2005, however, that federal authorities could continue to prosecute California patients and providers engaged in the cultivation and use of marijuana for medical purposes.

Despite having this authority, the U.S. Department of Justice announced in March 2009 that the current administration would not prosecute marijuana patients and providers whose actions are consistent with state medical marijuana laws.

Proposition 19 changes state law by legalizing the possession and cultivation of limited amounts of marijuana for personal use by individuals age 21 or older, and authorizing various commercial marijuana related activities under certain conditions. Nonetheless, these marijuana related activities would continue to be prohibited under federal law and it is not known to what extent the federal government would continue to enforce them. Currently, no other state permits commercial marijuana- related activities for non-medical purposes.
Under the measure, persons age 21 or older generally may possess, process, share or transport up to one ounce of marijuana; cultivate marijuana on private property in an area up to 25 square feet per private residence or parcel; possess harvested and living marijuana plants cultivated in such an area; and possess any items or equipment associated with the above activities. 


The possession and cultivation of marijuana must be solely for an individual's personal consumption and not for sale to others, and consumption of marijuana would only be permitted in a residence or other "non public place."
The smoking of marijuana in the presence of minors is prohibited.
The measure also sustains existing laws that prohibit driving under the influence of drugs or that prohibit possessing marijuana on school grounds. Any person age 21 or older who knowingly gives marijuana to a person age 18 through 20 could be sent to county jail for up to six months and fined up to $1,000 per offense.


Prop 19 allows local governments to adopt ordinances and regulations regarding commercial marijuana related activities including marijuana cultivation, processing, distribution, transportation, and retail sales.
However it does not permit the transportation of marijuana between California and another state or country nor permit sales to persons under 21.
Whether or not local governments engaged in this regulation, the state could, on a statewide basis, regulate the commercial production of marijuana.
The state could also authorize the production of hemp, a type of marijuana plant that can be used to make products such as fabric and paper.


Prop 19 requires that licensed marijuana establishments pay all applicable federal, state, and local taxes and fees currently imposed on other similar businesses.
In addition, the measure permits local governments to impose new general, excise, or transfer taxes, as well as benefit assessments and fees, on authorized marijuana related activities.
The purpose of such charges would be to raise revenue for local governments and/or to offset any costs associated with marijuana regulation.
In addition, the state could impose similar charges.


Prop 19 could result in savings to the state and local governments by reducing the number of marijuana offenders incarcerated in state prisons and county jails, as well as the number placed under county probation or state parole supervision. These savings could reach several tens of millions of dollars annually.


The measure would result in a reduction in costs for enforcement of marijuana related offenses and the handling of related criminal cases in the court system.
Proposition 19 is carefully crafted to decriminalize personal marijuana use and production so those over 21 years of age may decide if it is something they wish to consume.
By so doing it enhances freedom of choice, engenders respect for the law, protects children, regulates marijuana use and production, and significantly reduces burdens on our police, justice, and correctional systems.


Vote YES on Prop 19 to halt victimless crimes.

Source: Red Bluff Daily News (CA)
Author: Richard Mazzucchi
Website: redbluffdailynews

California Action Alert: Schwarzenegger Must Decide Marijuana Infraction Measure Next Week!

 By: Paul Armentano, NORML Deputy Director

Outgoing California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has until Thursday, September 30, to decide the fate ofSenate Bill 1449 — which would reduce adult marijuana possession charges from a criminal misdemeanor to a civil infraction.That gives reformers one final week to lobby for this sensible reform. If you have not yet contacted the Governor in support of this historic legislation, please do so today.

Senate Bill 1449 amends the California Health and Safety Code so that the adult possession of up to 28.5 grams of marijuana is classified as an infraction, punishable by no more than a $100 fine — no court appearance, no court costs, and no criminal record.

Passage of bill would save the state millions of dollars in court costs by keeping minor marijuana offenders out of court. The number of misdemeanor pot prosecutions has surged in recent years, reaching 61,388 in 2008. Adults who consume marijuana responsibly are not part of the crime problem, and the state should stop treating them like criminals.

