Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Alaska: Governor Set to Push Anti-Marijuana Legislation Again
Juneau Empire ^ | Dec. 9, 2005

Posted on 12/16/2005 7:23:26 AM PST by Wolfie

Governor Set to Push Anti-Marijuana Legislation Again

The Murkowski administration will "hit the ground running" next session on a bill proposed last year to overturn a court decision on marijuana use, said Alaska Department of Law spokesman Mark Morones.

Alaskans are allowed to possess up to 4 ounces of marijuana in their homes for personal use but the bill could lower that amount to less than 1 ounce if it passes.

The Senate Health, Education and Social Services Committee heard from experts last session on both sides of the issue - some arguing marijuana is a threat to society and others saying pot is less harmful than a pack of cigarettes.

The bill is awaiting action in the Senate Finance Committee before it reaches the floor. Then it would head over to the House for review.

Alaska Assistant Attorney General Dean Guaneli said some of the state's arguments were misunderstood last session. The purpose of the bill is not to bust college students smoking pot in their dorms, but to go after commercial growers, he said.

"The police are not getting effective search warrants for marijuana growing operations," Guaneli said.

Even though officers can smell marijuana coming from a residence, it is not enough evidence to prove there is more than the 4 ounces needed to get a search warrant, he said.

Those possessing more than 4 ounces would be charged with a Class C felony and those with an ounce would be charged with a Class A misdemeanor, according to the bill.

Michael Macleod-Ball, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Alaska, said the bill does not increase penalties for those growing commercial marijuana.

"Criminalizing those with small amounts of marijuana does not solve the problem," he said.

The bill also tampers with a right to privacy ruling that is unique to Alaska, Macleod-Ball said.

"All it does is give the police the ability to go into someone's home if they believe they have marijuana," he said.

A landmark court decision by the Alaska Supreme Court in 1975 made small amounts of marijuana kept at home by adults legal. It found no relationship between private use of the drug and the public welfare.

Experts who phoned in to the Senate committee meetings last session tried to show that in some cases smoking marijuana could lead to violence.

"If I smoke marijuana, I may not be led to rob a store. But I can lose my job and then be motivated to steal," John Fielder, a clinical psychologist at St. Mary's Medical Hospital in San Francisco, told the Senate committee last session.

The bill hearings are a platform to get testimony on the record so that if the bill passes, the findings can be used in court, Guaneli said.

The state will charge someone for possession of marijuana if the bill passes and use the suspect's trial to introduce the findings in the bill, he said. The judge may or may not use the findings to make his decision to overturn the long-standing ruling, Guaneli said.

The state wants to prevent marijuana from getting into the hands of children by going after local growers; if authorities can take out about half of the producers, then kids would be priced out of the market, Guaneli said.

The bill, Senate Bill 74, was bogged down last year because it was introduced in the middle of the session and needed extra time to get through the testimonies, Guaneli said.

Bills proposed last session that did not reach the House and Senate floors for a final vote are still alive because bills introduced in the two-year session remain on the table through 2006.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; US: Alaska
KEYWORDS: aclu; bongbrigade; chemicalwarfare; donutwatch; govwatch; hahadopers; liberals; liberaltarians; murkowski; perverts; waronterror; wodlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-132 next last
It appears the Governor is unaware of how a State Constitution works.
1 posted on 12/16/2005 7:23:28 AM PST by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Wolfie

"It appears the Governor is unaware of how a State Constitution works."

It's just a damn piece of paper right?


2 posted on 12/16/2005 7:26:51 AM PST by dljordan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie
"If I smoke marijuana, I may not be led to rob a store. But I can lose my job and then be motivated to steal,"

If there was a Nobel Prize for Sophistry, this gentleman's statement should certainly place him in consideration.

What a shameless, bought-and-paid-for, lickspittle!

It's hard to believe that a gubmint pension can be that enticing.

3 posted on 12/16/2005 7:36:14 AM PST by headsonpikes (The Liberal Party of Canada are not b*stards - b*stards have mothers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie

The state wants to prevent marijuana from getting into the hands of children by going after local growers; if authorities can take out about half of the producers, then kids would be priced out of the market, Guaneli said.
-----
Now who is this kind of thinking serving? MJ users, of course. If it is so bad, then BAN IT ALL TOGETHER!!! Their thinking is "don't throw quite so much gasoline on the fire".


4 posted on 12/16/2005 7:37:49 AM PST by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: headsonpikes

The guy was probably hired by some government agency right out of college and has never done an honest days work in his life. That's the problem with land use planners also.


