Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

MARIJUANA DECRIM BILL IN MA GENERAL COURT RIGHT NOW
The Massachusetts General Court (legislature) ^ | this current legislative session | n/a

Posted on 01/15/2003 9:47:52 AM PST by Hemingway's Ghost

HOUSE, No. 1223

By Mr. Hill of Ipswich (by request), petition of Steven S. Epstein for legislation to further regulate the use of marijuana. The Judiciary.

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts
______________________

In the Year Two Thousand and One.

______________________

AN ACT TO REGULATE MARIJUANA IN THE COMMONWEALTH.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:

SECTION 1. The definition of “marihuana” appearing in section one of chapter ninety-four C of the General Laws as appearing in the 1998 Official Edition, is stricken.

SECTION 2. The definition of “Tetrahydrocannabinol” appearing in section one of chapter ninety-four C of the General Laws as appearing in the 1998 Official Edition, is hereby amended by striking all words following the first “marihuana.”

SECTION 3. Section thirty-one of chapter ninety-four C of the General Laws as appearing in the 1998 Official Edition, is hereby amended by striking “Marihuana” from “Class D.”

SECTION 4. Subsection (a) of section thirty-two E of chapter ninety-four C of the General Laws as appearing in the 1998 Official Edition, is hereby repealed and the balance of the subsections re-lettered.

SECTION 5. The fourth sentence of the first paragraph of section thirty-four of chapter ninety-four C of the General Laws as appearing in the 1998 Official Edition, hereby amended by striking out the words “marihuana or.”

SECTION 6. The first sentence of the third paragraph of section thirty-four of chapter ninety-four C of the General Laws as appearing in the 1998 Official Edition, is hereby amended by striking the words “marijuana or.”

SECTION 7. Subsection (c)(4) of section forty-seven of chapter ninety-four C of the General Laws as appearing in the 1998 Official Edition, is hereby repealed.

SECTION 8. Section one of chapter sixty-four K of the General Laws as appearing in the 1998 Official Edition, is hereby amended by striking the definition of “Marihuana” and inserting in place thereof the following— “Marihuana”, the leaves and flowers of the plant Cannabis sativa L., whether growing or not; any preparation of the leaves and flowers, and any resin extracted from any part of the plant, provided said leaves and flowers, preparations or resins contain a concentration of delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol in excess of two percent by weight excluding all water in excess of fifteen (15) percent by weight.

SECTION 9. Section one of chapter sixty-four K of the General Laws as appearing in the 1998 Official Edition, is hereby amended by striking the definition of “Dealer” and inserting in place thereof:— “Dealer”, a person who, manufactures, produces, cultivates, ships, transports, or imports into the commonwealth, more than forty grams of marihuana, or seven or more grams of a controlled substance, or ten or more dosage units of a controlled substance which is not sold by weight.

SECTION 10. Section seven of chapter sixty-four K of the General Laws, as appearing in the 1998 Official Edition, is hereby amended by striking the first sentence and inserting in place thereof the words:— For the purposes of calculating the tax due under section eight, a quantity of marihuana shall be measured by weight. For the purposes of calculating the tax due under section eight, a quantity of a controlled substance shall be measured by the weight of the substance whether pure or impure or dilute, or by dosage unit when the substance is not sold by weight.

SECTION 11. Subclause one of section eight of chapter sixty-four K of the General Laws as appearing in the 1998 Official Edition, is hereby amended by striking “three dollars and fifty cents” and inserting in place thereof the words:— “one dollar”.

SECTION 12. Section nine of chapter sixty-four K of the General Laws as appearing in the 1998 Official Edition, is hereby amended by striking the word “one” and inserting in its place the word “two.”

SECTION 13. The first paragraph of section eleven of chapter sixty-four of the General Laws as appearing in the 1998 Official Edition, is hereby stricken and the following inserted in place thereof:— When a dealer manufactures, produces, or cultivates marihuana or controlled substances on which a tax is imposed by section eight they shall permanently affix on the packaging thereof the indicia evidencing the payment of the tax prior to sale or distribution and shall obtain sufficient stamps for the aforesaid purpose prior to commencing the manufacture, production, or cultivates marihuana or controlled substances. When a dealer transports, imports or acquires marihuana or controlled substances on which a tax is imposed by section eight and the indicia indicating payment of the tax has not been affixed to the packaging thereof, the dealer shall within one business day cause the indicia indicating payment of the tax to be affixed to the packaging thereof. Each stamp or other official indicia shall be used only once.