Governor Schwarzenegger, a Republican, has vetoed several different marijuana law reform bills in the past. Therefore, if you live in California, it is vital that you please e-mail or call Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s office and urge him to sign SB 1449 into law. For your convenience, a pre-written letter will be e-mailed to the Governor when you visit NORML’s ‘Take Action’ Center here.


Source NORML

What Pot Legalization Campaign Really Threatens

By David Sirota, Creators Syndicate 


California -- Here's a fact that even drug policy reform advocates can acknowledge: California's 2010 ballot initiative to legalize marijuana does, indeed, pose a  real threat, as conservative culture warriors insist. But not to public health, as those conservatives claim.
According to most physicians, pot is less toxic -- and has more medicinal applications -- than a legal and more pervasive drug like alcohol. Whereas alcohol causes hundreds of annual overdose deaths, contributes to untold numbers of illnesses and is a major factor in violent crime, marijuana has never resulted in a fatal overdose and has not been systemically linked to major illness or violent crime.


So this ballot measure is no public health threat. If anything, it would give the millions of citizens who want to use inebriating substances a safer alternative to alcohol. Which, of course, gets to what this ballot initiative really endangers: alcohol industry profits.
That truth is underscored by news this week that the California Beer and Beverage Distributors is financing the campaign against the legalization initiative. This is the same group that bankrolled opposition to a 2008 ballot measure, which would have reduced penalties for marijuana possession.


By these actions, alcohol companies are admitting that more sensible drug policies could cut into their government-created monopoly on mind-altering substances.
Thus, they are fighting back -- and not just defensively. Unsatisfied with protecting turf in California, the alcohol industry is going on offense, as evidenced by a recent article inadvertently highlighting America’s inane double standards.
Apparently oblivious to the issues the California campaign is now raising, Businessweek just published an elated puff piece headlined "Keeping Pabst Blue Ribbon Cool." Touting the beer’s loyal following, the magazine quoted one PBR executive effusively praising a rate of alcohol consumption that would pickle the average liver.


"A lot of blue-collar workers I've talked to say 'I've been drinking a six-pack of Pabst, every single day, seven days a week, for 25 years,’" he gushed, while another executive added "It's, like, habitual -- it's part of their life. It's their lifestyle."
Discussing possible plans to "develop a whole beer brand around troops" -- one that devotes some proceeds to military organizations -- the executives said their vision is "that when you see Red White & Blue (beer) at your barbecue, you know that money's supporting people who have died for our country."


Imagine marijuana substituted for alcohol in this story. The article would be presented as a scary expose about workers smoking a daily dime-bag and marijuana growers' linking pot with the Army. Undoubtedly, such an article would be on the front page of every newspaper as cause for outrage. Yet, because this was about alcohol -- remember, a substance more toxic than marijuana -- it was buried in a financial magazine and depicted as something to extol.
Couple that absurd hypocrisy with the vociferous opposition to California's initiative, and we see the meta-message.


We are asked to believe that people drinking a daily six-pack for a quarter-century is not a lamentable sign of a health crisis, but instead a "lifestyle" triumph worthy of flag-colored celebration -- and we are expected to think that legalizing a safer alternative to this "lifestyle" is dangerous. Likewise, as laws obstruct veterans from obtaining doctor-prescribed marijuana for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, we are asked to believe that shotgunning cans of lager is the real way to "support our troops."
These are the delusions that a liquor-drenched culture prevents us from reconsidering. In a society drunk off of alcohol propaganda -- a society of presidential "beer summits" and sports stadiums named after beer companies -- we've had trouble separating fact from fiction. Should California pass its ballot initiative, perhaps a more sober and productive drug policy might finally become a reality.


David Sirota is the author of the best-selling books Hostile Takeover and The Uprising.
He hosts the morning show on AM760 in Colorado and blogs at: http://www.OpenLeft.com/


Source: AlterNet (US)
Author: David Sirota, Creators Syndicate
Copyright: 2010 Independent Media Institute
Website: http://www.alternet.org/

Marijuana dispensaries targeted by county

Medical marijuana dispensaries in unincorporated Orange County could be banned under a proposed 45-day moratorium as the county prepares for the possible legalization of marijuana by voters in November’s statewide election.

The county ordinance, which would ban new dispensaries and dispensaries without permits, must be approved by 4/5 of the board of supervisors. The board meets Tuesday to debate the issue.

Currently, Orange County does not have any laws on the books for regulating the permitting or establishment of medical marijuana collectives, but the California Attorney General set up guidelines which require dispensaries register as a non-profit, obtain a seller’s permit, and supply security among other conditions.

According to county staffers, an estimated 11 medical marijuana dispensaries are operating in unincorporated Orange County. None of the cooperatives are permitted under California Attorney General guidelines, according to a county staff report, which would make them illegal under the moratorium, and subject to code enforcement and criminal prosecution.

If approved, the county’s moratorium – which includes medical marijuana delivery services – would run at least past California’s Nov. 2 election, which will put Prop. 19 – and its proposed legalization of marijuana – up to a vote by California voters.

Prop. 19 would legalize the use and possession of up to one ounce of marijuana for personal use for people over the age of 21 – and allow local governments to regulate and tax businesses that sell marijuana.

Using and growing marijuana in non-public places would also be allowed under Prop. 19.

The idea of a temporary moratorium, according to county staffers, is to give the county time to study the issue and come up with a plan on how to regulate medical marijuana cooperatives. The ordinance could be extended up to an additional ten months and 15 days beyond the original 45 days.

Still at issue, however, is how the inherent conflict with federal law – which bans the use, possession, and sale of marijuana – will be resolved.

California voters legalized medical marijuana in 1996, making it the first medical marijuana state, but the law did not police dispensaries or set up a system to hand out the drugs.

In 2003, the state Legislature passed the Medical Marijuana Program Act, which set up an identification system for medical marijuana users which allowed qualified patients and their primary caregivers to obtain medical marijuana.

The law, however, does not allow dispensaries to sell marijuana.

“It’s a battle between the implied interpretation of the law and the direct interpretation of the law,” said Anthony Curiale, a Brea-based attorney for medical-marijuana dispensaries.

Marijuana is the most commonly used illicit drug in America, with 16.7 million Americans using marijuana at least once in the past month, according to a 2009 report by the Office of National Drug Control Policy.

Marijuana use in the United States is up eight percent from 2008, a trend which the report says may be to blame by legalization campaigns, so called “medical marijuana” and a flood of pro-drug messages in pop culture.

Law enforcement officials accuse many dispensaries of hiding behind the guise of providing medicine to patients to operate highly profitable businesses that can pull in millions of dollars of profit a year.

Dispensaries, according to the California Police Chiefs Association, have been tied to organized criminal gangs and their inventory of cash and drugs have made them attractive targets for armed robbers and burglars.

Last month, a triple murder in West Hollywood was blamed on a marijuana heist. A La Habra woman was arrested on suspicion of possession of marijuana for sale. Her boyfriend was arrested on suspicion of gunning down three men because he didn’t want to pay for the marijuana they had bought from a local collective.

Other dispensaries owners have been attacked and murdered at their storefronts and homes, according to the police chiefs association.

Curiale, the medical marijuana dispensaries attorney, said medical marijuana collectives aren’t any different from banks, liquor stores and pharmacies which regularly get held up by robbers after money.

Sheriff’s officials declined through a spokesman to comment for this article.

Medical marijuana access has been growing since the Obama administration last year said people complying with state medical marijuana laws would no longer be subjected to federal drug raids and prosecution.

With no state oversight, cities and other local jurisdictions have been forced to police it themselves.

