ShareThis Page
Pittsburgh has small chance of passing a marijuana legalization law like Denver’s |

Pittsburgh has small chance of passing a marijuana legalization law like Denver’s

| Thursday, November 3, 2005 12:00 a.m

Holy smoke! Denver residents voted this week to decriminalize small amounts of marijuana in their newly re-defined “Mile High City.”

National marijuana-rights activists said don’t hold your breath when it comes to expecting any initiatives in Western Pennsylvania anytime soon.

The first clue might be that the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) has chapters in such far-flung places as Kailua-Kona, Hawaii, Casper, Wyo., and Hermosa, S.D., but nary a one in Pittsburgh.

The free-marijuana movement, at the edge of liberal, or “progressive” politics, has taken hold in predictable places like Seattle and Oakland, Calif., but is practically nonexistent around these parts, NORML executive director Paul Armentano said. Armentano said that he didn’t know of any proposals to mellow out laws associated with marijuana use at any time, ever in Pennsylvania, which differed from virtually all neighboring states.

“Quite honestly, Pennsylvania is not a hot-bed of drug policy reform,” Armentano said.

Washington, D.C., Marijuana Policy Project spokesman Bruce Mirken said this area was not on his radar, period.

“I don’t know,” Mirken said of Western Pennsylvania’s prospects. “Maybe it’s in the water.”

Or maybe it’s in a more obvious place. Pennsylvania, the entire state, is known for having some of the strictest marijuana laws in the country, Armentano said.

Currently, Keystone-staters face 30 days in jail and a possible $500 fine, if arrested with 30 grams or less of the leafy hallucinogen.

By comparison, the Buckeye state next door has decided to treat first-time minor marijuana offenses as some of the least serious ones under law.

First-time small-time offenders in Ohio face no jail time, are subject to no criminal record, and pay $100 or less (the prosecutorial equivalent of a speeding ticket), for having upward of 100 grams of pot.

Commander Thomas Stangrecki, head of Pittsburgh Police Bureau’s Narcotics and Vice Division, said Denver’s new measure is “definitely a bad idea.” The police commander said he thought more impaired driving would happen in that city because of it.

Most Pittsburghers would never support decriminalization of marijuana, Stangrecki said. “A lot of people in Pittsburgh are concerned about illegal (drug) use and sales,” he said.

“It’s hard to say,” said Steve McClain, who owns the Slacker store on Carson Street in the South Side. “I don’t know if (Pittsburgh) would be the last place on earth” to get pot legalization.

When Slacker opened in 1991, it was one of the city’s few pot smoker-friendly establishments that sold pipes and bongs.

Then, almost two years ago, the local U.S. Attorney’s Office made headlines when it was part of a nationwide crackdown, “Operation Pipe Dreams,” that involved Slacker and other drug paraphernalia distributors.

Among more than 30 defendants, was California actor Tommy Chong, of the famed comedy duo Cheech & Chong, and a virtual Mt. Rushmore face for the pot-smoking community. He went to prison for being the face of “Chong Glass,” handmade pipes.

Slacker stopped selling bongs, even before the 2003 raid, McClain said.

Western District U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan said her office wasn’t particularly zealous when it came to enforcing federal laws, associated with marijuana.

“This region has a reputation for abiding by the law,” Buchanan said.

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.