Massachusetts Cop Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 1295 Posts

·
Undefined
Joined
·
2,255 Posts
I'm sure the updates and memos will follow soon but........ If you stop a car with four people in it and all four have an ounce each are they good to go or can you charge them all with constructive possession? Also, if someone in the car has less than an ounce but it's broken into "x" number of little baggies can you still charge them with intent to distribute?

Also, how many retards do you think are going to try to rub it in one of our faces and say, "It's legal, man!!!!" just like they do at the Hemp Fest in Boston every year.
 
G

·
Who gives a shit anymore? The sheeple made their bed, they can all smoke their brains out for all I care; unless it directly impacts me, my family, or my fellow officers, I don't care any longer.
 

·
MassCops Angel
Joined
·
121,497 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
What Does The Marijuana Vote Mean?

The larger bag at right contains an ounce of marijuana. The smaller bags depict the same amount - an ounce - broken up into smaller amounts, typical of how the drug would be packaged for individual sales.

BOSTON (WBZ) ― Massachusetts voters decided to ease marijuana laws Tuesday.

So what does that really mean?

It means anyone caught with an ounce or less of pot will no longer be considered a criminal in Massachusetts.

Instead, they'll have to pay a $100 fine and be forced to turn over the drug.

(To get a better idea of what an ounce looks like - take a look at the photo at the top of the screen)

If they're under 18, they'll have to complete a drug awareness course or face a stiffer, $1,000 fine. Parents or legal guardians must also be notified.

The new law will go into effect in 30 days.

Is that enough time?

It depends who you ask.

Watch: WBZ's Web Exclusive Debate On Question 2

Barnstable District Attorney Michael O'Keefe opposed the measure.

He said the state must set up a new system to adapt to the new law, including retraining officers. He said he didn't know if it was realistic to make the shift in so short a time.

"Who do they report that ticket to? Who is going to oversee that?" O'Keefe said.

"We have a Registry of Motor Vehicles in this state, but we don't have a registry of dope smokers yet, but apparently we will now," he said.

Supporters say it shouldn't be a big problem.

They claim police are already equipped to give out citations on a range of non-criminal offenses.

What changes will the new law bring?

Supporters claim it will save taxpayers $30 million in costs associated with marijuana arrests.

They believe the new law will also keep thousands of offenders from having a criminal record, which can make it harder to get a job, student loan or gain access to public housing.

"It's going to end the creation of thousands of new people being involved in the criminal justice system each year and refocus law enforcement resources on violent crime," said Whitney Taylor of the Committee for Sensible Marijuana Policy.

Critics, led by the state's 11 district attorneys, say it will lead to more drug abuse among young people.

They argue that marijuana is a gateway to harder drugs and that the marijuana available on the streets today is more potent than pot three decades ago.

They also say that existing state law already requires judges to dismiss charges and seal records for first-time offenders.

Are Other States Doing This?

Massachusetts is now the 12th state in the country to decriminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana.

View: A state-by-state map of marijuana laws

http://wbztv.com/local/marijuana.massachusetts.pot.2.857031.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
I predict OUI-drug related motor vehicle crashes skyrocket in this state due to this reckless initiative. Every pot head in Mass will be driving around stoned out of their minds, believing it's okay due to Question 2.

Hopefully the legislature intervenes and modifies the law but I'm not holding my breath.

Here's my solution:

Johnny Hophead: Sir, I know my car smells like marijuana. Can you just give me the ticket and I'll be on my way.

Officer: Negative. Step out the vehicle. I want to perform standard field sobriety tests with you.
 

·
At your six
Joined
·
209 Posts
The old days; joint in possession, bring em in, process them, turn them to rat on their friends, move up the chain and make a large bust.

In thirty days; joint in possession, here's your cite, have a nice day. Oh yeah, and thanks for the weed for our evidence locker.

This state is becoming more and more of a joke every day. It only makes you wonder...... what is next?

Just making it harder to get the bigger fish!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
461 Posts
I've tossed more weed than I have charged people with. That all ends (in thirty days) Even a little roach earns the stoner a ticket or whatever process is used to administer this BS. No breaks to anyone, you voted for it, here is your fine.
 

·
MassCops Angel
Joined
·
121,497 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Whats going to happen is you will give them a ticket and they
will come on MassCops and post on Ask A Cop asking all of
their dumb questions,they will ask for a magistrates hearing and
it will get tossed.Or they will not pay the fine and it will stop them
from renewing their license or registration if they have one to start
with.
 
