California Governor Signs Marijuana Decriminalization Bill
California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) Thursday signed into law a bill that decriminalizes the possession of up to one ounce of marijuana. The bill reduces simple possession from a misdemeanor to an infraction.
[image:1 align:left caption:true]Currently, small-time pot possession is "semi-decriminalized" in California. There is no possible jail sentence and a maximum $100 fine. But because possession is a misdemeanor, people caught with pot are "arrested," even if that means only they are served a notice to appear, and they must appear before a court.
That has happened to more than a half million Californians in the last decade, and more than 60,000 last year alone. Every one of them required a court appearance, complete with judge and prosecutor. That costs the cash-strapped state money it desperately needs.
Under the bill signed today, SB 1449, by Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco), marijuana possession will be treated like a traffic ticket. The fine will remain at $100, and there will be no arrest record.
In a signing statement, Schwarzenegger said he opposed decriminalization for personal use -- and threw in a gratuitous jab at Proposition 19, the tax and regulate marijuana legalization initiative -- but that the state couldn't afford the status quo.
"I am signing this measure because possession of less than an ounce of marijuana is an infraction in everything but name," said Schwarzenegger. "The only difference is that because it is a misdemeanor, a criminal defendant is entitled to a jury trial and a defense attorney. In this time of drastic budget cuts, prosecutors, defense attorneys, law enforcement, and the courts cannot afford to expend limited resources prosecuting a crime that carries the same punishment as a traffic ticket."
"Gov. Schwarzenegger deserves credit for sparing the state's taxpayers the cost of prosecuting minor pot offenders," said California NORML director Dale Gieringer. "Californians increasingly recognize that the war on marijuana is a waste of law enforcement resources."
The law goes into effect January 1. Even if Prop 19 passes in November, it leaves in place misdemeanor charges for smoking in public or in the presence of minors. Those misdemeanors would become infractions under the new law.
Comments
Good job Arnie
I guess he didn't have much choice. If he vetoed it, it would have infuriated a lot of people and made even more people go to the polls to vote yes on 19.
In reply to Good job Arnie by Ahnold (not verified)
Trying to prevent Prop19 turn out
And most of them would be young Democrats, and then the upcoming rout of Meg-alomaniac and Steve-Jobs impersonator, Fiorina, would be by even larger margins. This is a backburn to prevent the Prop 19 brush fire. Kinda like the Republicans putting an prayer-in-school prop or an anti-woman prop on the ballot when they need a reactionary/TeaParty turnout.
In reply to Trying to prevent Prop19 turn out by Cal Damage (not verified)
Cal,You do realize by now
Cal,
You do realize by now that there are more Republican politicians that oppose the drug war than there are Democrat politicians? The democratic party has abandoned its classic liberal ideology and moved to all-out authoritarian statism.
The repubs aren't much better, but there is definitely a libertarian streak in the Tea Party.
:D
Fantastic!
Infractions are cirmes, too.
"The only difference is that because it is a misdemeanor, a criminal defendant is entitled to a jury trial and a defense attorney. In this time of drastic budget cuts, prosecutors, defense attorneys, law enforcement, and the courts cannot afford to expend limited resources prosecuting a crime that carries the same punishment as a traffic ticket."
So now he just took away the right to counsel and jury trial on this.
Frankly, he should be lambasted for denying people their constitutional rights!
While I applaud the decriminalization, it has laid bare that bigger problem that MUST be addressed!
In reply to Infractions are cirmes, too. by Tannim (not verified)
I don't know the details, but
I don't know the details, but I'm sure all charges could be contested just like any traffic ticket can be contested. The main point is every offender won't be required to appear in court. Sounds great to me and I don't even use the stuff.
If I had to guess I'd say he
If I had to guess I'd say he did this to weaken support for prop 19.
This negates 2 of the bigger selling points of prop 19.
One of the biggest selling points is that it would stop the senseless arrests, and criminal records that were following people around for the rest of their lives for being caught with small amounts of marijuana.
The other big selling point negated by the signing of this bill is the wasting of money, and police resources.
As close as the vote is going to be on Prop 19 this bill could actually be detrimental to it.
