ENFORCEMENT TO FIT THE CRIME

The debate on the state's marijuana laws and the Rutland City debate
on police overtime are essentially the same. In both cases, the
debate is over what the best use of limited police resources and how
the state should be wielding its power.

At the state level, the discussion was triggered largely by the
decision of Windsor County Attorney Bobby Sands to send a case
involving a judge growing and possessing marijuana to diversion.

The eventual upshot is the state Senate passing a bill
decriminalizing possession of up to an ounce of marijuana. That still
needs to pass the House and the governor's desk to become law, but
it's a sound, common-sense measure.

Opponents say it will result in marijuana users moving on to harder
drugs, but study after study show that's not the case. The most
significant health issue identified in clinical studies of marijuana
is that it is most often ingested by smoking.

Opponents also argue it will turn Vermont into a haven for potheads,
which ignores the fact that a dozen other states have similar laws,
including Maine and New York, where possession of up to an ounce is a
civil violation, punishable by a small fine. Even such conservative
bastions as North Carolina and Ohio are doing just fine with
decriminalization, so it really isn't the end of the world.

What it is, is the end of random and arbitrary "justice" which sees
some pot smokers (Bill Clinton, George W. Bush) become president and
others go to jail.

The Senate is merely reminding the police and courts that they have
more pressing issues than busting college kids -- or, for that
matter, grandmothers or college presidents -- for having a couple of
joints on them.

It's the same discussion the city needs to have as it deals with the
recent outbreak of drug-related violence. The first response from
police Chief Anthony Bossi -- seconded quickly by Alderwoman Karen
Bossi -- was that the department needs more overtime money. But it's
up to the city to make sure the resources of the department are being
spent where the residents want them spent before just handing over
more money.

The taxpayers, who regularly see uniformed officers enforcing speed
limits, including construction speed limits, or doing traffic control
at, say, Art in the Park, have the right to a voice in deciding
whether that's the best use of trained, professional police
officers, or whether those duties should be delegated to private
companies or even trained volunteers.

After all, the police are proposing to train private citizens to do
drug patrols on our streets. It doesn't seem like too much of a
stretch to imagine them delegating stopping cars at a crosswalk, or
sitting at a construction site as a reminder that drivers need to
slow down for highway workers, freeing up the full-time officers to
concentrate on the crack houses and heroin dealers.