*

*
Today at the Forum
Opinions from members of the Enquirer Editorial Board


David Wells,
Editorial Page Editor


Ray Cooklis,
Assistant Editorial Editor


Krista Ramsey,
Editorial Writer


Dennis Hetzel, General Manager,
Kentucky Enquirer/NKY.Com


Jim Borgman,
Editorial Cartoonist



Powered by Blogger

Friday, October 05, 2007

New Marijuana Law Exacerbates Jail Problem

In March of this year I, along with Vice Mayor Tarbell, cast the two lone votes against an ordinance that criminalized the possession of small amounts of marijuana. Just to be clear the vote in March of 2007 made the law permanent after it was instituted on a trial basis the year before—a decision I also opposed. Though many who claimed I was being soft on crime viewed my position as unpopular at the time—I stand by my vote. In fact the recent debate over the new jail plan only affirms in my mind that I made the right decision.

My position on the matter is not a philosophical statement about illegal drugs by any means. As a politician I am happy to “go out on a limb” and say that I am against the buying, selling, trafficking and use of illegal drugs. They hurt those who use them and the families and friends who care about those involved with illegal drugs. Rather my position on the matter of criminalizing small amounts of marijuana is a practical one.

Unfortunately throughout the City many violent offenders are arrested on a regular basis for a myriad of heinous offenses. The reality is that many of them are let out of prison early because of a shortage of jail space. Given this problem it makes little sense to me to pass a law, or rather make a law permanent, which inevitably will crowd our jails with non-violent offenders. Generally I view those caught with less than 200 grams of marijuana as less violent that those who are caught with large amounts and are likely trafficking for example. This also applies to those who commit more serious crimes such as rape, robbery, or assault with a deadly weapon.

This logic is a big part of the movement in the 60’s, which sought to decriminalize small amounts of marijuana. I would rather spend our limited resources going after those trafficking the drugs on a large scale. These are the folks most likely to be involved in violent activities in the first place.

Regardless of your position on the matter of the new safety plan, which includes a tax increase, I do believe that there is a jail space problem in Hamilton County. It is incumbent upon us as City leaders to help the problem in the short term. One way we can do this is by focusing our enforcement activities on finding the most violent criminals and making sure they are locked up for long periods of time.


6 Comments:

at 7:04 AM, October 06, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Agree 100%. People look for bogeymen and pot is a reliable one, albeit 20-30 yrs. out of date. And that's the real issue I would address.

Cincinnatians are part of a larger country (!!) and as a whole, we manage illegal drug prosecutions very badly. This includes locking up users and small fish, and even confiscating their property (!!) while the big ones get away or help our government finance wars (Iran-Contra). That's not meant to be a cynical, provocative statement, just a short, compact one since these posts need to be limited.

Maybe we feel better when we lock people up, but in fact, a wrist slap, a fine, and the most damaging thing of all, a record; all of these are enough-along with some scared straight follow up.

I'd like to think our Council members were being typical politicians and pandering to public sentiment rather than being sincere when they handed this down, and even that's sort of a sad statement.

Take away drivers' licenses on the first DUI if you want to make an impact on public safety. As part of their rehabilitation and community service, they should get free public transportation for as long as they need it, and be forced to attend community discussions on a new transit system.

OK, I spun off topic, but did I really?

 
at 8:43 AM, October 08, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

One way we can do this is by focusing our enforcement activities on finding the most violent criminals and making sure they are locked up for long periods of time.

You acknowledge that there is a jail space problem and in the same breath you say that violent criminals should be locked up as a short-term solution to the jail space problem.

Does anyone else see the flaw in that logic?

 
at 7:07 AM, October 11, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Additional comment to supplement my thoughts on taking away DLs after first DUI. These comments are born of a couple of close calls I've had in the last couple of days.

Talking on cell phones while driving, and violation of basic rules of the road such as passing at high speed in the right lane, and of course, going above speed limits on suburban streets are constants, these days, and in the last two days, I've had so many close calls, it's hard to believe.

I'm semi-retired, (not age related) with a bit more time than most, and I'll say this: if I am the victim of someone else's violation of law or flagrant disregard for rules of the road (especially drunk driving) I will work ceaselessly to have the perpetrator prosecuted in whatever ways available in the circumstances. I will make a cause of it: sorry somebody's gotta go down. No friendly handshakes while avoiding insurance claims (wink, wink). And no, I don't want your cell phone number for follow up to fix that ding. You might call me from your car and the next victim might that favorite of ours: a child.

Extreme? Maybe. Mean? Nope, I understand why it happens and feel sad, but I won't look the other way. I believe that this society overlooks HUGE problems perpetrated by the middle class, while making big noises about locking up people who're basically guilty of what should be misdemeanors (back to the marijuana subject).

Sorry to rant, but I just couldn't believe what I've observed in the last couple of days, and I am serious about my vow.

 
at 12:54 PM, October 11, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Passing the right on roads wide enough for two or more lanes moving in the same direction is not illegal in Ohio.

Let's stick to the marijuana, mmmkay?

 
at 7:45 PM, October 11, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks for the info but I knew that. I admit to a rant which may not have been clear vis-a-vis legality vs. good driving habits. You're not supposed to drive at high speeds for a long time in someone's blind spot (right lane) weaving and dodging and itching to pass, and sometimes doing it on a curve. That's reckless and could result in an accident very easily.

Anyway, I didn't have my rant while I was smokin' the pot....:D

 
at 7:59 AM, October 12, 2007 Anonymous Anonymous said...

Maybe if we had light rail it wouldn't be as much of an issue.

Oh, but that's another debate.

 
Post a Comment*

* Our online blogs currently are hosted and operated by a third party, namely, Blogger.com. You are now leaving the Cincinnati.Com website and will be linked to Blogger.com's registration page. The Blogger.com site and its associated services are not controlled by Cincinnati.Com and different terms of use and privacy policy will apply to your use of the Blogger.com site and services.

By proceeding and/or registering with Blogger.com you agree and understand that Cincinnati.Com is not responsible for the Blogger.com site you are about to access or for any service you may use while on the Blogger.com site. << Home


Blogs
Jim Borgman
Today at the Forum
Paul Daugherty
Politics Extra
N. Ky. Politics
Pop culture review
Cincytainment
Who's News
Television
Roller Derby Diva
Art
CinStages Buzz....
The Foodie Report
cincyMOMS
Classical music
John Fay's Reds Insider
Bengals
High school sports
NCAA
UC Sports
CiN Weekly staff
Soundcheck