SECTION 14. The third paragraph of section twelve of chapter sixty-four K of the General Laws, as appearing in the 1998 Official Edition, is hereby stricken and the following inserted in place thereof:— In any action brought by a taxpayer for an abatement of a tax assessed pursuant to this section the burden of production and persuasion shall be the commissioner’s. An affidavit filed by the commissioner setting forth the knowledge and information available to the commissioner at the time of the tax assessment and used to determine or assess the amount of tax and penalties shall be prima facie proof of the facts contained therein. The burden of production shall then be upon the dealer to introduce evidence that such tax or penalty has been arbitrarily, incorrectly, or illegally assessed, or that the information and knowledge of the commissioner was obtained in violation of the taxpayer’s rights secured by articles twelve and fourteen of the Declaration of Rights. The taxpayer shall have a right to trial by jury in superior court.

SECTION 15. The section thirteen of chapter sixty-four K of the General Laws as appearing in the 1998 Official Edition, is hereby amended by striking the entire section and substituting the following therefor:— Notwithstanding the provisions of any general or special law to the contrary, neither the commissioner nor any public employee shall reveal facts contained in a report or return required by this chapter or any information obtained from a dealer; nor can any such information contained in such a report or return or otherwise obtained from a dealer be used against such dealer in criminal proceeding, unless such information was independently obtained, except in connection with a proceeding involving taxes due under this chapter from the dealer making such return. Any person violating the provisions of this section shall be punished by imprisonment in a house of correction for not more than two years or by a fine of not more than five thousand dollars, or both and shall be barred for life from public employment, except elective office. Any taxpayer who is the subject of such unlawful disclosure of facts may recover damages against such person pursuant to section one B of chapter two hundred and fourteen. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the commissioner from publishing statistics that do not disclose the identity of dealers or the contents of particular returns or reports.

SECTION 16. The first and second sentences of section fourteen of chapter sixty-four C of the General Laws as appearing in the 1998 Official Edition, are hereby stricken and the following inserted:— Having probable cause to believe a return is incorrect or that the tax required in section eight has not been paid or a dealer should have made a return or paid taxes under this chapter the commissioner may require the attendance of any person having knowledge or information relevant to making a determination of the correctness of any return, the amount of tax that should have been paid, or whether or not a dealer should have made a return or paid taxes under this chapter and may compel the production of books, papers, records, or memoranda by persons required to attend and may take testimony on matters material to the determination, and administer oaths or affirmations.

SECTION 17. Section fourteen of chapter sixty-four C of the General Laws, as appearing in the 1998 Official Edition, is further amended by inserting at the end thereof the following:— When seeking to enforce a subpoena the burden shall be on the commissioner to establish probable cause for the issuance of the subpoena.

SECTION 18. Subsection (1)(a)(1) of section twenty-four of chapter ninety is hereby amended by inserting after the words “or of marijuana” the phrase:— as defined in section one of chapter sixty-four K .

SECTION 19. Chapter two hundred and seventy-two of the General Laws as appearing in the 1998 Official Edition, is hereby amended by adding after section ninety-nine A the following section one hundred:— Section 1. Whoever makes a sale or delivery of any marihuana, as defined in section one of chapter sixty-four K, to any person under seventeen years of age, either for the person’s own use or for the use of the person’s parent or any other person, or whoever employs any person under seventeen years of age for the direct handling, sale or delivery of marihuana shall be punished for a first offense by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than five years or imprisonment in jail for not more than two and one-half years, or by a fine of not less than one thousand dollars nor more than five thousand dollars, or both, and for subsequent offense by a fine of not less than five thousand dollars nor more than ten thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not less than five years nor more than seven years, or both. Section 2. Whoever makes a sale or delivery of any marihuana, as defined in section one of chapter sixty-four K, to any person over seventeen years of age but under twenty-one years of age, either for the person’s own use or for the use of the person’s parent or any other person, or whoever employs any person over seventeen years of age but under twenty-one years of age for the direct handling, sale or delivery of marihuana shall be punished for a first offense by a fine of not less than one thousand dollars nor more than five thousand dollars or by imprisonment in a house of correction for not more than two and one-half years, or both, and for subsequent offense by a fine of not less than five thousand dollars nor more than ten thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not less than two years nor more than five years, or both. Section 3. No person under the age of twenty-one shall be a dealer nor knowingly or intentionally possess marihuana, both as defined in section one of chapter sixty-four K, unless such substance was obtained directly pursuant to the provisions of chapter ninety-four D. Any person convicted of violating this section shall be punished by a fine of not less than two hundred dollars nor more than five hundred dollars or by not less than twenty nor more than one hundred hours of community service, or by both fine and community service.

