Marijuana/Meth Bill

Since I have fixed the issue with ecto and can now blog from my office, I wanted to discuss a couple of things that have happened in Alaska recently. The first is the governor's marijuana/meth bill. This bill was on the governor's "must pass" list. It dramatically increased the penalties for manufacturing methamphetamine or purchasing precursor chemicals. At one point in time, it set a mandatory $250,000 bond for any meth-related charge. I don't know if that was in the final bill because I have not read the final bill. The Alaska senate passed the bill, but they joined it with a measure which would criminalize possession of marijuana, even in one's own home. This directly contravenes the holding of Ravin v. State, a famous Alaska case holding that the right to privacy in one's own home outweighs any social interest in prohibiting the possession or use of minor amounts (in this case 4 ounces) of marijuana. The bill would also lower the amount of marijuana that would trigger the presumption of distribution. It used to be that possession of up to one pound of marijuana, not packaged for resale, would be a misdemeanor. This bill would lower that amount to an ounce or so. Now, then, possession of over an ounce of marijuana would be presume to be for distribution. The governor explicitly seeks to overturn Ravin. Once again, Republicans show that they are not really interested in small (or no) government. Rather, they are interested in using government for the benefit of their business friends and for enacting their own moral agenda. We certainly have enough shi'ite Baptists in this state that it is difficult to tell at times the difference between the Republicans and religious totalitarians. The House rejected the bill initially, supposedly because of the marijuana provisions. Last Friday, though, the House passed the bill and recommended it be sent to the governor. The reason for the flip-flop is that the House was not pleased with the way that the governor handled some of the procedural matters. They sent their political message and so the bill is on its way to becoming law. The marijuana portion of the bill is supported by a number of "findings" that marijuana is now more dangerous/addictive/whatever than it was 30 years ago when Ravin was decided. This is patently not true. Any objective examination of this subject will show this. Marijuana does far less damage physically or socially than the most dangerous and commonly available drug: alcohol. Yet alcohol is accepted and marijuana is not. Further, the governor is apparently upset because Ravin means that before police officers can get a search warrant, they have to describe how they know that someone has more than four ounces of marijuana. Thus, a neighbor smelling pot from the house next door is insufficient to grant probable cause for a search warrant. By criminalizing possession of any marijuana, cops could then rely upon neighbors who put their nose in others' business (literally) for search warrants. The AkCLU has already announced that it will challenge the law when the governor signs it.

Comments

[Brian]

Citizens making the effort to clean up criminal activity in their own neighborhood?

That would be terrible. Don't know that the Republic could survive such a blow.

Don't know how neighborhoods could survive without potheads either. Personally, I would get over any hardships caused by locking up potheads, with the knowlege that property values just went up.

[Steve T.]

I agree with most of the sentiment, except when it comes to the issue of neighbors.

Generally, neighbors are concerned about the smell of marijuana being detectable from their own property.

I live in an apartment, and I regularly have to close my windows because I am sensitive to second-hand cigarette smoke, and my downstairs neighbors smoke like chimneys. I put up with this because there's really nothing I can do about it legally (to my understanding). I would much less rather be exposed to marijuana smoke.

And I would bet my bottom dollar that if my state decriminalized the possession of 1lb of marijuana for "personal use" that dealers in my area would find a way to exploit that law to their advantage. How hard would it be to stash (no pun intended) the stuff in excess of 1lb somewhere else, and make junkies (uh, *clients*) bring their own baggies?

[Steve T.]

Oh, by the way, "shi'ite baptists" made me giggle. I'm going to incorporate that into my vocabulary.

[Lena]

Amen!
What is marijuana doing on the same bill as methamphetamine in the first place? Just look at the impact the meth epidemic has had on this nation (and others) in the past decade. Compare that with the worldwide, rampant use of marijuana and its minimal effect on the health and crime in a community. Clearly, abuse can be an issue, but they are NOT EVEN COMPARABLE drugs.

[matt]

wow! I understand the meth issues but marijuana? Ask any nurse, firefighter, medic and most will probably say if anything should be criminalized it's alcohol. anyone that has paid attention has seen alcohol destroy lives body and soul, and deeply affect those around them.

I have friendships with police officers and firefighters I know who smoke (surprised?) and though I don't anymore (honest) I don't worry about having those good folks protecting and serving. Better to see them occasionaly stoned over their vacation time then a regular drinker showing up on the trucks sweating out his late night whiskey socials