On Jan. 2, the law approved by Massachusetts voters in November to decriminalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana took effect. Harvard Police Chief Ed Denmark said this week that his department will enforce the new law and issue citations for possession of one ounce or less of pot. Harvard police officers have been trained and have signed off on the new enforcement procedures, he said.
However, noted Denmark, “decriminalization” doesn’t mean that possession of marijuana has been legalized. Under the new law, possession of an ounce or less of marijuana is still illegal, but is now a civil infraction punishable by a $100 fine, rather than a criminal violation, one that carried with it the possibility of incarceration.
The law has sparked controversy among law enforcement officers across the state, with some police chiefs saying they won’t even try to enforce it because of its possible flaws. When asked this week about his department’s position on it, Denmark said, “We’re here to enforce the laws that are handed down to us, not to pass judgment.”
—Ed Denmark,
Chief of Police
The Harvard department has not yet received citation books to use in enforcing the new law, said Denmark. “It’s still enforceable,” he continued. “If we find people in possession of small amounts of marijuana, we’ll confiscate and destroy it.” The law provides that officers have 15 days to issue a citation after finding someone in possession of an ounce or less.
Denmark said he thinks there will be court cases that will test the law in the months to come. “How can you have someone not identify themselves [when cited for an infraction]?” he asked, referring to one of the criticisms of the law.
When asked for his opinion about the law, Denmark said, “It’s well-intentioned. There are overall drug policy issues that need to be reexamined.”
“Not to minimize the importance of it, but no one has solid answers on the physical harm or monetary damage caused by marijuana,” he added.
He spoke of the disparity in laws that make it illegal for individuals to possess small amounts of marijuana, but do nothing to block the sale of cigarettes to adults, even though they have been proven to cause cancer. And he pointed to laws being promoted to ban the use of trans fatty acids in restaurants, although there are none being pursued to prohibit sales of cigarettes or alcohol, both of which are responsible for thousands of deaths each year.
Denmark said he sees marijuana use as more of a medical problem, in the same way that alcohol abuse is. “Incarceration doesn’t solve it,” he said.
His biggest concerns with the new law, he said, are that it could send the message that it’s now OK to use marijuana and could lead to more people getting behind the wheel of a car and operating under the influence. “If people want to smoke it in their basements, I don’t care,” he said candidly. “It’s when they go out on the street and drive [while using it] or try to sell it to others that I have a problem.”
Addressing the question of whether marijuana use is a problem in Harvard, Denmark said, “Harvard is no different than other cities and towns across America. There are people who like to get high, and that’s what they do,” whether with alcohol or marijuana. “I think there is more marijuana use in Harvard and other towns than we’re made aware of,” he added, noting that there are relatively few instances where his department has come across it.
Denmark said there are some problems with the new law that the state will have to address. “According to current statutes, I can terminate any officer hired after 1988 who is caught smoking tobacco products,” he said, “but I can’t terminate an officer found smoking marijuana, in possession of less than an ounce of it, or believed to be under the influence of it.”
And, he added, proving someone is under the influence could be difficult. “Marijuana is less detectible than booze,” he said. He said he has heard that the Legislature has some goals for 2009 that could address problems with the new law.
Despite the law’s shortcomings, Denmark and his department stand behind enforcing it. “I play the hand I’m dealt,” he said. “It doesn’t change our way of operation. The only difference is that instead of putting people in jail, we’re going to write a ticket. Only the penalty has changed.”
“It’s good that we’re looking at new measures,” he added. “I don’t know if this law was the best solution, but it’s got us thinking, moving toward more realistic solutions.”
And, he observed, “What we have seen based on the results of this vote is an overall societal change in the attitude toward marijuana. Our laws are reflective of societal wants and norms. This could be a case of ‘be careful what you wish for.’ Years from now we may find out it was a terrible idea.”
