Marijuana
M. F. Evans
Hi,
It used to be legal to possess up to 4 ounces of pot for personal use. It
was legal to have 4 plants
in one's home weighing in total not more than 4 ounces.
I don't remember the details or dates but there was a vote in the 80's.
Those who didn't smoke
voted that those who did shouldn't and won.
Now I believe it is a misdemeanor for possession and felony for possession
with intent to distribute or sales, and I believe it is a federal violation
to be caught selling or growing within
1000 feet of a school.
Others who know more can clarify.
Regards,
Morgan
--
M.F. Evans
Sterling, Alaska
http://www.alaska.net/~rafting/
(delete DUMPSPAM from address)
Bart <bart...@nospam.com> wrote in article <34EBC5...@nospam.com>...
| x-no-archive: yes
|
| Someone told me that at one time it was legal to grow Marijuana in
| Alaska, is this true? How do coppers deal with growers nowadays?
|
Dennis P. Harris
>Someone told me that at one time it was legal to grow Marijuana in
>Alaska, is this true? How do coppers deal with growers nowadays?
yes and no. it is not legal under federal law to grow hemp
anywhere in the US without having a marijuana tax stamp license,
which the feds will always refuse to issue.
in 1990 the voters of alaska barely passed an initiative to
outlaw possession of marijuana. since 1972 possession of less
than 4 ounces in private had been legal under the state supreme
court decision in alaska vs. raven, because of the privacy
provisions of the state constitution.
in 1993 an overzealous rookie cop in craig climbed a ladder,
peeked over a tall fence into a citizens' window, and upon
observing a cannabis plant, obtained a search warrant from the
local magistrate and raided the home. the district court in
ketchikan threw out the warrant, citing the raven case and
stating that the law passed by initiative was unconstitutional,
pointing out the alaska constitution does not allow amendment by
initiative.
the district attorney did *not* appeal the dismissal, and state
prosecutors have consistently avoided prosecuting any simple
possession cases under state law since then. i have been told
that the attorney general does not want to waste his underfunded
prosecution budget on a marijuana test case when they do not have
the staff to effectively prosecute more serious crimes.
growing of more than 4 ounces was always assumed to be growing
and possession for sale under state law. these days growers are
usually busted under federal law, which includes such draconian
provisions as a mandatory minimum 20 year sentence with no parole
and unconstitutional confiscation of the property on which
growing occurs prior to trial or hearing, even if the property
belongs to an innocent third party.
state prosecutors have generally deferred to federal prosecution
because of limited budgets and a federal desire to show that we
still have a "war on drugs". in some areas with strong
libertarian leanings, like the mat-su, once famed for growing
"matanuska thunderf*ck", state prosecutors couldn't get grand
juries to return indictments against growers and sometimes
couldn't get juries to convict them if they did get an
indictment.
relevant alaska statutes are on the web at
http://www.legis.state.ak.us/folhome.htm
=============================================================
"The only thing in the middle of the road is a dead armadillo"
--- Jim Hightower
Dennis P. Harris NO_SPAM_T...@alaska.net
Virtual Juneau http://www.alaska.net/~dpharris
Barb2845
>>Someone told me that at one time it was legal to grow Marijuana in
>>Alaska, is this true? How do coppers deal with growers nowadays?
>
>yes and
Lt. Governor Fran Ulmer is currently pushing legislation to allow mrj use for
medical purposes ... and there's a ballot initiative petition circulating for
decriminalization. When I signed, in front of the Anch. library, the person
circulating it told me that a number of police officers, including a few in
uniform, had signed on, and that signatures were generally easier to get than
for several other initiates he had worked for.
Barb
Christopher Effgen
Dennis
> the district attorney did *not* appeal the dismissal, and state
> prosecutors have consistently avoided prosecuting any simple
> possession cases under state law since then.
I believe that the reason for not prosecuting is that if the Supreme
Court did over rule, then drug testing for Marijuana would be illegal
unless justified by the nature of the work and evidence introduced that
proved it impaired performance.
The study of the effects of marijuana are very limited, but there are
studies that show that marijuana use is not harmful; in fact a study of
the employee records of nurses, whose blood tests revealed marijuana
use, showed; that they showed up for work more often; and their personal
records showed that they had generally been evaluated to be better
employee's.
Our government, while depicting the marijuana user's brains to be like
fried eggs, does not want to know what are the effects marijuana.
You might remember the Surgeon General that was chastised and almost
terminated for suggesting that the effects of legalization be studied.
Our government has a stick your head in the ground approach towards
marijuana use. Showing that you do not have to use drugs to have your
head located were the sun does not shine.
Marijuana use is illegal in Alaska from the point of view that you can
get fired if it is detected in your system, but practically legal in all
other cases except commercial growing and commercial distribution.
Christopher
W$
Christopher Effgen wrote:
>Marijuana use is illegal in Alaska from the point of view that you can
> get fired if it is detected in your system, but practically legal in all
> other cases except commercial growing and commercial distribution.
>
The marijuana inititive was supported by such in Anchorage as the fundamentalist
Baptist Temple groups. They are the same groups that successfully opposed the
sale of beer in the pub at UAA. They consistantly vote for repressive
legislation that their charismatic leaders such as Prevo want inacted to protect
people from themselves. This also includes the massive anti-smoking actions and
increases on the cigarette taxes.
This type of nonsense is one of the true cases of the Anchorage majority
legislating the morals of the whole state.
There is a $100 fine for smoking pot in public ... but I've never heard of
anyone getting a citation for it ... and there's just as many people sitting in
the cars in front of Chilkoot Charlies smoking pot as there ever was, and just
as many people in the bush growing their own.
Yes the FED actively prosecutes marijuana infractions ... and was even seizing
fishing boats when a crewman's locker had pot in it for awhile.
But then the FED knows "what's best" for Alaska, so I guess everyone should be
thankful.
W$
Barb2845
.>A popular bumper sticker:
>
>Annoy Prevo
>Think for Yourself
The D.A.R. E. (to Say No to Drugs) organization actually took to court
somewhere in the lower 48, and won, a suit againt a group who were putting out
bumperstickers which read "D.A.R.E. to think for yourself," ( along with
"D.A.R.E. to get the CIA off Drugs," and the perenially popular "D.A.R.E. to
Keep Cops off Donuts.") Bought a few of the last printing for my kids ...
they're collectors' items now, I hear (the bumper sticker, I mean. My kids are
still priceless originals..)
FYI non-Anchorage readers, Jerry Prevo is minister of a large, conservative and
politically active Baptist Temple here -- kind of a local Pat Robertson.
Mike Miller
Actually, in all fairness, the marijuana initiative was not the works of Prevo. It
was necessitated by Federal law. The Feds told the state that if we did not
criminalize pot, they would start withholding or redirecting the tax money Alaska
receives from the Federal government.
We didn't have a law on the books because it was thrown out under Alaska's
Constitutional Privacy Clause. The AK Supreme Court ruled that marijuana was not
enough of a danger to allow the intrusion on privacy caused by the law's
enforcement.
When the initiative passed in 1990 (by a 51% to 49% margin), a group of local pot
advocates went to a hotel room and called the press. From within the room, with the
cameras and microphones rolling, they called the police and reported themselves for
smoking pot. The police simply replied, "Thank you, we'll take that under
advisement." The police, prosecutors, and legislators all know that if an arrest is
made under the right circumstances, the case will go directly to the AK Supreme
Court and the law will be overturned again.
Right now, the law is only enforced when marijuana is found in the midst of other
crimes - and the probable cause for the arrest was not marijuana possession.
Arrests for growing and distributing pot are made under different State and Federal
statutes.
Jan Flora wrote:
> >The marijuana inititive was supported by such in Anchorage as the
> fundamentalist
> >Baptist Temple groups. They are the same groups that successfully opposed the
> >sale of beer in the pub at UAA. They consistantly vote for repressive
> >legislation that their charismatic leaders such as Prevo want inacted to
> protect
> >people from themselves. This also includes the massive anti-smoking
> actions and
> >increases on the cigarette taxes.
>
> A popular bumper sticker:
>
> Annoy Prevo
> Think for Yourself
>
> Jan
W$
Mike Miller wrote:
> Actually, in all fairness, the marijuana initiative was not the works of Prevo. It
> was necessitated by Federal law. The Feds told the state that if we did not
> criminalize pot, they would start withholding or redirecting the tax money Alaska
> receives from the Federal government.
>
It was not the works of Prevo ... it was and is supported by such as Prevo.
> We didn't have a law on the books because it was thrown out under Alaska's
> Constitutional Privacy Clause. The AK Supreme Court ruled that marijuana was not
> enough of a danger to allow the intrusion on privacy caused by the law's
> enforcement.
>
True.
>Jan Flora wrote:
Actually I wrote the first part ... Jan replied on the bumperstickers.
Mike Miller
W$ wrote: True.
> >Jan Flora wrote:
>
> Actually I wrote the first part ... Jan replied on the bumperstickers.
True. Autoquote in Netscape. You wrote the first part. She replied on the bumper
sticker. And I made the bumper sticker :)