The Drug War Refugees

Los Angeles Times ^ | February 2, 2003 | Eric Bailey

[Cultural Jihad]

Thanks for the stats. You backed up my claim about there being no arrests for simple possession or use. It's the rare exception which proves the general rule. It takes a Herculean task to get arrested for something like weed here in California. Hence the 27 actors who somehow managed to get arrested for possession should be looked at by Hollywood talent scouts. Now, the other stats are interesting: Sale and possession for sale (both felonies) accounted for only 1,600 arrests in a whole year, and this "other marijuana" category with 134 arrests could be smuggling, or unauthorized use of weed killers. At any rate, these numbers probably reflect the top 1 percent most irresponsible and wacked out, which we constantly hear is a very rare occurance.

[philman_36]

http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/statelocal/ca/casanjose.pdf
During 1999 in Santa Clara County, there were 2,480 arrest for marijuana and 3,610 arrests for other drugs.
Misdemeanor Arrests, Santa Clara County, 1999
Manslaughter-Vehicular 7 Assault and Battery 4,165
Petty Theft 4,395 Other Theft 221
Marijuana 2,480 Other Drugs 3,610
Drunk 7,693 Liquor Laws 1,006
Driving Under the Influence 7,380 TOTAL 48,958
Snip...During 1999 in Santa Clara County, there were 901 juvenile arrests for marijuana.
Juvenile Misdemeanor Arrests, Santa Clara County, 1999
Assault and Battery 1,416 Petty Theft 1,818
Other Theft 17 Marijuana 901
Other Drugs 72 Drunk 337
Liquor Laws 417 Driving Under the Influence 68
Now, it doesn't say "possession", so you've got an out, though you may want to look up exactly what a misdemeanor arrest consists of.

[Cultural Jihad]

Just go to norml.org to see what any particular state laws are. As it will say, for the past 30 years, any possession or use of 28.5 grams or less has been punishable by a $100 fine, as long as the miscreant has a valid ID.

[philman_36]

More than 28.5 grams?
Ah! I see! You've changed the goalposts yet again.
I thought as much. Why didn't you say that from the beginning?
It started out as...No one has been arrested for mere possession or use in the past 30 years. (refuted)
Then it changed to...when I stated no one has been arrested for mere possession or use in the past 30 years, I was reefering to marijuana, dude. (refuted, I thought)
And then you moved in for the kill...More than 28.5 grams? (what is there to refute)
So deceptive of you, but thanks for narrowing things down. Under the strict criteria that you've given, you're right.
11357-11362.9
11357 (b) Except as authorized by law, every person who possesses not more than 28.5 grams of marijuana, other than concentrated cannabis, is guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars ($100).
Even 23222 only provides for a fine of not more than one hundred dollars ($100) for anyone who possesses not more than one avoirdupois ounce of marijuana, other than concentrated cannabis as defined by Section 11006.5 of the Health and Safety Code.

Isn't it great that Proposition 36 and Proposition 215 were passed changing all of those laws!
Proposition 36
The new law, wich took effect July 1, 2001, creates a category of non-violent drug offenses. Simply stated, these offenses involve the possession and use of controlled substances and marijuana. It includes sections 11377, 11379, 11550, 11357 and others of the California Health and Safety Code.
What was a misdemeanor offense before Proposition 36?
That seems a little harder to find and makes your question more interesting, but I'll keep looking.

[Roscoe]

any possession or use of 28.5 grams or less has been punishable by a $100 fine, as long as the miscreant has a valid ID.

But what if he just happened to possess a kilo (for personal medical use, of course) while walking around the park at 1:00 AM without any ID? What about that, huh?