Section 4. Any person who smokes marihuana in or upon public property, or in or upon any privately owned property to which the public is invited where the smoking of tobacco products is prohibited by state law or regulation, municipal ordinance or by-law shall be punished in the same manner as that imposed for smoking tobacco.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; Politics/Elections; US: Massachusetts
KEYWORDS: decrim; dopers; liberdopians; marijuana; narcofacists; wodlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-29 next last
I'm a freelance journalist, and while researching a project, I came across this bill. If passed, it would represent the beginnings of an Amsterdam-like marijuana decriminalization system in the Commonwealth.
1 posted on 01/15/2003 9:47:53 AM PST by Hemingway's Ghost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: MrLeRoy; vin-one
Thought you guys might be interested in this. Please ping your lists.
2 posted on 01/15/2003 9:48:45 AM PST by Hemingway's Ghost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry; Roscoe; Dane; Destructor; robertpaulsen; unspun
Thought you guys might be interested in this.
3 posted on 01/15/2003 9:49:44 AM PST by Hemingway's Ghost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Hemingway's Ghost
In the Year Two Thousand and One?
4 posted on 01/15/2003 9:51:56 AM PST by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: *Wod_list
Wod_list pinged.
5 posted on 01/15/2003 9:52:35 AM PST by MrLeRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Hemingway's Ghost
How come this has a 2001 date on it?
6 posted on 01/15/2003 9:53:00 AM PST by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Hemingway's Ghost
2001?

...And people just get uglier and I have no sense of time." Bob Dylan

7 posted on 01/15/2003 9:56:02 AM PST by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Hemingway's Ghost
It's linked to from a page that's headed, "House numbers 1201 through 1300 of the 2001-2002 Session." No sign of it in the 2003 docket.
8 posted on 01/15/2003 9:59:35 AM PST by MrLeRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hemingway's Ghost
Here's another one from Barney Frank from "Smith Barney Frank" :http://216.167.102.130/BarneyFrankBill.htm
9 posted on 01/15/2003 10:00:01 AM PST by bigfootbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
I think that's the year in which it was first proposed/submitted.
10 posted on 01/15/2003 10:07:55 AM PST by Hemingway's Ghost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MrLeRoy
Further research reveals that MassCann is pushing its members to petition their legislators, especially the new ones in districts where the non-binding decrim ballot questions won overwhelmingly, to make sure the bill is read.
11 posted on 01/15/2003 10:10:26 AM PST by Hemingway's Ghost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Hemingway's Ghost; jmc813
ping to the one who's list is better than mine.
12 posted on 01/15/2003 10:11:44 AM PST by vin-one (I wish i had something clever to put in this tag)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie; vin-one; WindMinstrel; headsonpikes; philman_36; Beach_Babe; jenny65; AUgrad; Xenalyte; ...
WOD Ping
13 posted on 01/15/2003 10:14:24 AM PST by jmc813 (My tagline used to say "Go Jets!!!!", but I am now looking for a new one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hemingway's Ghost
Really doesn't matter what the state says, the feds say no. I think Arizona passed full legality (sales,growth,consumption) but the feds said no way. So unfortunately we're still doomed to keep paying the extremely high bill for the "War on Drugs".
14 posted on 01/15/2003 10:36:48 AM PST by walkingdead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: walkingdead
I think Arizona passed full legality (sales,growth,consumption) but the feds said no way.

Really? When was this?

15 posted on 01/15/2003 10:37:51 AM PST by Hemingway's Ghost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Hemingway's Ghost
Really? When was this?

A new urban myth is born.

16 posted on 01/15/2003 10:44:17 AM PST by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Hemingway's Ghost
Hope to read this soon. I'll try not to make any wisecracks about how appropriate this is for Massachusetts, you know, it being the bastion of conservatism it is and all. ;-`
17 posted on 01/15/2003 10:46:53 AM PST by unspun (One man's marijuana is another man's poison.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: unspun
Hope to read this soon. I'll try not to make any wisecracks about how appropriate this is for Massachusetts, you know, it being the bastion of conservatism it is and all. ;-`

Thanks---I'm looking forward to your input. Actually, in this regard, you'd be surprised at how "conservative" liberal Massachusetts is. We have several dry towns, and if you live more than approx. 7 miles from a state that allows alcohol sales on Sunday, you still can't buy a six pack on the Lord's 7th Day.

18 posted on 01/15/2003 10:54:39 AM PST by Hemingway's Ghost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: walkingdead
I no longer have the article, but not too long this came up in the Freeper discussions. The issue revolved around the States legalizing medical marijuana, and the Feds opposing it. When it went to court, and I think it was the 9th District, I Feds were basically told that that the States didn't have to comply with Federal Laws on this issue. The wording was something to the effect that The Federal Government could not compel State Officers to enforce certain laws. I am very loosely paraphrasing here, so forgive me for not getting it perfect.
19 posted on 01/15/2003 10:57:57 AM PST by Enterprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: rhombus
How come this has a 2001 date on it?

The legislators were stoned when they were drafting the bill.

20 posted on 01/15/2003 11:01:53 AM PST by jpl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-29 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson