de-emphasizing marijuana offenses borders on the nonsensical.
In November, Missoula County voters passed Initiative 2, calling on authorities to consider criminal offenses involving adults with marijuana the lowest law-enforcement priority.
It's much ado about nothing.
Initiative 2 says authorities should make “citations, arrests, property seizures and prosecutions for adult marijuana offenses Missoula County's lowest law enforcement priority.” What does that even mean?
Laws are laws. They aren't ranked. Some laws seem more important than others. Victimless drug offenses certainly seem less important than most. But relative importance, perceived or explicitly stated in the voting booth, has no practical effect. So long as a law remains on the books, it's enforceable.
Jaywalking is nobody's idea of a criminal menace and surely rests near the bottom of everyone's list of law-enforcement priorities. But that doesn't mean jaywalking's OK or the law is unenforceable. Try jaywalking in front of a police cruiser not otherwise racing to some other crime if you think otherwise.
County Attorney Fred Van Valkenburg says he's loathe to disregard the public's will as expressed on Election Day, so he feels compelled to make adult marijuana offenses his lowest priority. Given the case load in his office, that means not prosecuting most of those marijuana cases. That's a judgment call he's free to make, but it's a judgment, not a requirement. He really needn't feel overly constrained - except to the extent that he worries his handling of these cases will harm his own election prospects. We'd trust voters to reward good judgment.
By necessity, we have to give police and prosecutors discretion in enforcing laws. They simply can't do it all. Yet, as time and circumstances warrant, they are expected to address every violation of the law they can. Surely each officer and attorney is guided to some degree by his or her own sense of priorities, as well as that of their employer. But nothing in Initiative 2 bars enforcement of marijuana laws in Missoula County. Initiative 2 seems unlikely to aid in any suspect's defense in court. The county attorney retains all the latitude he needs to prosecute, say, felony marijuana offenses, which he believes were lumped in with misdemeanors by mistake under the initiative.
People who want to decriminalize marijuana offenses took the wrong route with Initiative 2. They need to repeal state law. People worried that Initiative 2 will undermine law enforcement are making too much of the measure. Its declaration of priorities is toothless, verging on nonsensical.
|
 |
 |
Add your comment now! Write your comment in the form below.
(Email address is for verification only. If you'd like to email a story, look for the link above)