[philman_36]

BWAHAHAHAHA!
BILL TO RECLASSIFY POT CRIME ADVANCES
The legislation, SB 791, would reclassify the lowest marijuana offense -- possessing an ounce or less -- from a misdemeanor to an infraction, the same level as an average traffic violation. The bill passed the Senate Public Safety Committee on a 4-0 vote and is headed for the Senate floor.
Proponents said the change more appropriately aligns the offense and its penalty. Since the Moscone Act decriminalized small-time drug offenses in 1975, those caught with an ounce or less of pot have been subject to a $100 fine and no jail time.
Oh yeah, you guys in California have been fighting such an intense WOsD since 1975! And here I thought all this time that Ohio was lax...
You're still fighting "the good fight" though, aren't you.
Votest on Marijuana and Drug Reform Issues
Marijuana Decriminalization: SB 791 by Bruce McPherson (R- Santa Cruz) would have made possession of less than one ounce an infraction instead of a misdemeanor; defeated in Assembly due to withholding of support by Democratic leadership, reluctant to support a Republican-sponsored bill.
Those Ca. Republicans rock! Why aren't you supporting them? Those waskaly Democwats.

Moscone Act in 1975. Not quite 30 years, but I'll give it to you.
If nothing else, thanks for teaching me something.

[philman_36]

But what if he just happened to possess a kilo (for personal medical use, of course) while walking around the park at 1:00 AM without any ID? What about that, huh?
Yeah, what about that, huh?
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! You're too funny Roscoe! No low in looking for the ridiculous?
Did you read those links from the other thread Roscoe?

[Roscoe]

looking for the ridiculous?

Thanks to you, I never have to look far.

[philman_36]

Thanks to you, I never have to look far.
Let me move the mirror a little bit for you there...

[philman_36]

The whole thing Roscoe...No low in looking for the ridiculous?
Shame on you.

[jmc813]

All I know is, the law is on my side.

The federal assault weapons ban is law. Is that on "your side"?

[dcwusmc]

Are you the new FedGov-bot troll? Who's being fired for being ineffective? (I would guess that the whole lot of you need firing and prison time, but, hey, that's just me. Others would settle for having you in front of a firing squad; a few want to tar and feather you.) In case you haven't noticed, troll, while a few here will admit to having used pot, INCLUDING SOME OF YOUR MORE ARDENT DRUG WARRIORS (who see no conflict between their prior drug use and wanting to see others jailed for the same crime they didn't get jailed for), NONE ADVOCATE THE ABUSE OF ANY SUBSTANCE, including the most abused and abusable drug, alocohol. What they (and I, who has NEVER used pot, cocaine in any form or unprescribed narcotics) advocate is a return to the supremacy of the Constitutiion and FedGov getting cut down to its proper size and functions which do NOT include making war on its own citizens based on what they choose to ingest.

[FreeTally]

Are you the new FedGov-bot troll? Who's being fired for being ineffective?

LOL!!!

Maybe its Don Myers or VA Avagado.

[dcwusmc]

Yeah, but who's going away? (And WON'T be missed!)

[Protagoras]

Hey! A visable ping for your buddies? Did you forget your secret email alert list?

[Protagoras]

Not to mention the posts ridiculing and advocating the arrest of law enforcement officers for doing their job

The laws have not reduced drug usage. But they have provided crime oportunities for many police in my city. (Chicago) In the last few weeks, several have been convicted of running a large scale drug operation. Two days ago a policemen was arrested here for planting cocaine in the car of friend's wife in order to discredit her in a divorce action.

The WOD doesn't work to reduce drug use, but it works fine for other purposes.

[Protagoras]

while walking around the park at 1:00 AM without any ID?

A new law requiring people to carry id? Your papers please.

[Cultural Jihad]

Hey! A visable ping for your buddies? Did you forget your secret email alert list?

Your apparent paranoia problem can be treated with wonderous medications these days.

[Cultural Jihad]

No one is required to adhere to any law whatsoever. However, everyone is obligated to adhere to the consequences of their actions. Only whiney liberals try to use cop-out excuses.

[FreeTally]

However, everyone is obligated to adhere to the consequences of their actions.

Make sure your buddies know that. I dont want to hear, "But we were just following orders" one day.....