VOTERS TO CONSIDER RELAXING MARIJUANA LAWS

Massachusetts voters tomorrow will consider whether decriminalizing
marijuana would lead to greater drug abuse and crime or provide
relief from unnecessarily harsh laws and benefit law enforcement
agencies and taxpayers.

If passed, Question 2 will replace the current law with a penalty
similar to a speeding ticket. Offenders who are 18 or older will be
required to relinquish their marijuana and pay a $100 fine. Those
under 18 will be subject to the same regulations, and their parents
or guardian will be alerted. Minors will be required to complete a
drug awareness course that involves 10 hours of community service and
at least four hours in a class.

Various law enforcement officials, district attorneys, educators,
health-care workers, businesses and community leaders oppose the
question. Somerville Mayor Joseph Curtatone also advocates a "no" vote.

"The mayor has argued that under current law, Somerville has made
significant inroads against alcohol and drug abuse among young people
in the city and believes that the deterrent effect of the current law
is a useful tool for discouraging young people from taking up
marijuana use," Somerville spokesperson Tom Champion told the Daily.

On the other hand, organizations such as the Greater Boston Civil
Rights Coalition and the American Civil Liberties Union strongly back
Question 2. They argue that its changes would not be harmful because
marijuana would remain illegal. They emphasize that laws against
trafficking, distribution and driving under the influence would
remain unaffected regardless of the outcome.

Champion argued that loosening laws would boost marijuana abuse,
which would have a multifaceted impact on society.

"Turning the possession of one ounce or less into a civil offense
could easily increase demand for marijuana. An increase in demand
could also increase the amount of criminal activity in the city,"
Champion said.

In support of Question 2, Whitney Taylor, the campaign manager for
the Committee for Sensible Marijuana Policy, said that 11 other
states from California to North Carolina have laws similar to that
proposed in Question 2, and rates of abuse in those states have not gone up.

"They began passing these laws in the 1970s, and we have 30 years of
data to back it up. The White House commissioned a report that was
carried out by the National Research Council, and they came to the
conclusion that changing the penalty system does not impact the rates
of abuse. The World Health Organization also completed an
international survey and came to the same conclusion," Taylor said.

A primary argument against Question 2 is that decriminalization would
appear to constitute an endorsement of substance abuse and would send
the wrong message to young people.

The referendum's detractors worry that marijuana is a leading cause
of juvenile crime and hospital admissions. There is a heavier
correlation between juvenile crimes and marijuana than between
juvenile crimes and alcohol, according to the 2008 Official
Massachusetts Information for Voters.

"From the city's point, whether or not marijuana is a gateway drug,
it is certainly, from the standpoint of criminal activity, a
companion drug. It is usually supplied by the same gangs and criminal
organizations that supply harder drugs," Champion said.

According to Harvard economist Jeffrey Miron, the state is spending
$29.5 million a year on arresting and booking individuals for
marijuana. He called this wasteful. "With all this talk and all these
cuts across the state, the amendment focuses the dwindling law
enforcement on more serious crime," Miron said.

If Question 2 passes, marijuana citations will go to the
municipalities where the offenses happened, and the local governments
will be able to use the money raised from those citations as they like.

Question 2 would additionally end a trend in which the state issues
over 7,000 Criminal Offender Record Information reports for marijuana
possession each year. "These reports create barriers to employment,
housing, loans to go to school, and create a lifetime ban on being a
foster or adoptive parent and becoming a teacher," Taylor said.

Massachusetts law already requires judges to dismiss charges and seal
the records of those who are caught in possession of small amounts of
marijuana for the first time.

Tufts University Police Department Captain Mark Keith, who was a
deputy sheriff in California for eight years before coming to Tufts,
would not comment on his position, but said that Tufts would make any
changes needed to accommodate the new policy, should Question 2 pass.

"My job as a police officer would be to enforce the law, whatever
that is, and if it changes, then myself and my staff will make the
changes accordingly," Keith said.

"There are very few instances in my 20 years at Tufts where anyone
has been arrested for under an ounce of marijuana. It's a minor
offense and the violators would be sent to the Judicial Affairs
Office. As far as arrests, [Question 2] wouldn't have a big impact,"
Keith said.