New pot law may make small difference in percentage charged
VANCOUVER, Wash. – Clark County prosecutors plan on dismissing more than 40 misdemeanor marijuana cases that aren't through the court system by Dec. 6. That's when a new law passed by voters earlier this month takes effect.
Right now having less than an ounce of pot could get you three months in jail and a thousand dollar fine in Clark County. But some wonder why not just make pot legal today?
"If they did something that now will be legal, and they're in the court system, I think they should let them off," said Becky Merrit who voted for I-502. "Our court system is so backed up now, and the money we would save by letting them go now, I think is worth it."
But jails may not be as full of small-time drug criminals as some think.
"I think it's accurate to say that's a myth," said chief deputy prosecutor John Fairgrieve whose misdemeanor drug cases are a small part of his load. "Often the marijuana is found during a search related to an arrest of an individual. So really, they're usually connected to some other charge," he said.
Only about four percent of the misdemeanor charges filed by Clark County prosecutors this year were strictly for someone having an ounce or less of pot. Those are the cases that could be dropped under the new law.
For example, in arraignment court Tuesday, there were a number of people being charged with possession and other crimes, but only one who was arraigned only on pot possession.
But big operations like the "Gang-Green" bust last October, which resulted in the arrest of more than 50 people, will still happen. Prosecutors and the regional drug task force will still go after those.
Additionally, recreational users are not entirely above the law either. The new law doesn't make it OK to, for example, drive under the influence. If you're driving erratically and police pull you over and you have less than an ounce of marijuana on you, you won't be charged for that, but you could be charged for other things.
Washington Gov. Chris Gregoire's trip to Washington, D.C. Tuesday revealed no clues about how the federal government will handle the new marijuana law.
The governor met with Deputy Attorney General James Cole to discuss Initiative 502. She said the government hasn't decided whether to try and block the law either in Washington or in Colorado.
Gregoire asked for a response soon since Washington has already started the process to enact 502.
It's pretty disingenuous to use a 4% then the actual case load.  In Clark County district court there is 56,000 cases in 2011 which would make about 2,300 cases that would not even been in the docket.  It equates to about 3-4 days of work for all the people involved in that one county.
This is also only 4% OF MISDEMEANOR charges, not ALL charges. Â There is a large population that this statement just ignores, which happens to be the ones that actually go to prison on FELONY charges.
Next you must ask what would 4% of a state budget be saved, considering they argue of 1% savings and expenditures.  The entire budget last year was 75 billion, for courts it was smaller but even the smallest percent you will be saving MILLIONS if not more.
Lastly this is ONE COUNTY worth. Â Washington has 39 counties, so that means a possible 39 times more cases or (2,300 * 39) or 89,700 cases state wide per year just for the misdemeanor charges.
With a number close to a 100,000 cases  a year you could see why someone might ignore that and say the much smaller sounding 4%.
Look it up your self (and for your poor journalists)
http://www.clark.wa.gov/courts/district/
http://fiscal.wa.gov/FRViewer.aspx?Rpt=Recast%20History%20Expenditure%20Agency%20Detail
Â
That is pretty raw math. Clark Co has a population of 425 K. You have counties with populations from 3900 to 1.9 million. Perhaps determine the percentage of 425K to the total population and extrapolate that statewide. Just a thought.Â
 @Brownknight I agree, that's why I invited anyone interested to check the links themselves.  The varied nature from county to county in population and percentage saved would result in a different and more than likely higher number as I tend to be conservative in estimation.
I really doubt that. Since they only came up with 40 charges. Most pot misdemeanors are cite and release situations. The actuality is that cops have been treating pot like an MIP for years. "Dump the stuff young man and wise up". It's when they say things like, "Fawk yew, pig" that they sometimes inspire the officer to whip out the trusty pen and mighty citation. We really do not have a wharehouse of people that are jailed for smoking pot. On the otherhand there are a large number of criminals, such as thieves, burglars, car thieves, etc. that also smoke pot. I do not believe you are endorsing thier release.
 @Secrets AmongUs "It equates to about 3-4 days of work for all the people involved in that one county." Yes, but that is 3-4 days out of a total of more than 250 days for the entire year -- so the savings, the difference in man-hours, is not that great. I think this is the deputy prosecutor's point.