How that is done, and the logic behind it, has run the gamut. In Oakland, lawmakers commanded strict oversight of dispensaries, telling them where and how they can operate. The city of Los Angeles took a much more laisser-faire approach. The result – dispensaries popped up in mind-blowing numbers.

Then, the Los Angeles City Council had second thoughts, limiting the number of dispensaries to 70 and laying down the law on where and how they can operate.

With the new strict rules in place, Los Angeles city officials announced last month that only 41 marijuana dispensaries are eligible to stay in business.

“The problem with the cities is they take a bludgeon approach when what should be used is a scalpel,” said Curiale. “The answer is not to ban medical marijuana. The answer is to regulate medical marijuana.”

Any violation of Orange County’s emergency marijuana collective ordinance would be a misdemeanor.

The Board of Supervisors meet at 9:30 a.m. Tuesday at the Hall of Administration at 333 W. Santa Ana Blvd., Santa Ana.

Source: totalbuzz.ocregister

Marijuana's future has an upscale look

By Phil Bronstein 

When it comes to legalizing pot, there's no stemming the inevitable. Whatever happens this November with California's Proposition 19, which essentially would decriminalize the drug, marijuana will end up being legit.
Whether you like it or not.


Jerry Brown and Barack Obama are against it - improbably, given their histories. Financier George Soros and Men's Wearhouse thread peddler George Zimmer are for it. Libertarians, a colleague reminded me, "are just Republicans who smoke pot."


But politics often are irrelevant when cultural tectonic plates are shifting.
Walk into the chic, slickly modern shop at Eighth and Mission, past the doorwoman. Eugene, a personal shopper consultant, waves at you from behind the counter. The white oak cabinetry looks as comfy and rich as caramel.
Merchandise is stored in apothecary jars with scripted labels. Data about the day's best offerings scroll across high-tech LED displays.
Inside the stylishly lit custom display cases, you'd expect Prada, Cartier or Hermes. But it's just clumps of pot - medical marijuana, in this case, cosseted up like exotic eggs.


This is SPARC (San Francisco Patient and Resource Center), a nonprofit, community-minded medical marijuana dispensary. But in the reflection of the slightly smoked windows, with a design that mimics the cannabis gene, you can also see weed's upscale commercial future.
"Venture capitalists are certainly reaching out, trying to figure out what the world will look like in six months," SPARC lawyer and consultant David Owen told me. "I have no doubt if and when recreational cannabis becomes legal that business will attract people with money."
Pot derivatives could be the new plastics. Everyone ends up loaded.
"I had to take a cash (cultivation) business and make it legitimate after George Bush left office," says SPARC co-owner and longtime grower Erich Pearson, who also runs an Oakland group that pairs local pot dispensaries with "socially conscious" investors.


The earth is moving in rural areas as well. "Serious people trying to start a niche market as brokers" approached Kathleen Archer, a TV producer who spent a year outside Healdsburg growing product for medical outlets. One was a woman who had worked 20 years for Brooks Bros. clothiers.
Nothing says unavoidable like a trend that has become truly trendy.
Down in Soquel, outside Santa Cruz, a dispensary is offering pot-infused ice cream. Crème de Canna. Really. There are now ganja yoga classes with joints to help limber up your joints before class.
And any modern trend needs a social media component. Seshroulette is a new, anonymous, live video-chatting service that allows you to talk with a stream of other stoned people. PriceofWeed.com is a website that crowdsources the going prices of pot in cities everywhere and charts them on a Google map.


This is a fun trip. But if California is first to have a crime-free sativa tea party all its own, "We'll have to go back to the drawing board," says SPARC's Peterson. That recalculation includes billions in potential tax revenues to a strangling state budget.
Ironically, the people who will get most hosed by legal pot are the poor who really need it for serious pain and suffering, not for recreational gelato. Those down-and-outers will still be taxed on what they pay for.
What's the '60s saying? Pot will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no pot.


Source: sfgate