San Francisco to effectively legalize Marijuana

[C10H12N2O]

San Francisco's Board of Supervisors will vote today on legislation that would set nearly all crimes involving marijuana as the lowest law enforcement priority for city police.

The legislation, sponsored by Supervisor Tom Ammiano, was approved Monday by a board committee with the blessing of police officials and over the complaints of some residents.

"This measure, which would legalize the unlimited growth and sales (of marijuana) on private property, will make public spitting and (leaving chewing) gum ... on the sidewalk higher priorities," said Kim Stryker, voicing opposition before the supervisors' City Operations and Neighborhood Services Committee.

Ammiano introduced the legislation in August at the behest of groups pushing for the national decriminalization of marijuana. He defended the policy move, saying it is consistent with Proposition W, a measure passed in 1976 by city voters calling for an end to marijuana arrests and prosecutions, and state Prop. 215, which provides for medical use of cannabis.

"There are many better ways that we can be using our tax dollars and empowering our law enforcement than wasting money and police resources on marijuana offenses," Ammiano said. "This ordinance would allow San Francisco to join other forward-thinking cities. It will not result in San Francisco becoming Amsterdam West."

Under the proposed legislation, police would be directed to essentially ignore most marijuana crimes unless they involve minors or acts of violence, driving under the influence or the sale or distribution of pot on public property or within view from public property.

San Francisco Police Capt. Tim Hedrick, head of the department's narcotics squad, said Ammiano's legislation is consistent with police policy on marijuana crimes. "It does not tie our hands enforcing the law," he told the committee.

But a number of residents protested the legislation, saying it will encourage crime and the use of harder drugs such as cocaine or heroin.

"It will undermine the efforts of people who live in marginal neighborhoods to make their neighborhoods safe, clean and peaceful," said Arthur Evans, a Haight-Ashbury resident. "This measure is an attack on the well-being of our neighborhoods. You should not throw obstacles in our way. You should help us to make San Francisco more safe and livable."

Supervisor Fiona Ma, a member of the committee hearing Ammiano's legislation, also spoke out against it, saying she believed it "establishes a new policy that has not been presented to the voters." Ma broke with Supervisor Jake McGoldrick, the committee's chairman, and Ammiano in voting against the legislation Monday.

Although the city doesn't track marijuana arrests and prosecutions, the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws has said that more than 1,000 people were arrested in cases involving the drug in 2004.

Dale Gieringer of the California chapter of the organization said cities that have adopted a lax policy toward marijuana have not seen it contribute to crime -- which is an argument activists make for legalization of marijuana under federal law.

"We have to start somewhere, and we have to act locally," he said.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl.../11/14/POT.TMP



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SAN FRANCISCO
Supes to vote on easing of marijuana laws
Opponents predict increase in crime, use of harder drugs
Charlie Goodyear, Chronicle Staff Writer

Tuesday, November 14, 2006


[edited format for FP]

[GABAlover]

I'm moving to SF

[Bauer095]

any word on how likely this one is to pass?

also an update later in the day when the polls have closed would be great

[nuke]

If only it was acid.

[hereliesclarity]

Go SF!

[Trogdor]

And I suppose then seattle, who's lowest police priority is marijuana, must therefore be the city with the highest crime rate in the united states. Or at least, that's what I'm led to believe by this article.

[kevz]

If your going to San Francisco be sure to wear some flowers in your hair...

[JuicyJay]

I hope that spitting in public thing was a joke. This is very good news. I believe that trafficking A LOT of any drug should be illegal. I believe that an ounce is a perfect amount for a personal stash. With being able to grow on private property, that is just begging for people to be selling pounds and pounds. People very well may rob these plants and end up getting shot. I don't think this proposition is a very thought out one.

"Marijuana could lead to the use of harder drugs like cocaine and heroin" The people who would actually care that this passed, are ALREADY STONERS. If they do hard drugs now, then they would do them before this passed. It may encourage younger people to smoke with no fear of getting arrested.

I just think there are so many things wrong with the proposition and if it gets passed I'll be shocked.

[sciencedj]

I hope that spitting in public thing was a joke.

This is not a joke. They also crack down on jaywalkers!