 @felines99  @Secrets AmongUs   I will do the math for you since you seem unable.  75 billion is the entire states budget.  A percentage of that is administrative cost, say with 10% being 7.5 billion dollars and you take 1 - 245/250 or 2% of 7.5 billion you get $150 MILLION in savings.   That's assuming just a 2% decrease, not a 4%, and only 10% admin court costs, not jail fees, LEO wages, etc involved.Â
How is saving MILLIONS not great?Â
Â
 @Secrets AmongUs My math is just fine. And I could say the same thing about you -- you are "dead set already in your opinion" as well. Admit it.
 @felines99  @Secrets AmongUs I figured I wouldn't be able to reach you as you are dead set already in your opinion regardless of facts.  I just wonder what you think of the government shutdowns which only last a day and only target small offices but yet still save money.   How does that work?  It's the same way I explained if you don't understand it, perhaps it's you that should recheck your math.
 @Secrets AmongUs  @felines99 I am not addressing the other statistics you offered. I am addressing only your statement which I quoted, showing that the 3-4 days are part of a much larger 250 days. So my math is just fine, thank you. Why don't you work on your arrogance, and your reading comprehension???
4 percent of misdemeanor charges is a huge number, just in Clark County, let alone the entire state (and country). Courts, DAs, and police hours are not cheap. Â Taxpayers will save millions of dollars. Â Add to that the tax revenue. Â Washington is going to look brilliant 10 years from now. Â Will there be problems? Â Sure, but all those people causing problems already have as much pot as they want, so why not save and raise tax dollars.
dont count these people we have in jail right now, the new law doesnt apply to that many people in jail.. no no dont count these people. Stop counting them. Another bias report with a hint a news. good work!
Pot addicteds lied... There wont be much money saved in the court system.
 @sortbait There are some folks (I'll use you as just one example, more because you make your ignorance so blatantly obvious every time you comment on this topic than for any other reason) whose minds are set in concrete and don't want to be bothered by the facts.  Oh, never mind . . . why bother?  It won't change a thing. Â
Lesson to self: Curing the intentionally ignorant is an exercise in futility.
What I want to know is how are the LEO's going to test drivers for being under the influence of pot?????
Field testing is becoming more common. Not all officers are DRE trained (Drug Recognition Expert), but the numbers are on the increase.
 @BrownknightÂ
Â
Yes that is correct but I think the question is actually HOW will LEO backup their accusations with PROOF e.g. science; like the breathalyzer. It is easy to reasonably suspect a driver of drinking but without the scientific evidence provided by a blood test or breathalyzer the testimony is just hearsay. And, everyone knows cops will lie their asses off to get a conviction so even the court has a minimum standard of proof that they require from cops.
@Icarus Just like they do now. Demonstration of impairment, video/audio recording. Sometimes a urine sample. It's actually more intensive than a DUII stop and a pain in the tukus. But I can't tell you all the secrets. They would send out the black vans and kill me.
Â
@Icarus @Brownknight Yes this is actually the concern of many people who voted against it. Since weed can stay in your system for a long time how do you prove someone is stone when you pull them over? What is the limit of being stoned and driving?I fear it will be many lost lives before laws are written to answer these questions. Stoners please move to Washington. I'd gladly by you a box of twinkies to move.
@kramr you act as if LEO's haven't been around pot since the 1960s. It's not like marijuana was just invented.
 @kramr They are going to set a box of Twinkies in front of them and see how many they eat.
@Pointblank  Okay....that was funny.
The police state has spoken and the parasitation of the public shall continue....
@2easy2berightback what?
@Playanekes The police state parasites that feed off of the public by way of tickets,fines,fees,and asset forfeiture.  "I noticed you were not wearing a seatbelt.... Oh welll you dont mind if I search your car then do you.... "
The bottom line is that this law will not make any difference in the number of people in jail. It was never about being put in prison for smoking some weed. That was just a lie the pro marijuana folks dreamed up in their drug induced psychosis to fool the ignorant public.