In reply to If I had to guess I'd say he by massmang (not verified)
Prop 19 == no black market
You are missing THE BIGGEST selling point of prop 19 which is that it would pull the rug out from under the black market. Decriminalizing possession doesn't do that. Dealers and growers and mules are still going to risk jail and still charge the same amount and make the same profits. With prop 19, you can grow your own, which yes a lot of people will do because it's easy, it's a weed after all. Also you can just go down to the corner store and buy it. This bill will do nothing to reduce the size of the black market and the associated violence and cost to society.
In reply to Prop 19 == no black market by nobody (not verified)
Well...
Unfortunately we don't know quite yet how this bill will affect the organization of drug rings if it will at all. I would imagine, since I don't believe they have detailed enough statistics for me to check; that most violence regarding drugs would stem more from real narcotics, heroin especially.) When's the last you heard a new story about a pot grow that errupted in violence? I usually see a couple of 100+ pot bust stories a month at some point and those growers always come peacefully.
And sure weed is making money for gangs who sell but you can bet their guys on the corner selling marijuana got rocks in their pockets too. Most of the USA's weed comes from good ol' USA. Trafficers aren't going to risk bringing weed when they can bring a few small bricks of heroin that scores them 10s of thousands more then a trunk-load of smelly grass would.
Also take into consideration that the blackmarket for marijuana has a big percentage of non-gang affiliated individuals, i'm sure most people have known some guy or two or more that have sold some pot to supplement themselves alongside a job. With this new bill ounces(as in one at a time) can be moved much quicker and with no fear of getting caught and losing everything by being labeled a criminal and a drug user/dealer. It's not a lot to move at a time but I don't see how it won't slowly increase the saturation. Now i'm all for Prop 19, but the poll results are so close and Arnold is clever as hell with this move. As others have said a lot of people are satisfied with the tens of thousands of people getting tickets instead of jail and I see the precentage dropping before the vote for prop 19. Either way I see it as win/win for the green fans and hopefully this greased the cogs of the legislative branch a little. I bet we'll see many movements for legalization in the next year. The fire is lit.
I wonder where federal law comes into play in this.
I think I may have lost my original point somewhere in that mess of speculative opinion. But uh, I think it gets my point across.
In reply to Prop 19 == no black market by nobody (not verified)
Well...
Unfortunately we don't know quite yet how this bill will affect the organization of drug rings if it will at all. I would imagine, since I don't believe they have detailed enough statistics for me to check; that most violence regarding drugs would stem more from real narcotics, heroin especially.) When's the last you heard a new story about a pot grow that erupted in violence? I usually see a couple of 100+ pot bust stories a month at some point and those growers always come peacefully.
And sure weed is making money for gangs who sell but you can bet their guys on the corner selling marijuana got rocks in their pockets too. Most of the USA's weed comes from good ol' USA. Trafficers aren't going to risk bringing weed when they can bring a few small bricks of heroin that scores them 10s of thousands more then a trunk-load of smelly grass would.
Also take into consideration that the blackmarket for marijuana has a big percentage of non-gang affiliated individuals, i'm sure most people have known some guy or two or more that have sold some pot to supplement themselves alongside a job. With this new bill ounces(as in one at a time) can be moved much quicker and with no fear of getting caught and losing everything by being labeled a criminal and a drug user/dealer. It's not a lot to move at a time but I don't see how it won't slowly increase the saturation.
Anywho, Arnold is showing his prowess as a knowledgeable and generally aware governor which cali residents should be damned proud of, with the recent poll about Prop 19 that came up with "legalize it"a few points ahead this senate bill has effectively cut out Prop 19's feet. As others have said a lot of people are satisfied with the tens of thousands of people getting tickets instead of jail and I see the percentage dropping before the vote for prop 19. Either way I see it as win/win for our freedom and hopefully this greased the cogs of the legislative branch a little. I bet we'll see many major movements for legalization in the next year.
The fire is lit.
Appreciate the history that you Californians are driving the helm of.
For the love of god don't crash it. Haha
It seems fishy to me...
I think Arnold is trying to keep prop 19 from passing by doing this. Now, I'm not saying its not a step in the right direction, because this is definitely better than before, but now he's basically turned prop 19 into a bill that makes it legal to grow and sell weed and does little else, because now having it is hardly a crime. People are now probably more willing to think that prop 19 is "too much, too soon". Its a compromise, but its a compromise on their terms, and not the people's wishes.
I'd say its highly likely Washington pressured him into doing it, as they don't want to risk taking prop 19 to the Supreme Court and losing.
In reply to It seems fishy to me... by Fishman (not verified)
That's what I'm saying. The
That's what I'm saying. The timing of this is this passing is a little too convenient.
This should have been done a long time ago.
Calif Marijuana decrim bill SB1449
Maybe he is doing this to weaken support for Prop 19, but Prop 19 is NOT perfect, either. Some are concerned that it will ensure that only Monsanto and a few big corporations can afford to comply with the costs of regulation to legally sell, thus continuing the illegal market revenue instead of putting it out in public. I don't want Monsanto invovled with pot, as they are cutthroat genetic modifiers that have only harmed agriculture and cost farmers on a grand scale. Even if Monsanto's GM seeds blow over to another farmer's organic crop, they are required to pay Monsanto for the crop, or charged a criminal offense for 'theft'. That scares me having them involved in such a healing plant as MJ.
And wouldn't this passage of SB1449 actually make Prop 19 obsolete? Then, in 2012 a new ballot measure that legalizes usage, sales and cultivation more clearly without impacting patients could be voted on. But for the interim, an ounce is basically what Prop 19 allowed for anyway. The rest is under contention by alot of people and even both sides admit that it could be crafted and worded more specifically to protect people in a better way.
I am quite pleased by this measure, however. Quite pleased! Good for you, Arnold!
In reply to Calif Marijuana decrim bill SB1449 by CharieR (not verified)
God have you even READ prop
God have you even READ prop 19? This bill certainly does NOT make Prop 19 obsolete, quite the opposite in fact.
If Prop 19 Fails, Prop 215 Continues and this BIll will Help
<h1>and Just say NO to Meg Whitman !!!</h1>
She has big business in her back pocket to thwart Pot use. She wants you to get drunk, not high! The nerve of HER!
say NO to Meg Whitman !
Decriminalization won't solve the major issue
I can't say what was in the terminator's head when he signed the Decriminalization Bill but while it's a tremendous move in the right direction, Decriminalization does nothing to control drug cartel involvement in the drug trade. Prop 19 takes regulation, distributing, marketing, etc from the hands of the criminals and gives it to legitimate business.
Only passage of Prop 19 can crush the cartels and the runaway prohibition violence which has brought this country to it's knees.
Vote YES on Prop 19...take a huge bite out of crime...the world is watching...
In reply to Decriminalization won't solve the major issue by kj (not verified)
maybe this will help lower
maybe this will help lower the prices!
until they tax the hell out of it .........
In reply to Decriminalization won't solve the major issue by kj (not verified)
Or ...
You can just stop doing drugs. You know, the stuff that makes you do stupid things? Like run over people while stoned. Like not show up for work. Like setting fire to your house. Research that was carried out 2 years ago but blocked by the academics has proven that use of marijuana does contribute to psychosis and delusions later in life. Delayed brain damage. But then you have to be brain damaged to want to not be able to think straight anyway.
In reply to Or ... by Thomas-in-Newport (not verified)
PCR was discovered on LSD.
Run over people while stoned? Where did you pull that out of?
Not show up for work? Your correlations are vague and degrade your already weak argument.
In reply to Or ... by Thomas-in-Newport (not verified)
Think about it....
"Blocked by the academics.." LOL, seriously? 1st of all I really doubt that all of the scientist in the world have a conspiracy against this made-up report. 2nd is was probably blocked due to it being: non-existant, not a scientific experiment or anti-pot groups love to claim certain "reports" but don't provide links.....you get an F on your persuasive essay
In reply to Or ... by Thomas-in-Newport (not verified)
I disagree
Get out of the dark ages my friend. The reefer madness propaganda has long been squashed.
Sober people run over and kill all the time. Oh, but those are just mistakes right?
As a MJ smoker for 20 years I have never driven intoxicated or injured anyone. 2 speeding tickets are the only thing you will find on my life long driving record. Never burned a house down, never got "stoned" around a child, never exposed a child to it, never have broken the law and pay my taxes and work 45+ hours a week doing Information Technology. All those same things the "holier than thou" folks who still cling to old ideals and propaganda are doing.
This makes so much fiscal sense, while fighting the drug war on Marijuana makes no sense.
Are you listening Washington State?? Stop crying you have no choice but to raise taxes and constantly crying about your budget deficits when a solution like legalizing and taxing Marijuana can go a long way to a solution. Instead that money goes to the back pockets of drug dealers on the corner and the cartels.
Little Johnny is going to smoke a joint whether you legalize it or not. So the false premise of "protect the children" is flimsy at best.
One just needs to look at alcohol to see the hypocrisy.
I am a law abiding citizen in every way but I smoke Marijuana for insomnia and chronic pain, it is a GOD SEND. Yet I am characterized as a "loser" and have to live in fear of losing my job or the social implications because of the false stigma MJ has.
Props Arnold but we have a ways to go. Vote YES on Prop 19 and Washington State voters get off your butt's and support a similar measure here.
Thanks for reading.
In reply to I disagree by Chris Edens (not verified)
Yes, you are
You break the law where you feel it suits your lifestyle. You are a loser. A selfish, arrogant, loser.
In reply to Or ... by Thomas-in-Newport (not verified)
I guess you should post links
I guess you should post links to back up your claims regarding these studies you refer to. You are obviously thinking of alcohol when you refer to people running over one another. Really, try to educate yourself before making these ridiculous comments.
In reply to Or ... by Thomas-in-Newport (not verified)
The human race has, from the
The human race has, from the beginning of time, has wanted to "fiddle with their minds." Every culture in the world has their "mind enhancers."
In reply to Decriminalization won't solve the major issue by kj (not verified)
Out of the hands of
Out of the hands of criminals? Those businesses you are thinking of are the true criminals. NO on prop 19 Marijuana should only be used for good. Dont let corporations like Monsanto control anything. Marijuana should be for the people. Food should be for the people. Not for money. Thats what has brought this country to its knees, greed for money.
The War on Drugs... It's OvEr!
Thank you Governor! What an exciting time for Drug Policy Reform and creative legislation. This bill is the nail that will build our decriminalization effort's. Forth-coming will be the reconciliation of those offenders serving time, paying fines, or are engaged in prosecution and the process of fighting for their personal property. Unfortunate for prop 19 believers and their corporate, institutionalized, national empirical interest's however... film at 11.
ACTUALLY
there is no law that stops you taking and posesing drugs in reality... there is however the misuse of drugs act and acts and statues are in fact not law.... they can only be applied by force of law when give the consent of the governed..... meaning...... you being the governed have to give a cop permission to have power over you to govern you on the said act ..... so its all shit anyways...... keep blazing the big spliffs... get high and be happy... you was never doing anything wrong in the first place anyways .... so yeh you can be fined a 100 dolla infraction... if you agree to it in the first place
In reply to ACTUALLY by STONER (not verified)
Hippie
Seriously dude, you need to cut Waaaay back on the pot...you can't possibly have too many brain cells left...
The Cleansing of MI
Thanks gov..MI druggies will be leaving in droves:)
In reply to The Cleansing of MI by sueinmi (not verified)
You mean my friends who smoke
ACTUALLY
The faster California falls into the ocean,the better the US will be. The state worries about pot and is bankrupt.
In reply to ACTUALLY by Sane Americans (not verified)
Legalizing and regulating
Legalizing and regulating cannabis will generate large revenues in business and taxes. This money used to go into organized crime. The market for crime will shrink which means less money will be needed to fund courts, jails, and police. This is just what all of the world needs, not just California.
CALIFORNIA is run by a bunch of retards
I hate people from California your state sucks
In reply to CALIFORNIA is run by a bunch of retards by Heyitsmekillbill (not verified)
Mostly I would agree, but....
In this case, it is rather large step towards a rational way of dealing with an intoxicant. There has been a "War on Drugs" since 1913, and criminalizing drug use has had no good effects, only bad ones.
In reply to CALIFORNIA is run by a bunch of retards by Heyitsmekillbill (not verified)
We Californians hereby revoke
We Californians hereby revoke the technology we invented from your computer. Thus, you are banned from the Internet.
More proof of worthless california
If “the govanator” had done his job and forced the ILLEGAL ALIENS out of the state then he could have afforded to enforce the laws against drug use. Now he has just given any decent company another reason to move out of California and take the jobs and taxes with them. California is now a worthless place with no valid reason to live there. Nothing there but druggies, whores, sodomites, illegal aliens, other assorted criminals and bums.
In reply to More proof of worthless california by Thomas-in-Newport (not verified)
Nice extreme opinion you have
Nice extreme opinion you have there, spastic.
In reply to More proof of worthless california by Thomas-in-Newport (not verified)
"California is now a
"California is now a worthless place with no valid reason to live there. Nothing there but druggies, whores, sodomites, illegal aliens, other assorted criminals and bums."
I think I've heard more insightful remarks from a two year old. Thomas - I don't think you could have said anything more ignorant than that, unless you tossed some racial slurs in there as well. And you might as well at this point. I mean, you have two feet - Why not blow the other one off, now that you've shot one of them?
In reply to "California is now a by Native Californian (not verified)
Hey where are the whores at?
I need to get some of that. Any streetwalkers in LA are treated as if they are lepers and hunted down mercilessly by the LAPD.
In reply to More proof of worthless california by Thomas-in-Newport (not verified)
lol try sticking your head
lol try sticking your head out of your gated community sometime smartass.
In reply to lol try sticking your head by Anonymous1 (not verified)
Oh - that's right all the whores are in Sacramento!!!
In reply to More proof of worthless california by Thomas-in-Newport (not verified)
I agree completely about
I agree completely about deporting and cracking down on illegal aliens, but I also support marijuana legalization completely. The drug war is a failure, and frankly people should be able to do drugs if they want too. The government has no place telling us what we can and cannot do with our bodies.
Please, druggies, move to
Please, druggies, move to Kaliforniuh.
In reply to Please, druggies, move to by AnonymousCoward (not verified)
Okay - that's right - all the whores are in Sacramento.
He he he.
The Great Libertarian Disintermediation is upon us!
Slowly but surely we must dismantle any government policy that coerces people in normal polite circumstances.
This means:
-1- no drug laws
-2- no financial laws > that is to say no income tax
-3- no prostitution laws
-4- no gun laws
Legalize Freedom!
In reply to The Great Libertarian Disintermediation is upon us! by Freemon Sandlewould (not verified)
Why not go with no Murder
Why not go with no Murder laws
No robbery laws
No drunk driving laws
No need for medical training
Be careful with how much freedom you want individuals to have. Lawlessness is not too far from freedom.
In reply to Why not go with no Murder by Steven (not verified)
"Why not go with no Murder
"Why not go with no Murder laws"
Murder infringes on the right to life of another individual. Protecting against this is a legitimate function of the state.
"No robbery laws"
Robbery infringes on the property rights of another individual. Protecting against this is a legitimate function of the state.
"No drunk driving laws"
This is a better argument for you. Some libertarians would argue that someone should not be arrested for driving drunk unless they cause some sort of damage. I would argue that the person should need to be physically impaired, meaning fail a field sobriety test. I would do away with the arbitrary system of determining alcohol in the blood stream, as people have different tolerances for different substances.
The reason for this being that a person who took prescription pain medication may be more impaired than someone who had 2 beers. However the person who had the beers may fail a breathalyzer, and the person on the pain meds would be free to go. Make the test based on their physical functionality, and not an arbitrary number.
"No need for medical training"
I don't understand the argument you are trying to make here.
"Be careful with how much freedom you want individuals to have. Lawlessness is not too far from freedom."
Do not equate libertarianism with anarchy. Libertarians believe (for the most part) that a persons individual freedoms end when they begin infringing on another persons individual freedoms. Pretty simple concept.
In reply to "Why not go with no Murder by Leroy (not verified)
I love your comment! I
I love your comment! I completely agree! The people who comment on here havent been able to put it in a better way than you have, thankyou
Wow, it's about time
As a conservative, finally something Arnie has done that I'm proud of. Conservatives in general should get behind the decriminalization. It's a freedom of choice issue, there is nothing wrong with smoking a little after you get home from a long day at work, etc.. The "War on Drugs" has been a disaster since the 1980's. And nobody cares at all about the worst drug problem of all.... perfectly legal prescription drugs, that probably do more to screw up your body and brain than pot ever could.
Not to mention alcohol is a POISON, and that's perfectly fine. Cigarettes are worse than marijuana with all the ingredients they have in them these days, they are legal. World would be a better place if everyone enjoyed a good social joint every now and then. Jefferson smoked in his pipe and just thought all the time, looking out over his property. And it wasn't tobacco. It worked out pretty well for him.
Lol at the two comments about
Add new comment