5 posted on 12/16/2005 7:41:02 AM PST by bigfootbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: PaxMacian; WindMinstrel; philman_36; headsonpikes; cryptical; vikzilla; libertyman; Quick1; ...

ping


6 posted on 12/16/2005 7:41:49 AM PST by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: All
"If I smoke marijuana, I may not be led to rob a store. But I can lose my job and then be motivated to steal," John Fielder, a clinical psychologist at St. Mary's Medical Hospital in San Francisco, told the Senate committee last session.

Well, if I like to read books, I may not be led to rob a store. But if I just read all day and don't go to work,I can lose my job and then be motivated to steal. That line of thinking works for anything. You do anything too much it will cause problems. I didn't think reasonable people still thought pot was a evil scourge or that it worse than alcohol.
7 posted on 12/16/2005 7:42:37 AM PST by RambozoDClown
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie

Frankie needs to show an iron fist on this one. Just ban it all!


8 posted on 12/16/2005 7:45:02 AM PST by MassachusettsGOP (Massachusetts Republican....A rare breed indeed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: headsonpikes
If there was a Nobel Prize for Sophistry, this gentleman's statement should certainly place him in consideration.

The statement is hyperbole, but it does reflect the fact that overall the greatest harmful consequence of a person using marijuana is getting arrested for it, and the consequences that follow from that.

9 posted on 12/16/2005 7:59:22 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie
"If I smoke marijuana, I may not be led to rob a store. But I can lose my job and then be motivated to steal

and then go out and order a pizza with the works, eat a few twinkies, drink a milk shake and eat some french fries.

10 posted on 12/16/2005 8:03:59 AM PST by Nachum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat
That was not what he was saying - he was quoted following this:Experts who phoned in to the Senate committee meetings last session tried to show that in some cases smoking marijuana could lead to violence.

I assume the unstated implication in the good psychologist's statement has something to do with amotivational syndrome, or some other attribute of pot that causes job loss.

Faulty metaphysics, essentially. ;^).

11 posted on 12/16/2005 8:36:04 AM PST by headsonpikes (The Liberal Party of Canada are not b*stards - b*stards have mothers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie
Control freaks! Nothing but control freaks!
Where are the criminal statistics? Is Alaska a hell hole of crime and depravity because people can have four ounces of marijuana in their home?

Will I hear crickets from the naysayers?

12 posted on 12/16/2005 8:40:57 AM PST by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: philman_36; headsonpikes

This legislation is a monumental waste of time. The only thing that can accomplish what the Governor wants is a Constitutional amendment.


13 posted on 12/16/2005 8:45:56 AM PST by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: EagleUSA
BAN IT ALL TOGETHER!!!

State Constitution be damned?

14 posted on 12/16/2005 7:16:51 PM PST by Know your rights (The modern enlightened liberal doesn't care what you believe as long as you don't really believe it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: albertp; Allosaurs_r_us; Abram; AlexandriaDuke; Americanwolf; Annie03; Baby Bear; bassmaner; ...
Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
15 posted on 12/16/2005 10:32:48 PM PST by freepatriot32 (Holding you head high & voting Libertarian is better then holding your nose and voting republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie
It appears the Governor is unaware of how a State Constitution works.

Yeah! He thinks legislators should make laws instead of judges.

16 posted on 12/16/2005 10:38:27 PM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

Sure thing. The Legislature should be able to crap all over the Constitution. No naysayers allowed.


17 posted on 12/17/2005 9:02:19 AM PST by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie
crap all over the Constitution.

"A landmark court decision by the Alaska Supreme Court in 1975 made small amounts of marijuana kept at home by adults legal."

You should have read the article before embarrassing yourself.

18 posted on 12/17/2005 9:07:06 AM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie

Someone outside Alaska is obviously bankrolling this scheme. Why else doggedly pursue this political dead horse?
There is more "passion" on this issue than even education, roads, or health.


19 posted on 12/17/2005 9:19:17 AM PST by rasblue (Everyone has their price)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mojave
Please. The Court decided the Legislature passed an un-Constitutional law. The Legislature can seek recourse by amending the State Constitution. That's how our form of government works. Apparently you are unaware of that. How embarassing for you.
20 posted on 12/17/2005 9:22:52 AM PST by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie
the Legislature passed an un-Constitutional law.

Quote the state constitution.

[crickets]

21 posted on 12/17/2005 9:47:03 AM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: MassachusettsGOP
Frankie needs to show an iron fist on this one. Just ban it all!

Yep, one of the things that made alcohol prohibition fail was that possession was legal.

22 posted on 12/17/2005 9:54:13 AM PST by Moonman62 (Federal creed: If it moves tax it. If it keeps moving regulate it. If it stops moving subsidize it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Mojave
What's the matter? Google not working?

