Replies

"Ever watch a high-speed chase on COPS? I wonder, since the guy is going to court anyway, how does the judge handle the 4 counts: Running a stop sign, 6 counts: Running a red light, 24 counts: Failure to signal a lane change, etc.

Or does he just throw those out in favor of the charges for fleeing a police officer, resisting arrest, etc.?"

I don't know about Chicago, but where I live a guy with that many charges probably wouldn't get any slack. Judges here don't normally throw anything out unless the prosecutor recommends it as part of a plea bargain. Normally, if I have a guy charged with possession of marijuana and a minor traffic offense or two, I'm much more likely to get rid of one or more of the minor traffic offenses than the more serious pot charge. Then they'll fine the guy $630 on the pot charge, give him a 90 day suspended sentence, 8 months probation where he'll meet with a probation officer once a month and pay the fee for this, take his license for six months and make him complete and pay for a marijuana offender program which counts as drug treatment for statistical purposes. If he's been fleeing from the cops he's liable to get jail time too and they aren't likely to drop a fleeing charge unless it was kind of a bogus charge to begin with.

"Doper: Mr. Leroy Washington"

Good jab at Mr. Leroy. :) By the way, I think "doper" actually means people who do hard drugs in most places. If I ask my clients about smoking dope they are liable to reply, "no way, I might smoke a little weed but I never touch dope." I have to make sure to use the right words or there is liable to be a mix-up that might hurt us in trial or plea negotiations. It would be better to use "stoner" or "pothead" to describe heavy pot smokers if you want to use a derogatory term that won't cause confusion. Personally, I wouldn't refer to a casual pot smoker as a stoner or pothead anymore than I would call a casual drinker a drunk. But I understand why your motivation.

"Cop: Well, here's your $500. ticket, Mr. Washington. Be sure to pay it.
Doper: Uh. Yessir. I surely will.

(Now the gang is on the ground, howling, tears running down their faces)

Yep, that'll teach them to respect Chicago cops."

Harassing gang members over petty crimes that will be dismissed anyway won't teach them respect for the law either. Actually, harassing anyone, gangster or not, over something as minor as marijuana has exactly the opposite effect on people. It makes them have nothing but contempt for the law and law enforcement in general. I was never caught with marijuana back in my pot smoking days, but I viewed the police with contempt, as did just about everyone else I knew who smoked pot. We knew the police would arrest us if they caught us with pot, so we didn't exactly regard the police as our friends. To us they were power tripping a-holes who bothered people for no good reason. Millions of people smoke pot. Close to a 100,000,000 have done it and many of those did it regularly or at least occasionally for a time. I suspect most of them probably looked at police and the laws the same way pot smokers did where I am from. These laws against marijuana possession and the enforcement of same do not foster respect for the law or police. They do exactly the opposite, on a grand scale.