Somerville rocks, so why does our Mayor oppose Question 2?

[ron_newman]

Somerville has a well-deserved image of being a haven for offbeat and creative types, so I'm confused and disappointed to see Mayor Joe take part in a press conference opposing Question 2.

As the city's press release itself points out, "Question 2 would decriminalize marijuana use and make possession of small amounts of marijuana punishable only with a fine similar to a traffic violation." (Actually, the police can also seize the marijuana.) That seems to me like just plain common sense. It saves the city money by not wasting police and court time on prosecuting a victimless "crime".

The campaigners against Question 2 call themselves the "Coalition for Safe Streets", but this question has nothing to do with either safety or streets.

Why did you do this, Mayor Joe?

Comments

[purpless77.livejournal.com]

I'm so proud to say I voted for him. If he was for question 2 he would DEFINITELY lose myself and many others as his supporters. Marijuana IS a serious drug and should be treated as such. It might not cause death by one use of unlaced marijuana but in many people it does cause serious lasting illnesses such as panic attacks, anxiety, etc. Which ARE serious. It's almost like cigarettes. It harms some but can leave others unharmed. There are many marijuana smokers who admit it as a gateway drug and an addictive drug. We need to start putting the well being of people in front of "saving money". They're already too leniant on marijuana smokers and dealers.
I'm against it and Kudos to our mayor.

[ron_newman]

I voted for Mayor Joe too, and will likely do so again, as I'm not a single-issue voter.

"It harms some but can leave others unharmed" can apply to lots of things -- drinking alcohol, skateboarding, downhill skiing, climbing Mount Washington, etc.

LiveJournal is addictive and can cause anxiety. Should we penalize it?

[magid.livejournal.com]

Out of curiosity, if you see marijuana as similar to tobacco cigarettes, do you think they should be illegal too?

[exsplusohs.livejournal.com]

Was just wondering the same thing.

[sonofabish.livejournal.com]

All "drugs" are serious- alcohol, marijuana, caffeine, aspirin, and have the potential of negative side effects. I'm addicted to my morning coffee and if I don't have at least 2 cups to get my caffeine fix, I am not at all pleasant to be around and I then develop blinding headaches and stomach cramps from withdrawal.

So by your standards, caffeine should be outlawed as a physically and psychologically addictive substance.

Which is silly. It's my body and I should be allowed my morning cup or two of Joe. Who's it hurting?

Why not the same for marijuana? If a person wants to sit in the privacy of his or her own home, smoke a bowl, and huddle in a corner with candles lit contemplating their belly button, who is it hurting?

I dare you to find me one single credible source that shows marijuana to be anywhere near as dangerous as alcohol in terms of deaths directly related to the substance- either through overdoses/poisoning, criminal assault/murder, or driving while impaired.

You can't.

For the police to spend their time and resources hunting down harmless stoners who aren't a threat to anything except a bag of Doritos and divert their efforts from more serious transgressions against the law- drunk drivers, burglers, rapists, gangs- to me is a very skewed sense of priorities.

[prunesnprisms.livejournal.com]

You totally left out refined sugar.

[sonofabish.livejournal.com]

and crack- I left out crack as well. Silly me....

[arrowintwolakes.livejournal.com]

Ok there, troll. Do you have a rotary phone too? Do you still wear hats out of doors? Must suck to be you, friend.

[ron_newman]

I sometimes wear hats outdoors, so I find this uncalled for.

[dylanesque29.livejournal.com]

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06339/743649-114.stm

Not necessarily, as evidenced from the above link. I think marijuana totally sucks, but I don't think that possession of small amounts of it warrants years of jail time. It creates an undue burden on our already incredibly broken court system, and diverts attention away from more serious crime, and fighting the factors that contribute to crime in the first place.

[duffless2323.livejournal.com]

While I respect you for being ballsy enough to voice a possibly unpopular opinion, I have to say that I find your viewpoint short sighted and lacking in logic and evidence. Talk of laced pot is just fear mongering based on what I'm guessing is anecdotal evidence at best. Like I said, I'm all for people having opinions contrary to my own, but if your goal is for people o consider yourself you might find it useful to use evidence to make your case instead of what came across as an ill informed fear based rant.