Article I - Declaration of Rights

SECTION 22. RIGHT OF PRIVACY. The right of the people to privacy is recognized and shall not be infringed. The legislature shall implement this section.

The Alaska Court of Appeals ruled that Alaska residents may possess up to four ounces of marijuana in their own homes without any criminal or civil penalty. The ruling, which cites a 1975 Alaska Supreme Court finding that the Alaska constitution's privacy provisions protect the personal possession and use of marijuana in the home, once again makes Alaska the only state in the country with legal marijuana in the home.

Now if the Legislature is unhappy about this, they can try to amend the State Constitution to exclude marijuana possession from the explicit Right To Privacy guaranteed by the State Constitution. Of course, you might be on of those people who think that Constitutions just get in the way of Governemnt doing its "job", in which case you might want to hang out with some of your brethren over at DU.

23 posted on 12/17/2005 9:56:00 AM PST by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie
RIGHT OF PRIVACY.

Nothing about drugs, nothing about "four ounces".

Like your DU comrades, you've exposed yourself as a cheerleader for judicial legislation and an enemy of representative government.

24 posted on 12/17/2005 10:20:41 AM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

Just the right to be left alone by the government. I know that scares you. Try sleeping with the lights on.


25 posted on 12/17/2005 12:05:22 PM PST by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie
Just the right to be left alone by the government.

Euphemistic evasion. The "right" to four ounces of dope, by judicial fiat.

26 posted on 12/17/2005 12:27:30 PM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

Why would someone not possess the natural right to stop and smell any flower?


27 posted on 12/17/2005 3:35:08 PM PST by PaxMacian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: PaxMacian
Why would someone not possess the natural right to stop and smell any flower?

What are you talking about?

28 posted on 12/17/2005 4:31:00 PM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

"The "right" to four ounces of dope, by judicial fiat."

Why would someone not possess the natural right(as opposed to "by judicial fiat" to stop and smell any flower(in the privacy of their own home?)

Moreover, where is the power enumerated in the Constitution for the Government to eradicate gifts from God or ban their possession?

"Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God?" --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virginia, 1782.

GOD MADE HERB
GOD SAW THAT IT WAS GOOD
GOD GAVE IT TO MAN

Genesis 1:11
Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, and the fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind, whose seed is in itself, on the earth"; and it was so.

Genesis 1:12
And the earth brought forth grass, the herb that yields seed according to its kind, and the tree that yields fruit, whose seed is in itself according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.

Genesis 1:29
And God said, "See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food.


29 posted on 12/17/2005 9:23:12 PM PST by PaxMacian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: PaxMacian
the natural right

Four ounces is "the natural right", not three or five? How was that arrived at?

Reading organic tea leaves?

30 posted on 12/17/2005 9:26:53 PM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie
In the DAO we like to call it "imaculate possession." Illegal to buy, Illegal to grow, but legal to posess
31 posted on 12/18/2005 12:33:48 AM PST by coug97
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Mojave
"Reading organic tea leaves?" - Euphemistic evasion?

My question still stands; Why would someone not possess the natural right to stop and smell any flower?

Four ounces is "the natural right", not three or five? How was that arrived at?

Certainly, these limits are seemingly arbitrary. Yet,limits of possession had to be determined where the individual right of privacy is violable if the quantity possessed was not justifiably an individual supply but rather a commercial venture and thereby warranting regulation. The question raised in the article is whether or not an odor warrants the violation of individual's privacy.
32 posted on 12/18/2005 9:54:58 AM PST by PaxMacian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: PaxMacian
My question still stands

It stands unrelated to the four ounce standard the court created by an act of judicial legislation.

33 posted on 12/18/2005 9:56:37 AM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

It is related in that it is on the continuum from merely being in the presence of this flower to propagator and supplier, somewhere between possessor and user, next to protector. Would you hang a man for smelling a flower? Are you doing anything less by stealing his property to quarter steroid addicted troopers in the WOSD?


34 posted on 12/18/2005 3:18:16 PM PST by PaxMacian (Gen. 1:29)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: PaxMacian
it is on the continuum from merely being in the presence of this flower to propagator and supplier

Sorry, I don't speak Hempish.

35 posted on 12/18/2005 3:30:12 PM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Mojave
Four ounces is "the natural right", not three or five?

No, every finite amount is the natural right ... but allowing four ounces still brings Alaska closer to the truth than allowing none.

36 posted on 12/19/2005 3:44:53 PM PST by Know your rights (The modern enlightened liberal doesn't care what you believe as long as you don't really believe it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Know your rights
No, every finite amount is the natural right ...

A drug dealer with a cargo plane, blessed by Gaia.

