By Darren Smith, Weekend Contributor
Simple marijuana possession is legal in several states and is likely to be in others in the future. Yet, the taint of a marijuana conviction on record can be a limiting factor for the convicted seeking employment and other benefits–Especially for engaging in an act that is essentially legal in green states. While certainly the courts are under no present obligation to expunge these records, morally it can be argued that state legislatures should put this social handicap to a rest.
Simply put the run-of-the-mill stoner is not a menace to society. The drug kingpins are. A case certainly can be made that the latter’s criminal record should remain permanent as could likely be articulated with most felony (trafficking) drug charges that organized crime and associated felonies contribute to disruptions. There is a fundamental difference between these two.
Presently there is a movement in many states to remove the right of employers, in general, to have on job applications a check box for the applicant to use if they have a criminal conviction. Many employers will read this box and simply discard the application from further consideration. There is an articulable need for specific cases such as banks needing information concerning conviction records for theft or embezzlement but it is doubtful that simple marijuana possession records in green states should bar an applicant from further consideration when it is immaterial to the requirements of the position applied for.
But in addition to this for otherwise law-abiding citizens the stigma of having a criminal record tends to have a chilling effect to some degree on self esteem and confidence to move forward. For many it is an unnecessary burden.
It is time to move forward and expunge simple marijuana conviction records.
By Darren Smith
The views expressed in this posting are the author’s alone and not those of the blog, the host, or other weekend bloggers. As an open forum, weekend bloggers post independently without pre-approval or review. Content and any displays or art are solely their decision and responsibility.
Regardless of how it’s perceived, society’s laws are an extension of society’s morals. There is no such thing as divine law, natural law, or any other sort of law that is independent of society. History proves this. Laws that are morally wrong, as perceived through a more and more evolved society, change and must continue to change. Once a society admits that a law is/was wrong then it must address the residual effects of that now defunct law. The authority of a society rests on its responsibility to its participants, not blind adherence to doctrines that may or may not endure.
issacbasonkavich – often it is only part of the society that thinks something should or should not be illegally. Do we need consensus?
10,000 INNOCENT PEOPLE CONVICTED EACH YEAR, STUDY ESTIMATES
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/ronhuff.htm
And that’s only for those who go to trial and based on asserting 1/2% of total convictions.
Innocence Project
The Causes of Wrongful Conviction
http://www.innocenceproject.org/causes-wrongful-conviction
If the Criminal Justice system ever provides “Justice” for it’s ignorant population, it did so by accident.
Neo – the Constitution does not guarantee that if you are innocent you will be found not guilty, only that if you are found guilty you will get a fair trial. Rather frightening when you think about it.
Precedent
An article found in the December 6, 1933 Los Angeles Times had a headline of “Old Federal Dry Law Violators to Stay in Jail”.
A Federal prosecutor stated that absent any instructions from the Attorney General, no sentences would be commuted, but the prosecutor said that there weren’t many people left in jail on bootlegging charges.
Doglover mentions tatoos:
One tatoo: drunk at the carnival.
Two tatoos: Navy!
Three or more tatoos: INMATE!
And 99 percent of those with tatoos, particularly three or more, are tobacco smokers. Went in dumb, come out dumb too.
Yup, and despite the KNOWN consequences, people still find the risk worth it. So perhaps the consequences are not severe enough.
The US has the highest incarceration rate in the world. It only consists of 5% of the world’s population yet accounts for over 20% of the world’s prison population. Even higher than Russia or China. Once convicted, you can never serve your debt to society, you are a convict for life. Even just arrests are have the same results without conviction. Land of the free?
Paul,
Absolutely. “Your honor, it is well known the law my client has been alleged to have violated is not really supported by the community he lives in. We believe it discriminates against his lifestyle and therefore the law is morally repugnant. We are prepared to bring in as many witnesses as necessary to demonstrate the community objects to this law on moral grounds. We will also be calling several witnesses currently locked up for violating this morally heinous law. We therefore request all charges be dropped and my client be set free, that would be the morally righteous thing to do.”
Yeah, so much for civil society.
“The authority of the law must rest on an inherent responsibility for what is morally righteous, not on what is or isn’t the law.”
