ZONE DEFENSE

A policy that would seem to brook no argument is being re-evaluated
of late by lawmakers, school officials and community leaders.

The drug-free zones that encircle every school and public building in
New Jersey were, of course, established to protect children from
being preyed upon by drug dealers. Anyone caught and convicted of
selling or possessing a significant quantity of drugs within 1,000
feet of schools or 500 feet of parks, libraries, museums or public
housing projects faces a mandatory minimum jail sentence of one to
three years and a $15,000 fine.

But those dealing in cities such as Trenton, where an estimated 80
percent of the city falls within drug-free zones, are caught in
overlapping parabolas of protocol. We have no sympathy for them, not
a drop, but we do recognize that the mandatory punishment of the
drug-free school zone may be too harsh for the offense.

Drug dealers in suburban areas where schools are widely spaced are
given much more lenient sentences for the same offense because their
crime is beyond the boundaries of the drug-free zones.

To address that inequity, several legislators have proposed plans,
such as reducing the zone from 1,000 feet to 200 feet.

Others adamantly disagree with that intent, insisting that the
welfare of the children is paramount. They are absolutely correct in
that; the dealers, their trade and their influence should be kept far
away from the kids and the schools. We owe our children that pledge
and protection.

However, there's a disturbing consequence of these lines in the
asphalt. It may be more socioeconomic than racial, but 96 percent of
those jailed for dealing drugs within the zones are black or
Hispanic, according to the nonprofit Drug Policy Alliance New Jersey.
As Roseanne Scotti, Alliance director, says, "Basically, this law
amounts to two different penalties being given for the same exact
crime -- the only differences between the two penalties are geography
and race."

That's why we support a bill advanced by Assemblywoman Bonnie
Watson-Coleman, D- Ewing, to keep the drug-free zones at 1,000 feet
while giving judges more discretion in sentencing.

Her bill would make carrying a controlled dangerous substance a
second-degree crime and allow the judge to issue imprisonment for
five to 10 years and pose a fine of $150,000. But the judge could
impose alternate penalties if there are mitigating factors such as
whether school was in session at the time of the offense or whether a
child was involved in the deal.

The drug-free law is a good law, but it needs to be tempered. And
Watson-Coleman's bill seems to strike the right balance.