G

·
I predict OUI-drug related motor vehicle crashes skyrocket in this state due to this reckless initiative. Every pot head in Mass will be driving around stoned out of their minds, believing it's okay due to Question 2.
People always will, regardless of the laws being enforced (not that I encourage it). Plus everyone knows its easier to drive stoned than drunk.

Driving drunk = swerving all over the place, speeding, blowing through red lights, potentially crashing, injuring/killing other people... The funny thing is this deadly substance IS legal.

Driving stoned = driving the speed limit or 5 mph under it, obeying all the laws of the road because your paranoid that every car behind you is a cop.

Have you even heard of someone killing another motorist because they were stoned? I think not.
 

·
Zombie Hunter
Joined
·
4,815 Posts
They claim police are already equipped to give out citations on a range of non-criminal offenses.
Not non-criminal offenses that require confiscation, testing and storage of an illegal substance. How can we really prove its pot without lab testing? Do we have to bring the pot to court as evidence to fight civil tickets?

I'm with Delta on this one; you sh*t your pants Massachusetts, you sit in it. Because of the near-impossibility of current testing methods to prove OUI drugs, I certainly won't be trying to arrest people for that. Smoke all the pot you want, run down a few pedestrians on your way to BK, and total your car, I couldn't care less.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
461 Posts
. Smoke all the pot you want, run down a few pedestrians on your way to BK, and total your car, I couldn't care less.[/QUOTE]

By doing that "they" win. I say they want a civil fine, cite em all. If every cop wrote everyone for all possessions the system (whatever they come up with) will be overwhelmed. I could care less about where the fines go but I bet it would not be long before people would be second guessing themselves on this.
A new court or hearing officer maybe needed to handle all the cites. Lets see how much money that saves the Commonwealth!

I'm tired of being the whipping boy of the state and trying to balance the budget on the backs of the police, cut details, cut community police OT, reduce funding for police training, target the quinn bill for FY-09.

Sorry for the rant climbing off my soap box, maybe I need to smoke a doobie to lighten up. Well a least we have a new president, Oh that did not work out to well either.
 
G

·
Have you even heard of someone killing another motorist because they were stoned? I think not.
If I made a spectrum of stupid:

<____________________________________________________________>

Myspace....... . . Democrats........ . Question 2 ....... . Democrats. ............ Oprah

Your post would beeee
<---- Thataway
 

·
Zombie Hunter
Joined
·
4,815 Posts
Arrest them for OUI-drugs, cause you know every nitwit is going think it is legal under an ounce and they will undoubtly tells us that they smoked weed.
Sure, then try to prove impaired operation in court. What FST's are you going to perform, because pot effects the body differently then alcohol. How exactly are you, scientifically, going to prove the amount of THC in this person's body interferes with their ability to operate a vehicle. There is no PBT or infra-red breath test for pot. Arresting someone is only half the battle, a couple of tossed cases and you could be looking at a lawsuit for false arrest.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
253 Posts
The true merit of this law change will come with the new case law. I could be wrong but I could not think of any civil infraction in this state that gives us the right to search a motor vehicle and occupants. As long as the smell of weed is still PC to search I don't give a rats ass about this law change...I used to give about 90% of people breaks for small amount of weed anyways so now I will be writing them (hoping for that judges appeal).
 
G

·
I say they want a civil fine, cite em all.
And who is going to shag my calls when I'm tied up half the night, logging alleged marijuana into evidence so it can be tested, all for a pissy civil fine that's probably going to be bagged anyway?

If every cop wrote everyone for all possessions the system (whatever they come up with) will be overwhelmed. I could care less about where the fines go but I bet it would not be long before people would be second guessing themselves on this.
The courts' response will be to simply dismiss the cases as soon as the appeals arrive.
 
G

·
I can't believe this stupid question passed yesterday. What a nightmare it's going to be, and what ticks me off the most is that the dealers -- the real scumbags in the equation -- are not going to lose any business at all. In fact, they're probably laughing their heads off right now that all the dumbasses voted "yes" on this.

I voted "no" on it, for the record. I may be a dumass in many ways, but I wasn't in this case.

Good luck to everyone who has to deal with this.
 
1 - 20 of 1295 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top