Laserfiche WebLink
categories `stand alone' and `civil incidental' as opposed to the criminal incidental."6 As <br /> d <br /> a result, Miron finds the proportion of stand alone arrests and reduces the total of an•ests <br /> .R by this amount. A review of the data definitions used in reporting Uniform Crime <br /> Statistics indicates that in the case of multiple counts the most serious charge is the only <br /> one reported. Given the law in Hawaii and the nature of the arrests, marijuana possession <br /> is only more serious than traffic violations. Thus it is more accurate to use the arrest <br /> statistics reported for Hawaii under the Uniform Crime Information System without <br /> adjustment. In this instance this report differs from Miron. <br /> <br /> 7 Estimating the budgetary implications of legalization is somewhat more difficult. <br /> In terms of enforcement costs the same procedure used in analyzing decriminalization is <br /> employed. Because additional costs include jail time for offenders, and because actual <br /> numbers exist for persons incarcerated and associated costs, these are added. Taxation, <br /> <br /> r, which would play a significant role in legalization, requires assumptions about the public <br /> policy that would be pursued, the social costs of legalization, and estimates about how <br /> much supply would increase. Miron (2004) reports $4 million per year as potential tax <br /> revenue from legalization in Hawaii. A different methodology would be to use per capita <br /> tax revenue from alcohol and tobacco as a basis for estimating tax revenue. <br /> Bud etary Effects <br /> Table 1, below contains possession arrests, total arrests, percentage of possession <br /> arrests, county police expenditures and the cost of enforcement. Arrests are from the <br /> Uniform Crime Statistics of the Department of Justice. County police expenditures are <br /> from the United States Census, State and Local Government. These statistics cover 1998 <br /> through 2002. The Census does not provide state and local data for every yeaz. Although <br /> <br /> ar <br /> alternative statistics and budgets are available, using Census data combines state and <br /> <br /> r <br /> e Ibid. p. 4 <br /> ~ Miron reduces Massachusetts' arrests by two-thirds as a result of this adjustment. Thus <br /> <br /> °'r this means there would be significant differences between the two reports. However the <br /> difference is data driven. Miron finds 1.7 percent of all arrests in Massachusetts in 2000 <br /> would fall into these two categories. In 2000, in Hawaii 1.72 percent of all arrests were <br /> <br /> 'r mazijuana possession arrests. Given similar marijuana use patterns and risk of arrest this <br /> indicates that the results are compazable when the revision is not used. <br /> 5 <br /> <br />