- Naked Conch - Posted by Matt Gardi - Feb 11, 2012
As the campaign season heats up heading into the 2012 elections, I was surprised to learn that both candidates for State Attorney, incumbant Dennis Ward, and his challenger, former Chief Assistant State Attorney Catherine Vogel support some form of decriminalization of Marijuana. Catherine Vogel discussed the topic with me live on the air on KONK during a recent appearance on my show, the Naked Conch Hour. I followed up with Ward off air to get his thoughts regarding the topic, and while being much more guarded, he suggested that he too, might support similar legislation.
To be clear, the concept of decriminalization is by no means “legalization.” But rather, would take the criminal aspects away from the infraction, while still maintaining a civil penalty. Proponents of decriminalization argue that there is a tremendous waste of resources that go along with criminal charges being filed against those being caught with small amounts of marijuana. Factoring into the equation is taking Law Enforcement off the streets to process the arrest, consuming time and resources at the jail, and then the subsequent labor and material costs associated with the State Attorney, Clerk, Courts, and possibly even the Public Defender’s Office. Proponents suggest that criminal prosecution of those caught with small amounts of marijuana is a costly objective. They suggest that decriminalization would result in a civil citation being issued, the pot being confiscated, and the individual paying a fine, much like a traffic ticket. This in turn would generate revenue for all aspects of law enforcement.
Opponents argue it creates a slippery slope, and will lead to further acceptance of illegal activity and condones recreational drug use. They suggest that a relaxed fine, as opposed to criminal prosecution may not create a great enough deterrent to recreational users, thereby increasing the use of marijuana, and aiding the criminal enterprises that exist behind the scenes, producing and distributing pot. They suggest that a fine simply will become a price to be paid for indulgence.
On my show, when Vogel was presented with the question as a result of the flow of conversation, she was quick to point out that as State Attorney she would always prosecute the laws as they exist, and would not impart her sentiment upon the duties of the office, and the responsibility of prosecuting those currently charged. However, she expressed her thoughts that from her research jail time does not seem to change the behavior, and agreed that the amount of resources consumed were substantial. Therefore, she concluded that she would support a legislative approach to decriminalizing possession of small amounts of marijuana. We didn’t have the opportunity to get into the specifics of what defined small amounts, but Vogel was clear of her support of some sort of decriminalization if developed by the legislature.
State Attorney Ward was much more cautious, requiring specifics such as what defined a small amount before offering an opinion. He was however quick to offer his full support for the medical use of marijuana, but a little more guarded when it came to possession. He argued that juveniles already have a way to avoid criminal charges, and thought that age should also play a factor in consideration of any such legislation. He wouldn't disagree that there was a huge consumption of resources that went along with a criminal prosecution, even in the event of a juvenile that may avoid a criminal record but whose case was still managed by the system. Ward did eventually capitulate that there may be some instances that it would make sense simply to cite someone with a civil infraction and collect a fine, versus consume all the resources to criminally prosecute. However, he was clear that he would only support such legislation if small was in fact “very small,” and that he would still have to evaluate such a change on all aspects of the legislation developed.
Opponents argue it creates a slippery slope, and will lead to further acceptance of illegal activity and condones recreational drug use. They suggest that a relaxed fine, as opposed to criminal prosecution may not create a great enough deterrent to recreational users, thereby increasing the use of marijuana, and aiding the criminal enterprises that exist behind the scenes, producing and distributing pot. They suggest that a fine simply will become a price to be paid for indulgence.
On my show, when Vogel was presented with the question as a result of the flow of conversation, she was quick to point out that as State Attorney she would always prosecute the laws as they exist, and would not impart her sentiment upon the duties of the office, and the responsibility of prosecuting those currently charged. However, she expressed her thoughts that from her research jail time does not seem to change the behavior, and agreed that the amount of resources consumed were substantial. Therefore, she concluded that she would support a legislative approach to decriminalizing possession of small amounts of marijuana. We didn’t have the opportunity to get into the specifics of what defined small amounts, but Vogel was clear of her support of some sort of decriminalization if developed by the legislature.
State Attorney Ward was much more cautious, requiring specifics such as what defined a small amount before offering an opinion. He was however quick to offer his full support for the medical use of marijuana, but a little more guarded when it came to possession. He argued that juveniles already have a way to avoid criminal charges, and thought that age should also play a factor in consideration of any such legislation. He wouldn't disagree that there was a huge consumption of resources that went along with a criminal prosecution, even in the event of a juvenile that may avoid a criminal record but whose case was still managed by the system. Ward did eventually capitulate that there may be some instances that it would make sense simply to cite someone with a civil infraction and collect a fine, versus consume all the resources to criminally prosecute. However, he was clear that he would only support such legislation if small was in fact “very small,” and that he would still have to evaluate such a change on all aspects of the legislation developed.
No comments:
Post a Comment