37 posted on 12/19/2005 6:21:36 PM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Mojave
A drug dealer with a cargo plane, blessed by Gaia man's nature as a reasoning free-willed individual capable of forming and pursuing his own ends, and thus not properly treated as a means to anyone else's ends.
38 posted on 12/20/2005 3:35:06 PM PST by Know your rights (The modern enlightened liberal doesn't care what you believe as long as you don't really believe it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Know your rights
man's nature as a reasoning free-willed individual capable of forming and pursuing his own ends

Who have made laws against dope in 50 of the 50 states.

39 posted on 12/20/2005 5:57:01 PM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Mojave
And thus have improperly used other men as means to their own ends.
40 posted on 12/20/2005 8:05:14 PM PST by Know your rights (The modern enlightened liberal doesn't care what you believe as long as you don't really believe it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Know your rights
And thus have improperly

Improperly? Beg that question!

41 posted on 12/20/2005 8:14:12 PM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Mojave
Such laws clearly use other men as means to the law-approvers' ends. If you want to claim that's proper, knock yourself out.
42 posted on 12/20/2005 8:25:21 PM PST by Know your rights (The modern enlightened liberal doesn't care what you believe as long as you don't really believe it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Know your rights
Such laws clearly use other men as means to the law-approvers' ends.

Sorry, I don't speak hempish.

43 posted on 12/21/2005 6:07:22 PM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Mojave
You're beyond hope ... I'm talking over your head to the grownups.
44 posted on 12/22/2005 3:35:55 PM PST by Know your rights (The modern enlightened liberal doesn't care what you believe as long as you don't really believe it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Know your rights

Nope, you're muttering to yourself.


45 posted on 12/22/2005 5:55:18 PM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: headsonpikes

"If I smoke marijuana, I may not be led to rob a store. But I can lose my job and then be motivated to steal," John Fielder, a clinical psychologist... told the Senate committee last session.

It's the little things that expose a person. Note that Fielder said "I", rather than If a person... 

"If I  a person smokes marijuana, I the person may not be led to rob a store. But I the person can lose my his job and then be motivated to steal,"

If he, John Fielder, is capable of acting irresponsibly, he assumes that any person could be as irresponsible as he sees himself. True, virtually any person could be as irresponsible, yet it is Fielder that exposes himself. Apparently without pot prohibition he wouldn't know how to act responsibly.

Obviously his response to this would be something along the lines of: "Oh, but I wasn't speaking about myself, it is other people that could act irresponsibly."

My response: so that's why you spoke in the first person, because you were speaking about other people. Depends on the meaning of is, right?

46 posted on 12/22/2005 6:18:18 PM PST by Zon (Honesty outlives the lie, spin and deception -- It always has -- It always will.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Know your rights

You're beyond hope ... I'm talking over your head to the grownups.

Mojave, aka Roscoe, has for years been posting his one-line non sequiturs and straw men on the WOD threads. Mojave/Roscoe is a staunch WOsomeD warrior whom at one time actually made coherent arguments. Albeit they were all refuted causing, by his own choice, to digress to what you read of him today. 

His posts do keep the threads bumped to the top where his trivial remarks are easily ignored and the only recognized value of them is as representative of the overall pitiful arguments put forth in support of the WOsomeD.

For example, from the article: "If I smoke marijuana, I may not be led to rob a store. But I can lose my job and then be motivated to steal," John Fielder, a clinical psychologist... told the Senate committee last session. How pitiful is that!?

47 posted on 12/22/2005 6:42:47 PM PST by Zon (Honesty outlives the lie, spin and deception -- It always has -- It always will.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Zon
Albeit they were all refuted

Dream on...


48 posted on 12/22/2005 7:02:50 PM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Zon

I believe that what you describe is an acquired characteristic normally developed in an institutional setting, such as a public school.

Thinking in slogans results in chronic cognitive dissonance.


49 posted on 12/22/2005 7:38:10 PM PST by headsonpikes (The Liberal Party of Canada are not b*stards - b*stards have mothers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie

We are up to our a$$es in METH and Murkowski is going to try, again, to move against pot?

Murkowski, both of them, will be GONE before we Alaskans put up with more of their cr@p.

I liked him when he was in D.C., but he has been an offensive arrogant failure as governor, he really pi$$ed us off by putting his daughter into his vacant seat.

She was given a chance by us, but she's showing her true colors now, with McCain for the so-called torture "ban', now this with the Patriot act?

Do your worst Murkowskis, you're both out of here.

Can you BOTH say "one term'?

I knew you could.


50 posted on 12/22/2005 7:56:19 PM PST by porkchops 4 mahound ("Si vis pacem, para bellum", If you wish peace, prepare for war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-132 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson