Angela Goodhope Says:
January 9, 2008 at 12:37 pm
As the campaign manager for Missoula's lowest priority marijuana initiative (and a member of the county's oversight committee for it), I have to comment.
First, I agree completely that a felony burglary and assault are far more serious than growing marijuana, and it will be interesting indeed to compare the respective sentences this man receives. But history offers a safe bet on what will happen.
The crimes that actually threatened another person's life, and that violated the privacy of another person's home, are virtually certain to be treated much more lightly than the drug offense. This relates to one of the rationales for the marijuana initiative - that offenses against people's bodies and their property deserve far more attention than drug possession issues, particularly adult marijuana. The nonsensical drug war gets everything backwards.
The drug charge will likely destroy this man's life, involving a lot of prison time at great taxpayer expense. Even if it didn't, he already has lost all eligibility for any student loans, should he ever want one, and all eligibility for veteran benefits if he's a vet. These are consequences of any drug conviction, no matter how minor the offense (having a single joint, for example), and they never happen to anyone else, not even people who attack others violently, including murderers.
Meanwhile the police also have confiscated this man's property - down to his bike and music player! - and they'll auction it off as a fundraiser for their drug war budget. This, too, never happens to people arrested for anything other than drugs.
One point is that in this day and age it makes no sense to spend taxpayer dollars investigating and arresting, prosecuting and imprisoning people merely for marijuana. People have used marijuana for more than 5,000 years, with no recorded deaths or overdoses in all that time. Meanwhile, a wealth of scientific research conducted over the last several decades confirms marijuana's extraordinary and diverse value as a powerful medicine. Research also has proven that marijuana isn't addictive and isn't a "gateway" to using other drugs. Pretty much everything we've heard from the government's prohibition campaign over several generations now is a lie. Nationally, we spend billions in the drug war, and most of it is focused on marijuana, one of the safest medicines on the planet. And none of that spending over the past 35 years has made a bit of difference in overall rates of drug use.
But it's made a huge and completely negative difference in the lives of millions of Americans and a great many Montanans, all of it at taxpayer expense.
Your post also invites some clarification of the facts about Missoula's lowest priority policy. First, the marijuana initiative is a recommendation, not a requirement. Second, as amended by county commissioners last year, even this recommendation now only applies to misdemeanor offenses, which are those involving less than two ounces. Growing plants in any quantity (even one) remains a felony offense, and even giving a single joint away remains a felony.
The main result - so far - of the lowest priority marijuana policy is that the county attorney no longer prosecutes misdemeanor offenses, and he has called on the county sheriff to stop making misdemeanor arrests. This is important, positive progress.
Those of us on the county's oversight committee hope that another accomplishment in the near future will be the adoption of a more complete and easy to use record-keeping system, so that both the county and its taxpayers can understand more completely where the money is going and what's being accomplished by law enforcement activities.
It's also important to keep in mind that the lowest priority policy doesn't apply to the city of Missoula. Not yet, anyway. Changing the situation, so that adult marijuana offenses are a lowest priority for the city as well, was one of the county oversight committee's most important recommendations a few months ago.
People can learn more at the oversight committee's website, http://www.co.missoula.mt.us/i... and at http://www.responsiblecrimepol... |
Missoula authorities bust pot dealer
January 9, 2008
by Jay Stevens
Oops, so much for the pot initiative making marijuana crimes the lowest priority for Missoula police:
Authorities arrested 29-year-old Brian L. Hawk inside his home at 2705 S. Seventh St. W., where the man allegedly conducted a lucrative pot-dealing enterprise that served as his only source of income for the past two years, according to court papers.
Hawk was met at his home Friday with a battering ram, and detectives were greeted by 3-foot-high marijuana plants, jugs of fertilizer, lighting systems, and a large carbon filter and CO2 tank.
Hawk was charged with three drug-related felonies Monday in Missoula County Justice Court, and remains jailed on $75,000 bail.
The number of plants, the fact that Hawk was dealing, all of this makes the Hawk case a showpiece marijuana bust. In fact, it's such a perfect bust, it smells political, doesn't it? Like Missoula authorities are making the case that, yes, pot is serious. In this case, it looks like it was.
IMHO, the most serious crime committed by Hawk was something unrelated to dealing pot:
On Dec. 21, Hawk was charged with felony burglary and misdemeanor partner assault for allegedly breaking into his girlfriend's home and knocking her to the ground.
I suspect the pot crimes will earn Hawk more jail time than the assault of his girlfriend.
So...if we're going to make pot a low priority, was this investigation and arrest warranted? After all, the subtext of the Missoula pot initiative was a desire to end the illogical priorities of law enforcement, equating pot with serious drug use. But at what point do you draw the line?
Update: For the record, I thought this bust was proper, necessary, and totally appropriate. I realize the post may have been ambiguous. I'm just wondering what level of marijuana use is tolerable. A joint in your pocket? A plant in your bedroom closet? Medicinal use, only?
This entry was posted on January 9, 2008 at 10:00 am and is filed under Crime, Culture, Missoula.
5 Responses to "Missoula authorities bust pot dealer"
1. Jim Lang Says:
January 9, 2008 at 11:59 am
I suppose it would be pointless to note the inherent contradiction in having a law that says people can smoke a plant for medical purposes while simultaneously having a law that makes growing that plant a felony.
2. Angela Goodhope Says:
January 9, 2008 at 12:37 pm
As the campaign manager for Missoula's lowest priority marijuana initiative (and a member of the county's oversight committee for it), I have to comment.
First, I agree completely that a felony burglary and assault are far more serious than growing marijuana, and it will be interesting indeed to compare the respective sentences this man receives. But history offers a safe bet on what will happen.
The crimes that actually threatened another person's life, and that violated the privacy of another person's home, are virtually certain to be treated much more lightly than the drug offense. This relates to one of the rationales for the marijuana initiative - that offenses against people's bodies and their property deserve far more attention than drug possession issues, particularly adult marijuana. The nonsensical drug war gets everything backwards.
The drug charge will likely destroy this man's life, involving a lot of prison time at great taxpayer expense. Even if it didn't, he already has lost all eligibility for any student loans, should he ever want one, and all eligibility for veteran benefits if he's a vet. These are consequences of any drug conviction, no matter how minor the offense (having a single joint, for example), and they never happen to anyone else, not even people who attack others violently, including murderers.
Meanwhile the police also have confiscated this man's property - down to his bike and music player! - and they'll auction it off as a fundraiser for their drug war budget. This, too, never happens to people arrested for anything other than drugs.
One point is that in this day and age it makes no sense to spend taxpayer dollars investigating and arresting, prosecuting and imprisoning people merely for marijuana. People have used marijuana for more than 5,000 years, with no recorded deaths or overdoses in all that time. Meanwhile, a wealth of scientific research conducted over the last several decades confirms marijuana's extraordinary and diverse value as a powerful medicine. Research also has proven that marijuana isn't addictive and isn't a "gateway" to using other drugs. Pretty much everything we've heard from the government's prohibition campaign over several generations now is a lie. Nationally, we spend billions in the drug war, and most of it is focused on marijuana, one of the safest medicines on the planet. And none of that spending over the past 35 years has made a bit of difference in overall rates of drug use.
But it's made a huge and completely negative difference in the lives of millions of Americans and a great many Montanans, all of it at taxpayer expense.
Your post also invites some clarification of the facts about Missoula's lowest priority policy. First, the marijuana initiative is a recommendation, not a requirement. Second, as amended by county commissioners last year, even this recommendation now only applies to misdemeanor offenses, which are those involving less than two ounces. Growing plants in any quantity (even one) remains a felony offense, and even giving a single joint away remains a felony.
The main result - so far - of the lowest priority marijuana policy is that the county attorney no longer prosecutes misdemeanor offenses, and he has called on the county sheriff to stop making misdemeanor arrests. This is important, positive progress.
Those of us on the county's oversight committee hope that another accomplishment in the near future will be the adoption of a more complete and easy to use record-keeping system, so that both the county and its taxpayers can understand more completely where the money is going and what's being accomplished by law enforcement activities.
It's also important to keep in mind that the lowest priority policy doesn't apply to the city of Missoula. Not yet, anyway. Changing the situation, so that adult marijuana offenses are a lowest priority for the city as well, was one of the county oversight committee's most important recommendations a few months ago.
People can learn more at the oversight committee's website, http://www.co.missoula.mt.us/i... and at http://www.responsiblecrimepol...
3. holotone Says:
January 9, 2008 at 12:41 pm
What's "appropriate" about confining a living human being to a cage for growing plants? Granted, it sounds as if the young fellow in question was sleazily living off the grandeur that the black market has created, but still - It's just a plant.
What level of marijuana use is tolerable? Much like the threshold for alcohol, that decision is up to the individual to make for themselves - Not the nanny-state.
I do, however, believe that Mr. Hawk should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law for his crimes against person and property.
4. Jon Wilson Says:
January 9, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Shoot over in Colorado, cops are paying growers for their pot! Thanks to the state's constitution cities have to fork over hundreds of thousands of bucks for destorying crops. Go Rockies!
5. Jay Stevens Says:
January 9, 2008 at 1:08 pm
What's "appropriate" about confining a living human being to a cage for growing plants? Granted, it sounds as if the young fellow in question was sleazily living off the grandeur that the black market has created, but still - It's just a plant.
I was more concerned about his selling cocaine and having traffic at all hours at his home than I was about the plants. Given the recent Grizz players' holdup (using shotguns and automatic weapons) of a pot dealer in the U District, I think having so many plants and dealing out of his home made his neighborhood dangerous.
Until the law changes, and dealing pot can take place in broad daylight and not invite robbery, etc, I'm not keen on large-scale pot dealers. A few pot plants in your closet? Who cares....
IMHO. |