[JuicyJay]

That is horrible. "Don't walk out of these lines!" "Don't spit in public, it's unsanitary for the Earth!" "Don't chew leaves, it's gross"

At least a fine for having marijuana is reasonable, but Jay walking or spitting

[lyXw33d]

^what are you guys talking about?

...over the complaints of some residents.

"This measure, which would legalize the unlimited growth and sales (of marijuana) on private property, will make public spitting and (leaving chewing) gum ... on the sidewalk higher priorities," said Kim Stryker, voicing opposition before the supervisors' City Operations and Neighborhood Services Committee.

They don't want drug enforcement to have a lower priority than petty rule breaking like public spitting. But hey, fuck that, hope this gets passed.

[JuicyJay]

I misread that Good point! Still, it's against the law to spit in public, screw that!

[qwedsa]

I hope that spitting in public thing was a joke. This is very good news. I believe that trafficking A LOT of any drug should be illegal. I believe that an ounce is a perfect amount for a personal stash. With being able to grow on private property, that is just begging for people to be selling pounds and pounds. People very well may rob these plants and end up getting shot. I don't think this proposition is a very thought out one.

"Marijuana could lead to the use of harder drugs like cocaine and heroin" The people who would actually care that this passed, are ALREADY STONERS. If they do hard drugs now, then they would do them before this passed. It may encourage younger people to smoke with no fear of getting arrested.

I just think there are so many things wrong with the proposition and if it gets passed I'll be shocked.

young people smoking marijuana, what is the world coming to!?

[Astavats]

Be nice if this passes...maybe it would start encouraging others to "let loose" a little?

[Carlos The Elf]

it just passed

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...AGUAMCRCP5.DTL

[Bauer095]

Hooray!

Thanks for the update Carlos, my favorite part:

and urges the district attorney to adopt the same policy when prosecuting criminal defendants.

I remember when Denver's marijuana legislation passed last year and the very first thing they discussed in the news when it went through was how the state was immediately "strongly urging" Denver police to enforce state law and how little this would change things, etc.

I have faith that SF will do it right, as they have already shown they can, and this will be a positive step towards total legalization

Huzzah.

[New]

What joyous day! Kalloo, Kallay! This is a large step forward in a very large process.

[MasterOfDeception]

When will the results be known?

edit, oh, just saw the link, good news..

the 8-3 vote is supposed to mean a ratio of 8 pro - 3 against ?? percentages?

oh, it's just the council that voted, not everyone could vote as in Nevada..?


(excuse me i don't how it works in various american states)

[Submarine]

I can't believe some of those foolish people actually believe that legalizing marijuana will make their neighborhoods more dangerous. I mean what the hell.

[staypuft]

If this passes then it's a step in the right direction...thank fuck

[user99]

San Amsterdam? Maybe tomorrow ( as in a few decades ) probably

[Bauer095]

What joyous day! Kalloo, Kallay! This is a large step forward in a very large process.

Right you are, styrofoam products have been giving the food service industry a bad name for years, companies who make such products should be sued for environmental destruction

I mean...yay nugs

[EntheoDjinn]

As an outsider, who knows little of the due processes of US law, am I right in thinking that federal law will still allow the 'feds' to carry out prosecutions and impose harsh penalties for pot offences ? And can the US Govt. appeal this and attempt to reverse it?

Hope they don't - nice to see changes taking place . Too many people in US serving brutal sentences for what seems minor drug offences .

E

[ChemicalBeauty]

Seattle did this ages ago and in and of itself, it really doesn't mean shit unfortunately.

However it is one step closer to legalization

[Johnny1]

I think the non-drug-using public is slowly starting to figure out that marijuana is pretty benign. It's a great development.

I've always thought that the people who make money from pot being illegal - bar owners, alcohol makers/distributors, restauranteurs, police agencies, prison builders, prison guards - would fight like hell to stop any kind of legalization. Maybe they have decided they can coexist with pot, and that drinking combined with pot can feel pretty good.

Now the biggest hurdle is the people who would hope to control our lives to the fullest extent possible: organized religion.

If only it was acid.

What if everyone took acid and than voted on whether to go to war? But it would have to be the whole world for it to work, not just selected countries.