Though Proposition 19 failed to pass Tuesday night, support and opposition for the legalization of marijuana was shown statewide as well as inside the Fireside Room at Bakersfield College on Oct. 28.
Organized by Katrina Oldershaw, legislative liaison for the Student Government Association, the discussion panel and open forum, consisting of a psychologist and two police officers, took place inside the room at 6 p.m.
“I will tell you right now that I do not support Proposition 19 because I think that there is a lot of harm that can come,” said psychologist Dean Haddock.
“I also don’t like how the law is written because it still leaves it criminalized in a way that I think is a problem for medicine.
“It’s a very strong drug, and we also know that it really affects the adolescent brain. It affects the development of the adolescent brain, and that’s where you are going to find a lot of the abuse.”
The doctor primarily warned against the dangers of the plant throughout the discussion but offered reassurance on the medicinal uses of cannabis.
“There are some excellent uses for marijuana for medicinal purposes,” said Dr. Haddock.
Speaking as a representative for the Kern County Sheriff’s Department, Lieutenant Curtis Cornelison provided insight on law enforcement’s concerns with the proposition and drug traffickers.
“One thing you have to realize that [was] touched on is drug trafficking organizations are just not marijuana traffickers,” he said. “They are poly-drug organizations, and what that means is that they operate with whatever is in demand.
“What we’re going to create for California is a distribution hub for the other 49 states, for marijuana. Now what that does is cause marijuana to be produced here, moved to other locations, and then other drugs come back in trade.”
Curtis went on to state how the law will not put the drug cartels out of business due to their adaptive nature with drug trafficking, as well as express how he felt the casual use of marijuana will increase among adults, providing a negative influence for children.
Barry Klein, supervising deputy for the district attorney’s white-collar crime unit, spoke in the forum on how the Obama Administration does not prosecute for medical marijuana, but if made legal in California then they would prosecute for the commercial selling of marijuana within the State of California.
“Marijuana, whether or not Prop 19 passes, will still be a controlled substance under the federal law and will still be subject to federal guidelines and penalties,” Klein said.
“The attorney general under the Obama Administration in March of 2009, they came out and differed to the various states medical marijuana use. They are not prosecuting for that. That is not what they have said about this.
“With everybody who wants to think that California is going to get out of their budget debt because [of Prop 19], just think about that. Would you go ahead and provide your state or your local government with your business records, which show that you’re making money off of marijuana, when it’s evidence of a federal crime?
“Chances are there are not going to be paying those taxes that everybody is looking forward to.”
Daniel Smith, a Prop 19 supporter, entered the forum barring a sign with BC history major Joey Dunford, that stated, “Pot Laws are Illegal All Government Lies for 70 + years Free All Pot Prisoners No More Lies” and were asked to leave.
“I need a permit, an authorization beforehand,” said Smith, “I have no problem with that. It’s not keeping me from doing it downtown. I’ve been out there for three days. Telling a lie for 60 years doesn’t make it the truth, but that’s what they’re doing. They got people convinced that it’s truth.
“How do they enforce lies and call it law. I thought that you had to have proof to do this shit.
“There is no proof to their side; it’s all on our side. They need to come up with a legitimate reason to make it illegal. There is nothing wrong with it, period.
“We need to legalize it,” said Dunford. “We need to tax it. We can make so much money and get this state out of fiduciary debt.”
Speakers ranged from those that challenged the position of the panel, to those who wanted to acquire the opinion of the two officers and the psychologist.
Speaking last, Ed Sulla of Bakersfield’s National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) chapter, took the lectern and challenged the panel’s position on the proposition and opinion on marijuana in general.
“I just wanted to address that it is being compared to alcohol and tobacco, I think because of the taxation aspect and legalizing for adults – that is where that begins and ends.”
It was addressed by the panel and speakers earlier in the discussion that the legalization of marijuana and its regulation by the government, would be much the same as the status with tobacco and alcohol. The panel went on to comment that just because two other addictive and psychically harming drugs are legal, doesn’t justify legalizing a third.
“Up until cannabis was made illegal in the United States in 1937 it was available in various forms in pharmacies,” said Sulla. “It is well-documented as a medicine.”
The panel also stressed its concerns for impaired driving rates and statistics if the law was passed. Sulla went on to rebuke the claims that it would pose a greater risk among traffic.
Referring to an article in the marijuana publication, The West Coast Leaf, Sulla said, “There is an article in here that says that, ‘Data shows that marijuana no big factor in highway safety,’ they did a study in the states that have medical marijuana and have had that for years now.there is really no increase in highway accidents due to cannabis in those states.”
While wrapping up the discussion Sulla stressed that marijuana affects different people in different ways and that psychological people can be addicted to everything.