Well, folks the unenforceable "blunt ban" had its 15 minutes and is now on the way out the door. Good thing that our City Council wasted a bunch of time and effort (nevermind the tax money) on getting this bill passed. Next time maybe they will listen to the constituents that told them that this was going to happen from the beginning. Stay tuned.
-dOc
http://www.northeasttimes.com
Law banning the sale
of â??bluntsâ?? overturned
By William Kenny
Times Staff Writer
A Philadelphia judge has overturned a city ordinance passed unanimously by City Council in December that banned the local sale of a series of products commonly linked to drug abuse.
Citing the ordinanceâ??s conflict with state law regarding drug paraphernalia, Common Pleas Court Judge Gary S. Glazer on March 7 ruled the local provisions unenforceable.
The ordinance, introduced last spring by Councilman Brian Oâ??Neill (R-10th dist.), banned the sale of certain tobacco products in many local stores. Specifically, the measure targeted so-called "blunts" and flavored cigars, as well as cigarette and cigar wrapping products that the lawâ??s advocates claim are intentionally marketed to young people with the knowledge that many will use them to smoke marijuana and other drugs.
The law exempted specialty tobacco stores, hotels and restaurants, but applied to hundreds of convenience stores and "stop and go" stores throughout the city, as well as retail establishments within 500 feet of schools, churches and other places where children gather.
The blunts law took effect on Jan. 23. Cigar manufacturers and marketers challenged it with a Common Pleas Court lawsuit on Jan. 30.
In overturning the law, Glazer wrote, "Although the ordinance has a laudable anti-drug objective, its operation is inconsistent with state law. The ordinance converts a specific intent offense into a strict liability one, subjecting legitimate businesses selling legal dual-use products to the arbitrary enforcement of the City of Philadelphia Department of Licenses and Inspections."
That is, state law requires that local authorities enforcing restrictions on drug paraphernalia prove the intent by the seller, buyer or possessor to use the item as such. State law outlines 13 factors to consider when making such a determination.
The factors include verbal statements, written instructions, visual depictions, proximity of the alleged paraphernalia to controlled substances and expert testimony concerning its use.
During Council debate of the bill last year, however, anti-drug advocates argued that existing law was ineffective in preventing the sale of illegally used blunts, which is a common occurrence on street corners throughout the city, they said.
Glazer, in his written opinion, quoted then-Assistant District Attorney Mike Erdos, now a Common Pleas Court candidate, from Erdosâ?? Council testimony.
"In order to arrest store owners or employees or go after the property through drug forfeiture, we have to demonstrate a specific intent by these individuals to sell their wares for drug-related purposes," Erdos said. "It has been difficult to demonstrate this intent to the courtâ??s satisfaction."
Furthermore, other witnesses said, some cigar manufacturers and retailers seemingly cater to dubious purchasers â?? notably teens and young adults â?? by producing and selling candy-flavored products.
In fact, one addiction expert claimed that cigar manufacturers modified their products with potential drug abusers in mind. That is, before sweet-flavored blunts were available on the shelves, smokers would dip standard ones in various substances to improve the taste.
Following Glazerâ??s ruling, Oâ??Neill said he intends to pursue the issue. The city may appeal the ruling. If so, the councilman hopes that an appellate court might offer lawmakers some guidance as to more appropriate language to achieve the goals of the ordinance. Also, Oâ??Neill said, it may be possible to pursue statewide legislation. â?¢â?¢
