PROP 1 PITS PROPONENTS AGAINST LAW ENFORCEMENT

Marijuana Ordinance Good For Columbia.

The proposed marijuana ordinance on the April 8 ballot will improve the
handling of small-amount marijuana possession cases in many ways. It will
only apply to adults and will have no effect on how juvenile court cases
are handled.

Proposition 1 would require that most misdemeanor marijuana cases be
referred to the municipal court, which is not technically a criminal court.
Therefore, those whose cases go there might still honestly claim not to
have a criminal conviction record when applying for work or school.

A criminal conviction is a life-long stigma that can make it difficult to
find employment. It is in the best interest of all of us that citizens be
able to find and keep good jobs, pay their taxes and support their families.

The ordinance would also remove the possibility of a jail sentence for such
offenses. This will not be a radical change since few people are sent to
jail for small-amount marijuana possession.

Fines for repeat offenders go as high as $500, but the judge could still
order counseling and community service work as conditions of probation with
the possibility of avoiding a public conviction record for those who comply.

Proposition 1 would bring about an important change in that people who are
now convicted in state court lose eligibility for any form of federal aid
to education, loans, grants or work-study assistance for at least one year.
Again, it is in the best interest of all of us that people be able to
complete their college education.

Congress has passed a law that says this loss of federal aid to education
is a consequence of any conviction for marijuana possession under state law
or under federal law. The language of the law is clear on this point. This
penalty, by the way, is not inflicted on those who commit murder, robbery
or other violent crimes.

The ordinance would require that the city prosecutor dismiss small-amount
possession cases against people who have a serious medical need for marijuana.

Marijuana has been proved to relieve the symptoms of cancer chemotherapy
treatment, multiple sclerosis, glaucoma, AIDS/HIV and certain other serious
ailments. This ordinance would require that a physician recommend such
medical use. It would leave the discretion to decide whether a personis
marijuana use is medical in the hands of doctors, where it belongs.

Passage of this ordinance would definitely allow police officers to focus
their limited time and resources on preventing and investigating more
serious crimes, ones involving violence and/or property loss. These crimes
are surely higher priorities for law enforcement than minor marijuana
possession cases.

Columbia police make a full-custody arrest of people charged with
small-amount marijuana possession. These people are usually handcuffed at
the scene of the arrest, placed in the backseat of a police car and taken
to police headquarters for fingerprinting, photographing and paperwork,
often consuming hours of the arresting officeris time.

The MU Police Department and Missouri Highway Patrol officers generally do
not do this. Both of these law enforcement agencies routinely write a
summons for misdemeanor marijuana possession without placing a person under
a full-custody arrest. There is no reason why the Columbia Police
Department should do so.

Perhaps the single greatest fear regarding what might be perceived as a
reduction of the penalties for possession of small amounts of marijuana is
that the rate of use of marijuana might increase as a consequence.

Fortunately, we do not have to guess about what the effect of this
ordinance will be.

Ann Arbor, Mich., has had a similar ordinance on its books for more than 25
years. As the police chief of Ann Arbor said in a recent Tribune interview,
the ordinance has not resulted in any increase in marijuana use, nor has it
resulted in any problems for law enforcement or the community in general.

This is entirely consistent with the experience of every other community in
the United States that has passed a similar law. During the mid-1970s, 10
states decriminalized the possession of small amounts of marijuana. These
states include one third of the population of the nation.

In none of these jurisdictions has any scientific study revealed any
increase in marijuana use attributable to decriminalization.

The rate of use in those states and cities has increased and decreased over
the years, but in a cycle indistinguishable from the same cyclic rise and
fall of marijuana use in other states, such as Missouri, which maintain
harsh criminal penalties.

Professor Jeffrey Miron of the Department of Economics at Boston University
corroborates this fact in recent Tribune commentary.

A Time/CNN poll last fall indicated that 80 percent of Americans support
legal access to medical marijuana and 72 percent support fines only and not
jail for possession of small amounts.

A recent poll by MUis Center for Advanced Social Research indicates that a
majority of likely voters in Columbia supports Proposition 1.

Proposition 1 will help more Columbians find and keep good jobs, finish
their college education and avoid prosecution when marijuana is used for
legitimate medical purposes. This will allow law enforcement to focus on
violent and other serious crimes. Proposition 1 will benefit all of us, and
it merits your support.