Bergslaw.com blog

Aren’t Laws Meant to Make Us Safer?
Thursday, April 8, 2010 - 02:11

Traffic laws and criminal laws are in place to make the world we live in a safer place, but what happens when a law does the opposite? That is the question many of California’s residence are asking in relation to a new California law that allows the early release of prisoners.

According to lawmakers, the law would release nonviolent offenders prior to the end of their sentence without parole supervision. It was said that it would save the state as much as $1 billion. With a budget deeply in the red, the new law seemed like a win, win. However, according to a recent Associated Press report hundreds of inmates have been released who were considered violent offenders. Apparently, the law was not specific enough and did not provide good enough direction to state prisons and county jails. Now, lawmakers are taking a second look, but is it already too late? 1,944 convicts have already been released; how many of those are violent offenders who can now be a threat to you and your family?

As budgets get tighter and states look to areas to save money, I have to wonder if laws are being passed for the safety and good of the public or if they are being passed for the benefit of the bottom line. Get more information at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/06/violent-parolees-go-unsup_n_527... and http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/31/california-now-freeing-vi_n_520... and decide for yourself.

View or add comments
California Seeing Grey on Marijuana Laws
Sunday, April 4, 2010 - 14:02

Typically lawyers and law enforcement turn to their state’s Supreme Court to set the precedent on tough legal issues; however, California’s Supreme Court’s recent rulings on medical marijuana cases have left law enforcement, lawyers, and medical marijuana advocates wanting and needing more.

The California Supreme Court recently determined not to uphold a law that only allowed medical marijuana users to possess eight ounces of marijuana. At first glance, this decision appears to be a victory in medical marijuana law. However, since the Supreme Court failed to define what the reasonable amount is, they have left medical marijuana users as unprotected as ever. The new ruling has prompted some district attorneys to drop charges on current cases, but have left them unsure of how to proceed with new cases. Furthermore, the ruling does nothing to protect medical marijuana users against arrest since it did not establish a clear line for how much marijuana is acceptable.

While the ruling is certainly another step in the right direction, it has further increased the confusion surrounding medical marijuana laws and has created another grey area. Law enforcement in different California counties already interpret and enforce the current law differently and this is sure to create even more discrepancy. With the new Tax Cannabis Act gaining support we are certain to see much more discussion on medical marijuana laws as wells as legalizing recreational marijuana usage.

View or add comments
Using Marijuana Could Help Your State’s Bottom Line
Wednesday, March 31, 2010 - 11:35

Did you ever think that smoking pot may just be the fiscally responsible thing to do? This is what proponents of legalizing marijuana in California are suggesting, and they may have just found their winning argument.
In the past, reasons to legalize marijuana have ranged from “it isn’t any more harmful than alcohol” to “it has medical value”. Now, the initiative known as the Tax Cannabis Act is calling to legalize marijuana for recreational use by adults. Therefore, marijuana sales could be taxed which would increase the state’s tax revenue. Opponents of the act say that these tax revenues will be offset by possible increases in crime and violence.

When I look at a state with a $20 billion deficit, it seems like they could use every dollar they can get. Collecting taxes on a good that is already being sold everyday certainly seems like working smarter not harder. Does this mean that I think the state of California and you, the voter, should blindly barge forward? No, like any issue there needs to be further research. Advocates of the ballot measure site that legalizing marijuana could bring $1.4 billion in tax revenue. I know I would feel more comfortable with this figure if more studies and sources were done and provided to support it. However, in the current economic environment, I believe the opponents of the measure are going to have to do better than a war of words to defeat it. They too are going to have to back their words with hard figures in order to convince the voter that there would be no financial benefit of legalizing marijuana.
The measure will be on the ballot this November. Are you going to research the reliability of both sides of the debate before you decide how to vote, or have you already made up your mind?

For additional information please see the following articles:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/26/us/26pot.html

http://www.chicoer.com/advertise/ci_14762300?IADID

View or add comments
The Dark Side of Youth Texting
Wednesday, March 24, 2010 - 15:50

Have you ever taken a nude photo of yourself via your cell phone and sent it to your significant other? Maybe you haven’t, but a growing number of teenagers are doing just that. It has become so common that a term has been created for this act; sexting.

While sexting may have parents wanting to confiscate their teenagers cell phones, is it really a criminal act? According to current laws, teenagers who send or forward a nude or risqué photo of themselves or another individual are treated like child pornographers and can be charged with distributing child pornography and have to register as a sex offender. Once again it appears the law has yet to catch up with technology. There is no disputing that a teenager sending or forwarding a nude photo of themselves or another can have very negative consequences and be severely damaging. However, to say this act is equivalent to the acts pornography laws were originally intended for, is lacking insight. Like most situations, teen sexting is not black and white. While a young man sending a nude photo to his willing girlfriend is bad judgment, if she then forwards this photo to her friends, this appears to be a criminal matter. However, does this make her or her friends who then forward it pornographers?

While some states are taking a look into their laws and realizing that they need to be updated to take into consideration varying situations, others have yet to act. Why is this so scary? Because your son, daughter, niece, nephew, or grandchild could be the next “sex offender” for one moment of bad judgment and curiosity. What is your state’s stance?

For additional information please see the following article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/21/us/21sexting.html

View or add comments
Syndicate content