 @RalphCramden It could lead to offenders taking up less prison space. Cultivating marijuana can put you in prison. If the state takes over production less people will have to cultivate marijuana illegally. Drug psychosis? It's apparent you're thinking of other types of drugs.
 @Funky-MunkyÂ
Read my post above. It gives the definition of a drug induced psychosis.
Â
Once the law takes effect the state will require a tax on it. If someone is growing pot without paying the tax then they will be arrested for tax evasion. Either way they will be in trouble with the law.
 @Icarus  @Funky-MunkyÂ
The government is waiting till the drug companies get up to speed so they can sell pot. Government knows they can get the tax money from the drug companies and the drug companies are large enough to produce large quantities.
 @Funky-Munky Â
Â
And, it's still illegal to grow so the only way to obtain your weed is still via illegal sources. So the will of the people remains frustrated and the law of prohibition which favors and creates a profit for illegal producers remains in effect.
 @RalphCramden I see you are basing everything solely on smoking and possession minimal amounts . Depending on amount possession can earn you some serious prison time. I have witnessed many earn Federal prison time involving possession. Drug psychosis is mainly a stimulant induced byproduct. Many have argued marijuana can trigger drug psychosis in individuals already prone to drug psychosis. I have read many articles contradicting to the claim marijuana can cause drug psychosis induced behavior. If you look hard enough there's conflicting information pro or negative marijuana. My thoughts are drug psychosis is caused strictly from stimulants such as methamphetamine, cocaine or other powder related drugs. Oh well, why are Oregonians even arguing Washington States new law? December 6, 2012 will be just like any other day pertaining to marijuana. There will only be the black market, providers and MMC holders in the mix. Legal marijuana being sold is the equivalent to buying a bong with no weed to smoke. You can legally have an ounce in possession but nowhere legal to buy it. It's a complete cluster flub. The Federal Government so far is laughing their butts off. Washington State officials will refuse to provide any licenses for as long as they can hold out. Could take several years before they even consider the peoples vote.
 @Funky-Munky Â
There is no one in jail for simple possession. It is a ticket, or book and release. No one goes to prison or jail for simple possession.
Â
Legalizing it will not reduce prison population as most are there for other reasons like trafficking and other criminal violations.
Â
Even if someone fails to show up in court for simple possession a warrant is issued and that isn't even a hold warrant unless it is a repeated violation and then the are not being held for  possession but for violation of a bench warrant.
Â
As for the drug induced psychosis see the post below my original post where I detail what drug induced psychosis is all about.
 @RalphCramden Sorry Ralph.... I just cannot see the logic involved in the above post you shared. You insinuated there wouldn't be a reduction in prison space involving offenders smoking marijuana. Those who smoke won't have to take the risk of cultivation thus eliminating the possibility of incarceration. Many who smoke grow their own and those who don't grow their own rely on the black market. Oh well, lost in translation I suppose.
@RalphCramden "drug induced psychosis." Well, after 20 years of playing rock music, and having a dad who has probably smoked it every day of my life, I have no idea where you come up with the of a marijuana-induced psychosis. I have never seen a thing, and am subsequently inclined to believe you're as much part of the "ignorant public" as anyone.
 @Playanekes @IcarusÂ
I want the government out of states business and could care less if pot is legalized or not.
Â
Pot causes altered mental status just like alcohol and other mind altering drugs. Altering the perception of reality is called psychosis. Even if it's a temporary condition. Psychosis does not mean permanent.
Â
Drug induced psychosis is a common term in emergency medicine. There is even an ICD9 code for it.
Â
Before you go off on your tangents better learn what the word means. It makes you look real stupid otherwise.
 @cantcurestupid    @Playanekes  @IcarusÂ
I have to try. It's my nature to educate if possible. As you know you can't cure stupid but you can fix ignorance. Unless the person is not teachable, then I guess they are classified as stupid.
@RalphCramden @Playanekes @Icarus Oh dont stop them from looking really stupid, its part of our entertainment! :)
 @Playanekes  @RalphCramdenÂ
Â
Ralph is like 80 years old and a reactionary conservative know-it-all afraid of the world; patronize him.
Â
The world is really a scary place, Ralph, stay indoors or the wolves will get you.
