POT DECRIMINALIZATION LIMITED IN BAY STATE

To the editor:

I enjoyed Ned Bristol's column, "Why stop at casinos, Gov. Patrick?"
(Sept. 23).

Having never read his work before, I am not sure he fancies himself a
Jonathan Swift or John Stuart Mills. I hope the latter. I am sure of
two things: that he appreciates facts and he got one partially wrong.

That fact is that Massachusetts has not effectively decriminalized
marijuana possession. By statute, possession is still a misdemeanor
potentially punishable by time in jail and the revocation of the
privilege to drive; keep and bear arms; receive federally guaranteed
student loans; and, reside in subsidized housing. If by "effectively
decriminalized" he means these punishments are rarely invoked he is
correct. If he means that marijuana possessors are often not arrested
he is also correct.

Many police departments and individual officers have a de facto
policy against arresting marijuana possessors unless the person has
an outstanding warrant or has committed another offense for which
they have the power to arrest by statute or common law. These
otherwise law-abiding persons are freed to go on their way. Sometimes
they are freed after receiving a verbal; sometimes they are freed and
given a ticket notifying them they have four business days to request
a magistrate's hearing and sometimes they are freed after being told
they will be summonsed to court. In the latter case, they should
receive notice to appear for a clerk-magistrate's hearing, but some
district courts issue a complaint without scheduling a magistrate's
hearing.

Real decriminalization requires the repeal of the arbitrarily
exercised power of the police to hold a person for the bail magistrate
merely because the officer found them in possession and reducing the
penalty to a fine as the Legislature chose to do with most motor
vehicle offenses over 30 years ago.

Steven S. Epstein,

Georgetown

This writer is an attorney and founder of the Massachusetts Cannabis
Reform Coalition.