[420 Girl]

There are plenty of things that need fixing by local governments on Cape Ann.

Penalties for pot use is not one of them.

Marijuana is still illegal in Massachusetts. It is still a crime to deal it, or even to possess more than an ounce. But an overwhelming majority of citizens voted last fall to decriminalize possession of less than an ounce. It is now a civil infraction that carries a fine of $100.

In other words, the people spoke — and spoke loudly — about how seriously they want marijuana to rank in the war on drugs.

So the moves in Manchester and Gloucester to tack on additional fines of $100 to $300 for "public consumption" of marijuana — changes that have already been adopted in Salem, Lynn, Methuen and other communities — are not only an insult to the will of the people, they are a blatant case of misplaced priorities. They are simply unnecessary.

Manchester voters are being asked at next week's Annual Town Meeting to adopt a bylaw that would add $300 to the $100 fine for possession, for using pot in public. In Gloucester, City Council's Ordinance and Administration Committee has unanimously recommended an additional $100 fine for a first offense of public consumption, $200 for the second offense and $300 for any others.

Based on the overheated rhetoric by officials in both communities, one might think there has been an explosion of public pot smoking since Jan. 1 when the law took effect — that there are masses of people lighting up joints while they order a beer in local pubs or getting stoned on park benches.

According to Manchester Town Administrator Wayne Melville, without the additional fine, some people will think, "Hey, it's only a hundred bucks, so I think I'll go down and smoke in the police station."

Oh, please. Can Melville produce a single citizen looking to get fined $100?

Officials are trying to sell a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. Since the law took effect there has been one citation for pot possession issued by local police on all of Cape Ann, and one other written by state police. It would be interesting to compare that statistic to the number of arrests for heroin, cocaine or Oxycontin.

It is conceivable, although not likely, that at some point there may be a problem with public consumption. If there is, that will be the time to consider additional penalties. But the law hasn't been given a reasonable time to work, and there is clearly no serious problem here, as the citation statistics show.

Finally, if there is a need to impose additional penalties for public consumption, it would make more sense to do it statewide, with an amendment to the law by the Legislature. That would avoid the patchwork of local ordinances and bylaws now under way, and relieve local officials of thinking they will become a magnet community for pot smokers if their fine remains at "only" $100.

But right now, there is not a problem. Local officials should focus on problems that need fixing.


http://www.420magazine.com/forums/in...ot-needed.html