People hate on Massachusetts for many things. We have high taxes, tough gun control, and we provided the country with a blueprint for socialist health care (a plan which is now causing us some problems). Believe it or not, giving government monopoly powers over an industry doesn’t work on the state level either, costs are exceeding revenues, and cuts are having to be made. The governor recently proposed denying health benefits to certain LEGAL immigrants, a decision that would have no basis in in the realms of logic or morality.

Two hundred and thirty-odd years ago, though, we were the epicenter of freedom. You know what other concept got its first test run here in MA? The written constitution. The legal document we all share - as citizens of what was originally a federation of diverse states with shared free trade, foreign, and defense policies - was based on the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, drafted by none other than Sam Adams, a graduate of my high school. When I think about his and other names on the great frieze above the royal purple curtains in the assembly hall back at the Latin School, I can’t help but be a little proud of my Bostonian heritage.

To the matter at hand: today I read an article from last week’s Herald (the more conservative of Boston’s two newspapers), about the effects on law enforcement practices of the recently-enacted citizen referendum to make marijuana possession a civil rather than criminal offense. Here’s the opener:

“Thumbing their noses at the state’s lax new pot law, Bay State stoners are brazenly lighting up in front of cops and then refusing to pay fines - leading some frustrated police chiefs to all but give up the fight.”

A friend of mine, a libertarian who shall remain nameless for obvious reasons, was recently smoking pot in a public park, and I asked him what he planned to do if a policeman passed by, and decided to hit him with the $100 fine that is the penalty for carrying an ounce or less of cannibus. “If he told me to give him 100 bucks?!” he retorted. “I’d tell him to give ME 100 bucks!” If you read the article, you’ll find that lots of other Boston-area residents seem to share his understanding of this issue. There is no reason ever to pay this fine. Points will not get added onto your license, and they won’t arrest you. They could haul you into court, theoretically, but that would cost them more than the amount of the fine. We may be socialists up here, but not all problems of economic calculations elude us.

“All told, a staggering 83 percent of 415 tokers cited in Boston since the law took effect in January have refused to pony up the $100, a Herald review shows.”

This should be major news! One hundred and sixty-years ago, a liberty-minded Massachusetts native wrote, in his treatise on the idea of civil disobedience to government, “when the subject has refused allegiance, and the officer has resigned his office, then the revolution is accomplished.”

83% of pot smokers are refusing allegiance to the state, by openly defying it. Police officers aren’t enforcing the law, if not on grounds of justice, than at least for practical reasons. According to Henry Thoreau’s definition, marijuana is now legal in Massachusetts (in my neighborhood, anyway). If the other 13% of the “Bay State stoners” heard the news, I am positive they would turn to civil resistance as well. Let’s all take note of Thoreau’s advice, and take heart: as ever, the strength of the people lies in our numbers, and if enough of us refuse to submit to oppression, oppression will end. I guess this means I’ll have to revise my campaign platform.

This entry was posted on Saturday, July 25th, 2009 at 10:22 pm and is filed under Americana, Civil Disobedience, Non-Violence, The Constitution.You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.