Can you imagine being the last person in WA convicted and sentenced for simple possession? What a lousy break - and inexcusable that the courts continue to waste time and energy on a losing cause.
Â
Sort of like being the last guy killed in WWI, one George Lawrence Price.Â
It's going to take a while to figure this all out. Will it be illegal to grow your own, or grow for others? Do you have to purchase it through the state?
 @Lips It's already state legal for providers to grow for MMC holders. I am not sure about what will happen to the medical marijuana aspect when legalization goes into effect. The state will provide licenses and everyone else will be forbidden to grow their own without a state license. In addition we will be working on establishing a law that only Washington State residents will only be allowed to purchase marijuana through a state facility.
@Lips  What i understand is that the state will choose the growers (likely, the rights to be the growers will be sold by the state) and it will be illegal to grow your own. As long as the quality is good, I would buy the legal stuff.
 @scared_citizenÂ
Â
"What i understand is that the state will choose the growers..."
Â
That is exactly why any law passed for recreational use needs to include a "Home grower Provision"...unlicensed and undocumented...to allow growing for personal use. The state has a great interest in replacing the cartels as the suppliers of pot.Â
Â
Without an absolutely "free" home grower provision the cops would have a virtual "probable cause" license to search any home at any time to search for a grow operation or to verify compliance with home grow laws. Â Licensing and registration would compound this issue because they could search at anytime to verify compliance and the home grower would be a natural enemy of the State because the state would see the home grow operation as competition. Â
Â
Yep, Lips, that's how I read it. Smokers can't legally grow their own and the only place to buy it is from illegal sources; in fact, considering the consequences of growing at home it would be stupid to do so as opposed to just buying on the street; therefore, the demand for illegal weed increases.
Â
Nothing has changed; prohibition remains and the advantage remains with the cartels because they have no competition and people are prevented from growing their own and there is no other source to undercut the cartel profits; therefore, the profit margins are preserved for illegal producers and demand will increase.
Â
Makes it easier to be a petty middleman as long as she doesn't carry more than an ounce at a time which suggests that distribution will increase.
Â
 @Icarus  @scared_citizen And that's just part of it. There's also the fact that thousands of people already have their own network established, that doesn't include Mexican cartels. From a social standpoint, it would be like giving up your long time barber, grocer, doctor, mechanic., etc. Not to mention those that supplement their income with small clusters of people they grow for. Weed wasn't discovered yesterday. There's already a working system that the states only involvement has been to prosecute and jail ''offenders''. Sounds like they aren't intending on really giving that part up, they'll just be going after their competitors, instead.
Ahhhh! A voice of reason! How refreshing!
Â
@Lips @Brownknight  Since you can only have up to an ounce in your possession, it would have to be a SMALL grow operation and that would certainly be as "under the radar" as it is now.
 @Brownknight I thought it was going to be more along the lines of alcohol. When I want a six pack or a bottle of vodka, I go to the store. But my brother and my son brew really good beer. When I go to their houses, we sample their beers and usually take some home. During large gatherings, they always bring a bunch. I don't want to see people skirting the taxes, and don't think most will, but don't want it to be illegal to grow or share within your social group. That would be sad. Especially if the price is jacked up. This is something I've talked of before.. will legal be more restrictive? Because as this story shows, and my own personal history shows, weed laws are so lax, I almost wouldn't mess with them, if it's going to be like tobacco where they start out 75 cents a pack and once the state has total control they climb to 8 bucks a pack, 75% tax... uh, no thanks. All reasons why I'm glad Oregon didn't pass theirs. The way it was written, it would have cost me double (or more) annually, and been ten times the work.
 @Lips Now there is one, the state selling it, that could explain the taxes they plan to impose.
I am confused. Do you advocate not controlling it at all? Let people make lots of undocumented money distributing this while still collecting financial support from the backs of others that work for a living? What has changed? Oh yeah, we do not hold them responsible.Â
@Playanekes That's your answer? Tax the income from pot or not tax it and let people continue making money under the table. That is the question before you. So you choose to turn this into a personal attack?
@Brownknight "I am confused. Do you advocate not controlling it at all?" You're thinking like a Nanny State tax-everything liberal socialist but you probably consider yourself a conservative. That's likely the source of your confusion.