'NO' ON PROPOSITION 19

On the surface, legalizing the possession of a small amount of
marijuana sounds like a good idea. Can 100 million Americans be wrong?

Should California legalize the possession of an ounce or less or
marijuana when federal law prohibits it? Is it possible that one out
of three Americans have smoked pot?

That's a smoke screen, put out there by supporters of Proposition 19
on the Nov. 2 ballot. It reeks of "since everyone is doing it, let's
legalize it." But there's a huge difference between lighting up in
one's living room and getting behind the wheel of a car or truck when
the driver is stoned. Prop. 19 would allow that driver to get behind
the wheel, and not do much about it until he crashed his car, truck or
school bus or broke a traffic law. Even then, it would be difficult
for police agencies to determine how much marijuana the driver had
smoked.

Proponents maintain that teenagers can easily obtain pot now; Prop. 19
would make it illegal for people younger than 21. (Haven't they heard
of fake ID cards many teenagers already have?) It couldn't be sold on
school grounds or near a school and couldn't be smoked around minors.
(Good luck with that one, parents.)

Medical marijuana already is legal in California, and the Obama
administration has said it would not prosecute those users. Getting
medical marijuana requires only a farcically easy-to-obtain doctor's
prescription. Underage use would be just as easy with fake IDs.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has signed a bill that downgrades
recreational possession of an ounce or less to an infraction, similar
to running a red light (that doesn't result in a crash).

Supporters of Prop. 19, including a retired judge, a retired police
chief of San Jose and a retired deputy chief of the LAPD, maintain
that municipalities would reap "billions" of dollars in taxes from
legal marijuana outlets. But since Prop. 19 also would allow
cultivation of a limited supply for personal use, who's going to
collect those taxes?

Opponents of Prop. 19 include Sen. Dianne Feinstein and L.A. County
District Attorney Steve Cooley and both Jerry Brown and Meg Whitman.
They rightly point out that since it would be legal to smoke marijuana
for recreational use, a driver couldn't be cited until he got into an
accident or broke a traffic law. And even then, there's no simple test
that, unlike drunken driving, could measure a driver's effectiveness -
before a crash.

Prop. 19 is flawed, flies in the face of federal law, is opposed by
major law-enforcement officials and politicians and would be abused by
underage consumers. Estimates of tax revenue are wildly exaggerated.
The argument that once pot is legalized, the burden on law enforcement
would be reduced ignores the burden of enforcing underage use. For
those consumers ages 21 or older, cops would have to carry a scale.
Oh, brother.

We recommend a "no" vote on Nov. 2.