Another example of the SFPD's continued hostility toward cannabis despite both the voters and the Board of Supervisors voting to make it the department's lowest priority. Will the Police Commission please tell the department to get its priorities straight and stop wasting their energy and resources on enforcement that the public doesn't want?
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
I am wondering how much the SFPD's hostility might have to do with their wishing to keep on the good side of conservative supporters. I am thinking donors to the Police Officers Association, donors to political supporters of the SFPD (note that Democrats won handily in California, except for Kamala Harris, who as of last time I checked was two points difference from Cooley). In other words, maybe grassroots activism (which puts progressive measures on the books) takes a back seat to solid financial backing?
Marcy
Marcy,
My best guess is, not too much. I think police officers tend to be politically conservative without any outside pressure. The POA effectively *is* the SFPD, and as a union, they want to protect their narc jobs. They have financial and power incentives to keep cannabis criminalized. Psychologically, I think many police also do not want to admit that the Drug War they've been fighting all these years is an immoral failure, and that people do *not* deserve to be arrested for smoking cannabis.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))