Concord Monitor Says House Was Right to Pass HB 1623
Today (3/20) we received another awesome endorsement from the major media, this time from the Concord Monitor! More info will be posted soon on how we will be approaching the Governor and the Senate, so stay tuned!
(If you enjoy reading articles like this in New Hampshire newspapers, please support NH Common Sense by clicking the yellow rectangle to your right and making a small, medium, or large donation. We spent every dime we had getting this bill through the house, but our work is obviously far from complete! Thanks!)
House right to reduce marijuana penalties
Forty years ago, Harvard psychology professor Lester Grinspoon, alarmed
at the widespread use of marijuana, set out to write a scientific paper
that would definitively prove that the drug was harming its young
users. Here is what he found:
"By 1971 . . . I knew that far more
harmful than any psychopharmacological property of this substance was
the way we as a society were dealing with its use. While marijuana is,
in fact, remarkably free of toxicity, the consequence of annually
arresting 300,000 young people were not."
We'll leave it to the scientists to
decide issues like toxicity, but 60 years have passed since the United
States made possession of marijuana illegal and the evidence is clear.
As the young sponsors of a bill that passed the New Hampshire House
Tuesday articulated, the consequences of an arrest for even a minute
amount of marijuana are serious and can have repercussions for decades.
People convicted of possessing marijuana
face a year in jail and a lifetime criminal record that could make it
difficult to get some jobs. They also lose their eligibility for
federal financial aid, a ban that could make attending college
difficult and more costly. The punishment, particularly when it is so
often given to young people whose judgment is not yet fully formed, is
greatly out of proportion with the crime.
The bill makes possession of a quarter
ounce of marijuana or less a violation punishable by a $200 fine and
confiscation of the drug. It does not legalize marijuana or change the
penalties for larger quantities, manufacturing or sale.
At least 11 states have decriminalized
the possession of a small amount of marijuana, generally one ounce or
less. Oregon did so in 1973. Studies in those states suggest that
marijuana usage increases only slightly or not at all. In Great
Britain, in fact, after marijuana was decriminalized in 2004, usage
went down - the theory being that the drug lost some of its allure for
rebellious youth because of its new status.
It makes no sense to make criminals of
young people prone to experiment with a drug most experts consider much
safer than alcohol. That's no argument for legalizing marijuana, but it
is cause to rethink the state's criminal penalties.
Driving while impaired, whether by
alcohol, marijuana or some other drug, remains a problem. And if
incidents increase as the result of the bill's passage, or if marijuana
use by the young increases, the law can be repealed.
That's unlikely to be necessary. Gov.
John Lynch has already threatened to veto the bill. And he probably
won't even have to. Taking his lead, Senate Democrats have already
indicated they're likely to kill it.
It takes courage for politicians to vote
for a bill that gives their opponents an easy target - even a bill that
could remove an obstacle between some teens and college. It's no
surprise that Lynch raced to stop this debate before it got much
further.


