By David Humphreys, Emma Reed and Alexa Marcigliano
Just the facts: Understanding Question 2
On Nov. 4 Massachusetts residents voted to pass the Sensible Marijuana Initiative with a 65 percent majority. Question 2, as it was known on the voting ballot, has been controversial throughout the ballot process, yet seems to be misunderstood by many.
According to the Committee for Sensible Marijuana Policy, the Massachusetts decriminalization initiative will “amend the current criminal statuses so that adults possessing an ounce or less of marijuana for personal use would receive a simple $100 fine,” though it would still “maintain current penalties for selling, growing, and trafficking marijuana, as well as the prohibition against driving under the influence of marijuana.”
In contrast, the Coalition for Safe Streets, a group opposing Question 2, claims that “by effectively legalizing marijuana use and possession of significant amounts of the drug, Question 2 clears the way for the retailing of marijuana in our communities. It emboldens and enables drug dealers to operate with minimal fear of criminal prosecution.”
Throughout their website they refer to the “costs of legalizing marijuana,” and the grave effects it would have on our communities.
Information from both sides seems to have sparked confusion with the general public over what exactly this new law will mean, when it will be enacted, and who it affects. For example, on the popular Web site Yahoo! Answers, user Ryan G. asked, “Now that marijuana is legal, what has changed over there? Or is it more symbolic? Can it actually be bought in stores? Did it become cheaper?” Others informed Ryan of his mistake, mainly as to how decriminalization does not mean legalization, however these questions are not uncommon.
Though Melissa Downing, a resident assistant at the University of Massachusetts, understands what the new law means, she says that she has heard many others who have their facts wrong. Despite this, Downing feels that students will still carry on as they always have.
“Even if they are confused by the law, residents know that they are not allowed to smoke in the building,” said Downing. “So, if anything, it might add to more people smoking outside in the open instead of being concealed.”
According to a press release put out by the Office of the Attorney General for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, “This proposed law would replace the criminal penalties for possession of one ounce or less of marijuana with a new system of civil penalties, to be enforced by issuing citations, and would exclude information regarding this civil offense from the state’s criminal record information system. Offenders age 18 or older would be subject to forfeiture of the marijuana plus a civil penalty of $100.”
In the summary, the press release disproves a claim by the Coalition for Safe Streets, by stating “the proposed law… would not affect existing laws, practices, or policies concerning operating a motor vehicle or taking other actions while under the influence of marijuana, unlawful possession of prescription forms of marijuana, or selling, manufacturing, or trafficking in marijuana.”
Nowhere, however, does it state exactly when this law will go into effect.
“There’s talk right now of potential slight delay in implementation of the law because there’s so many questions that haven’t been answered yet on how this is going to be carried out,” said Patrick Archbald, Deputy Chief of the UMass Police Dept.
