Suburbanites may pay more for arrests
by Lori Barrett | June 9, 2008 at 5:55 am
Posted in baltimore crime, drugs
Baltimore City Council is scheduled to introduce legislation tonight that would surcharge suburbanites and out-of-staters who buy drugs in the city.
In addition to any criminal penalties, nonresidents of Baltimore could receive a $1,000 ticket to cover the cost of their arrest. Baltimore City residents are exempt from the fine because they pay (or should pay) taxes. Said William Cole, the councilman who sponsored the bill: “These civil citations serve as a way to extract our pound of flesh.”
However, the exemption of Baltimore City residents is raising some questions.
The ACLU is calling it unconstitutional: “You can’t treat the citizens of Baltimore differently… than the citizens of other jurisdictions. If you’ve committed a crime, you’ve committed a crime.” Law enforcement officials also question its effectiveness by targeting only out-of-town residents.
Police arrested about 20,000 suspects with a known address on drug charges last year. About 15 percent of these suspects were residents of the surrounding counties. Another 6,800 suspects had no known address. State law already allows prosecutors to collect up to a $25,000 fine.
Is this the right way to approach Baltimore’s drug problem? Seems to me that we should be focusing a bit more on the source of the problem rather than the residencies of the buyers…
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
June 9th, 2008 at 12:38 pm | Please log in to reply. | Log in to rate this comment | report this comment
YES!! Finally! They found a way to Keep Baltimore drugs for Baltimore! I hate it when these kids from Pasadena and Howard Co. come into our city and buying up all of our drugs and going back to their homes. They don't even stay to take in the sights and sounds of the local Baltimore neighborhood corners. Keep Baltimore drugs for Baltimore.
June 9th, 2008 at 2:46 pm | Please log in to reply. | Log in to rate this comment | report this comment
I agree with you Lori - fining the buyers is not a deterent. Think about it - the people that are buying (regardless of geopgraphy) are already willing to risk fines, lawyer fees, and most importantly, a night in the dreaded Central Booking. Is the POTENTIAL (will never be upheld in court) for an additional fine is going to make an addicted person stop and think "hmmm..maybe this isn't a good idea?" Hello no, if you need a bag of dope, you'll walk through broken glass with no shoes on if need be.
The only person in the equation that's making a concious decision not dictated by (for the most part) a mental health issue are the dealers. And I'm not talking about the 12 year olds that hand out the drugs...I mean the 20-35 year old that supply, package and recruit the dealers. Those guys are biggest ****heads of all - not only do they prey on other people's weakness for drugs, they ruin the lives of young people from the neighborhood in the process.
Anyway...I don't know the answer to the bigger problem. I just know that this bill seems really transparent and cosmetic.
!
June 10th, 2008 at 2:44 am | Please log in to reply. | Log in to rate this comment | report this comment
I see the downside to my cheer. This bill is going to keep out of county big responsable buyers: the business people and responsable drug culture will be out of the city. They will set up a courier to meet them out of county (but not in Harford Co. Don't deal with those cops). This will help them more and in the same event it will keep them out of the city and not spending any other $$ that they wouuld normally. I'm talking strippers and pole dancers. Liquor store owners and NON-ARMED cab drivers. Maybe even a hotel room in the Inner Harbor. See your city tax base shrink now? Don't tax the tourists!
You can kiss that all good-bye.
Damn, there's always a downside.