WTF!?
isaac,
So you would prefer to live in a society where laws are subordinated to moral opinions? It’s bad enough that the security of rights depends largely on what laws are enforced in a particular jurisdiction but are you seriously advocating that those laws should be subordinated to what the local authorities find to be morally righteous? Your post reminds me of the movie, “My Cousin Vinny”. Morally righteous equals morally relative when law is abandoned for popular opinion.
Olly – I can see that working in court when I say on the stand that I feel that it was morally right to rob the Circle K.
RB,
That’s it? You’ve only discovered the Bush Administration to have subordinated the rule of law to their own designs? That is a bit myopic, don’t you think? I would suggest you begin with the current administration and work backwards. It should take you awhile to reach the Bush years, at least if you ‘actually’ care about justice and the rule of law.
Paul
Life is not that black and white. To ruin a person’s life for smoking pot is reprehensible regardless of the structure of the law. Legalizing pot in those states that have done so and will eventually do so is a statement of admission that the law was wrongly conceived. Those who were jailed and had their lives ruined for mere possession should, at the very least, be given a completely clean slate. The authority of the law must rest on an inherent responsibility for what is morally righteous, not on what is or isn’t the law.
issacbasonkavich – If you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime. Just as true today as it was when the TV detective said it many years ago.
The Bush Administration violated federal felony statutes in their warrantless wiretapping crimes, so let’s have equal justice under law – what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
RB – given the rate at which the DOJ is prosecuting we will all be long dead before they get around to the Bushs.
I’ve heard that in prison, having a tatoo is a sign of toughness. Those without a tatoo are intimidated by those with tatoos. Hence many x-cons wear their history on their skin.
Character matters and choosing to do something you know is against the law demonstrates something about your character. Now if that offense was done when you were 17 it could be argued immaturity played a major role in your decision-making process. At some point it is assumed people have matured in that process and if they still choose to break the law then their character is questionable. I have a problem with the changes in sentencing laws that allow early release because the laws have changed. These people broke the law during a time when our culture deemed the crime and punishment proportional. The criminal made the choice that the risk was worth it; do the time.
Employers should know the character of who they hire but a conviction should lead to further questions, not stop the process. It’s like filtering an application based on a degree. I would filter based on military service over a degree all day long.
Any smart employer does a routine background check on employment applicants, even if they don’t check the box, or even if there is no box.
Sorry, Paul. The issue is equality before the law. To disadvantage some but not others for simple possession is inherently unequal treatment and need to be changed.
Velomac – they (the criminals) were willing to break the law when the law was in operation. I see no reason to give them a get out of jail free card today.
I agree w/ the expunging of cannabis possession. I do not agree w/ the eliminating the check box on employment applications for other criminal convictions. Now, I believe in hiring ex felons. I was a Vista volunteer back in the 70’s working @ a Federal Prisons halfway house as a job developer. Employers have a right and need to know the background of whom they are hiring. The way to approach this is from the positive, ENCOURAGE employers to hire ex convicts. I see our Prez is making the Federal govt. ignore convictions. That is, like most of what he does, wrong. Hiring should be encouraged but EVERY hire needs to be analyzed on a case by case basis. Are you going to hire a drug addict as a pharmacy assistant? A child sex offender as a daycare worker? COMMON SENSE is on the endangered list in our current culture.
I think we should go back to Prohibition. But not on alcohol. And not on pot. On tobacco.
A bunch of you folks on the blog are tobacco smokers. I could probably predict who. But it is not who but when which is relevant. Tobacco kills. When someone croaks they might die of heart failure but they have had a lung removal and a lot of cancer treatment. The death certificate does not say cause of death: smoking tobacco. Yet that was the cause.
I dont want to say something like “went in dumb, come out dumb too.” But the laws could be changed to expunge convictions for making dago red wine or moonshine liguor or convictions for growing pot. That would be good. The first one for a few relatives when I was a human in a prior life.
When we went to the local gas station recently and I went inside as a guide dog the cashier was selling cigarettes to some people who were obviously minors. Not coal minors. The cashier should be prosecuted.
I feel that when you break the law you break the law. That is the point here. They were willing to break the law when it was the law so it should stay. No get out of jail free card.
Good column , and a reasonable recommendation. Thanks to Homeland Security and its funding of programs like Desert Snow/Black Asphalt, they would probably remain in federal databases.
Doesn’t seem like the smartest use of resources to combat terrorism.
Very true, this should be done as soon as possible across all states.
The Science Geek
http://www.thesciencegeek.org