cannabisnews.com: Marijuana Laws Facing New Challenge 





Marijuana Laws Facing New Challenge 
Posted by FoM on August 12, 2000 at 22:25:15 PT
By Nancy West, Sunday News Staff
Source: Union Leader 
 In the long run, they may lose money by shrinking their own criminal client base, but one of the state's best known law firms is backing the movement to decriminalize marijuana. The Chichester law office of Mark Sisti and Paul Twomey is the new home base for the New Hampshire Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, a branch of the national NORML organization. 
Twomey, a parent who also serves on his local school board, says he doesn't smoke pot or tobacco, nor does he drink alcohol. But he does believe it is time to get marijuana users out of the criminal justice system. Twomey is quick to point out that he opposes other illegal drugs and certainly doesn't approve of allowing underage people access to marijuana.  "Making marijuana legal would cut significantly into our income. I honestly don't care. It's wrong to continue," said Twomey.  He and Sisti have built a well-respected firm representing many high-profile clients, such as Pamela Smart, as well as many low-profile drug users and dealers along the way.  "I see the tremendous injury done to families and society by the war on drugs," Twomey said. "This is a cultural war of the '60s. Let's declare the war over and get on with it."  Even prosecutors who disagree with Twomey say they respect him.  First Assistant U.S. Attorney David Vicinanzo said, "This debate has been going on since I was a kid, but many of the arguments are the same. What has changed is we have 30 years of research showing marijuana use is generally bad for you and the marijuana is many times more potent than it was 30 years ago," Vicinanzo said.  Vicinanzo said marijuana investigations at the federal level are a lesser priority than investigations for crack or heroin.  "In America, there is perhaps no single greater cause of misery and disease than alcohol, so we already have one evil, why do we want to legitimatize another mind-altering substance," Vicinanzo said.  "I disagree with Paul Twomey on this issue. He's a thoughtful, and intelligent lawyer and decent guy. Reasonable people can disagree. . . ," Vicinanzo said.  Besides the stature brought to the marijuana debate by a firm such as Twomey's, Phil Greazzo of Manchester, president of NORML in New Hampshire, and other board members of the fledging chapter, say they will lobby the Legislature in the next session on three major fronts.  They want to legalize medical marijuana and industrial hemp and decriminalize marijuana in New Hampshire. While there are a couple of legislators who want to help, law enforcement leaders are expected to continue to strongly oppose even hemp legalization.  As more and more babyboomers comfortably settle in to leadership positions, many with first-hand knowledge of what a marijuana joint looks and tastes like, people such as Twomey and Greazzo see the timing as right to pursue the marijuana agenda.  "I'd like to see people use marijuana recreationally and at most receive a fine, no jail time," said Greazzo, 30, of Manchester, who works in the field that manufactures medical products.  "The top issue right at the moment is that every other country in the world recognizes medical marijuana as medicine for certain people, except the U.S.A.," Greazzo said.  Greazzo said he will testify on a proposal to legalize medical marijuana on Aug. 23 at 10 a.m. in the Legislative Office Building in Concord. National experts on the subject are expected to testify as well.  "The second top priority is marijuana decriminalization. Let the people decide. A majority of the people think it ought to be decriminalized.  "As far as the public goes, we have a receptive audience," he said. He said law enforcement has a vested interest in keeping marijuana illegal to maintain job security and to continue seizing assets in drug cases.  "I'm not going to lie. I'm the president of NORML (in New Hampshire). I do occasionally smoke marijuana," Greazzo said.  He makes sure he never smokes around his 4-year-old daughter, but hopes to have a candid conversation about drugs when she is old enough. What he hates most is the hypocrisy.  "Man has been involved with marijuana since 8000 BC and it has never caused a single death," Greazzo said. "Nobody is going to champion the cause for legalizing heroin, but we do need sensible drug reform. They (drug addicts) need treatment. This is a health issue. Why do we have military generals running the issue?" Greazzo asked.  Col. Gary Sloper, commander of state police, said he wasn't surprised to hear of NORML's New Hampshire presence because of recent efforts in the Legislature.  "We wouldn't support changing any laws regarding marijuana or any controlled drug. All you have to do is look at the history of substance abuse.  "I'd hate to see us cave in because a number of the lives that are destroyed through drugs. I know there are arguments pro and con, but the Legislature is wise to continue to make it illegal. I wouldn't want to change the drug laws," Sloper said.  "The '60s came and went. I don't want to see a resurgence or do anything to make it more available to people who don't use it because it is illegal. If those people are encouraged to start using, I wonder if more would slip through the cracks," Sloper said.  Rep. Derek Owen, D-Hopkinton, is the sponsor of legislation to legalize industrial hemp, which was defeated last year.  Owen said he and other farmers want to keep the hemp issue separate from marijuana decriminalization to increase the likelihood he will some day be able to harvest hemp. Personally, however, he said he also favors decriminalization of marijuana.  "We should be able to grow a niche (hemp) crop on our property," Owen said.  He said hemp is used for rope, hemp seed oil, paper and clothing and he certainly wouldn't risk his farm to raise marijuana.  "I'm for decriminalization. I think the war on drugs should be gone. It's like Prohibition. It didn't work," Owen said.  Rep. Timothy N. Robertson, D-Keene, said he is still pushing to legalize medical marijuana and also plans to push for decriminalization as he has for several years.  "Personally, I'd like to do away with the drug war and help people deal with addictions. I don't think putting them in jail is a good place," Robertson said.  The 68-year-old Legislator said he tried marijuana in the 1970s.  "I found it pleasant, but it was illegal and I didn't have the need to get high," said Robertson.  He believes the public will eventually demand more common sense in national and state drug policies.  "Politicians as are not great leaders; they are followers. Most of them follow voters," Robertson said.  "Why did we do away with Prohibition? Because it was bringing the country to a screaming crime wave. The rich never stopped drinking. The bootlegger where we lived had a route like a milkman," Robertson said.  He concedes it is still difficult for politicians to speak openly about past drug use.  "This may cost me the election and it wouldn't bother me. It's the principle," said Robertson.  Former Attorney General Jeffrey Howard, who is running for governor in the Republican primary, said he has never tried marijuana, but acknowledges having been at parties when he was young where other people were smoking pot.  If legislation passed decriminalizing marijuana, "I would veto it...I know from my days as a prosecutor that it is a very harmful drug in terms of what it can do to brain cells and the risk others are put at when they are sharing the road with someone under the influence of marijuana," Howard said.  There is one exception to his anti-marijuana position, though.  "I believe we should give greater consideration to medicinal uses of marijuana under strict government supervision," Howard said.  But for Twomey, who routinely represents people arrested on assorted drug charges, it is time to take action now.  "I don't use pot and wouldn't use it if it were legal. I just see people's lives ruined day after day after day. They are forced to spend a lot of lot of money for attorneys. When you put it next to alcohol and tobacco, it is a harmless, benign substance," Twomey said.  "The only stigma is if you get arrested. . . I do favor legalizing marijuana. I personally think adults should decide what they put into their own bodies. There should be strong penalties for giving it to children," Twomey said.  He also expressed outrage that the fine for providing cigarettes to children is so small when cigarettes are so deadly. Marijuana has never killed anyone, he said.  "I'm not urging anyone to legalize any other drugs," Twomey said.  Twomey accepts the fact that people will talk about his latest move and there might even be a snicker or two behind his back.  "There are a lot of people out there who agree, but they are afraid to speak out," Twomey said. Published: August 13, 2000Contact: TheUL aol.comAddress: P.O. Box 9555 Manchester, NH 03108-9555Copyright: The Union Leader Corp. 2000NORMLhttp://www.norml.org/CannabisNews Cannabis Archives:http://cannabisnews.com/news/list/cannabis.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #1 posted by kaptinemo on August 13, 2000 at 10:26:53 PT:
A lawyer ought to know better
'First Assistant U.S. Attorney David Vicinanzo said, "This debate has been going on since I was a kid, but many of the arguments are the same. What has changed is we have 30 years of research showing marijuana use is generally bad for you and the marijuana is many times more potent than it was 30 years ago," Vicinanzo said.'Lawyers are suppposed to be able to seperate fact from fiction, and truth from lies. They are supposed to be able to use faculties of critical discernment to determine what is actual from what is supposed; to glean information from sources, and to discard hearsay.And yet, what this lawyer has done is *precisely* the opposite. He is relying solely upon *hearsay* as far as the nature of the research he relies upon. All of the Feds do. And it will be their undoing.The Feds have known for decades that the only thing that has prevented MJ prohibition from being thrown out on its' face has been the dearth of peer-reviewed medical research failing to prove toxicity. But now, the Abrams Report has just done so. But these antis refuse to acknowledge its' existence. A very grave error.So long as the Feds could control access to the only legally available supply of cannabis by not permitting any study that tested for medical *harmlessness* to use it for studies, the antis could effectively keep the prohibition going. We all knew that. Needless to say, they would grant the application of *any* prohib sympathizer - such as Gabriel Nahas - so long as they made their biases against MJ clear from the get-go. (Dr. Abrams had been warned by many friends of his that this was the case, but the good doctor couldn't conceive of Federally controlled science establishments being that corrupt.)He now knows better of course. By pulling a bit of political jiu-jitsu of his own, he was able to get his landmark study done. And blew out of the water many of the lies that this lawyer seems to still cling to. Just like this one:'Former Attorney General Jeffrey Howard, who is running for governor in the Republican primary, said he has never tried marijuana, but acknowledges having been at parties when he was young where other people were smoking pot.' If legislation passed decriminalizing marijuana, "I would veto it...I know from my days as a prosecutor that it is a very harmful drug in terms of what it can do to braincells and the risk others are put at when they are sharing the road with someone under the influence of marijuana," Howard said.'Again, this lawyer is citing research to the effect that cannabis is harmful. (Even worse, he is putting on the mantle of a *doctor*. Is he a brain surgeon? Do prosecutors get special courses in brain physiology? How would a prosecutor know if someone is brain-damaged? X-ray vision, perhaps?) What research? *Whose* research? When was it conducted? Was it peer-reviewed? What were the results? They can't tell you. And they are not about to admit that the only *current* research that has been done on cannabis 'toxicity' has destroyed the entire concept.I'd love to be a fly on the wall when this matter is finally brought to court as it has in Canada.
[ Post Comment ]

Post Comment


Name: Optional Password: 
E-Mail: 
Subject: 
Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]
Link URL: 
Link Title: