Quantcast The Daily Pennsylvanian
DailyPennsylvanian.com
Issue date: 4/18/08 Section: Opinion

Lisa Zhu | A tale of two punishments

Penn students and Philly residents face very different consequences when it comes to the possession of marijuana

Lisa Zhu

  • Print
  • Email
  • Page 1 of 1
Lisa Zhu

This weekend, a large proportion of Penn's student body will be celebrating a holiday that has become an essential part of the culture and lifestyle of many Americans. While I do wish a happy Passover to my Jewish peers, the festivity that I speak of has nothing to do with Moses.

Rather, I'm referring to April 20, the one day of the year unofficially dedicated to the iconoclastic consumption of marijuana in the United States. But as certain students at Penn gleefully light up a joint this weekend, the consequences of doing the same for our neighbors a block away remain much more of a buzz kill.

Specifically, the regulations governing marijuana use and possession within many universities serve as a glaring indication of the privilege given to those of a certain socioeconomic status. And the disparity between Penn and Philadelphia's persecution of marijuana users is further indication of intrinsic unfairness in our criminal justice system.

My cursory investigation into how Penn deals with marijuana yielded few results. In other words, the University seems to have a very opaque or informal procedure for dealing with cases of marijuana possession.

"We do get cases of possession of marijuana. I have no clue how many we get, and I have no clue how many go to court," said Office of Student Conduct Director Susan Herron. "There's no set sanction for any particular type of case; it's all very fact sensitive."

And because most marijuana cases involving students are kept confidential, it is difficult to describe the range of punishments meted out by the University. However, anecdotal evidence indicates that the few existing repercussions hardly qualify as cruel and unusual punishment.

For instance, "Last year, I was caught with weed in my room, and I was sent to speak with the House Dean," an unnamed College and Wharton sophomore told me. "They talked to me about getting a drug test, but they never really followed up on it, and nothing ended up happening."

In other words, from my very informal poll of my peers, it would seem that most Penn students smoke up without the fear of being hauled down to 4040 Chestnut Street for a heart-to-heart with Mo-Mo Rush.

"From friends that I've known that have been caught with marijuana in a college dorm, it's basically a slap on the wrist," Engineering and Wharton senior Azim Munivar told me. "There's no real legal action that happens. It's really handled internally within a College House."

In contrast, the consequences of drug possession outside of Penn's campus are much more dire. A Philadelphia Inquirer article from April 1, 2008 stated that out of the entire country, Philadelphia had the highest incarceration rate in its jails. Some of these inmates are arrested simply for possession of marijuana. Unsurprisingly, the demographics of these prisoners show an overwhelming number of them are racial minorities who live below the poverty line.

"Though many universities, especially four-year private institutions, recruit for diversity, they still draw predominantly middle- and upper-class students," said Ware House Dean Nathan Smith, "Most of them offer a certain level of protection from legal repercussions for non-violent crimes."

But that's not to say that Penn should automatically crack down on students caught with marijuana.

There are no easy solutions to the problems of class- and race-based disparity in America's criminal justice system.

The nature of urban crime is far too complex for us to easily differentiate between what's right and wrong, what warrants a prison sentence and what does not.

Suffice it to say, however, that Penn has the right idea in acknowledging that students will be students, that even our most powerful leaders have raised a joint to their lips from time to time (but never inhaled).

It's high time (no pun intended) that Philadelphia learns the same.



Lisa Zhu is a Wharton and College junior from Cherry Hill, N.J., United Minorities Council chairwoman and Undergraduate Assembly member. Her e-mail is zhu@dailypennsylvanian.com. Zhu-ology appears Fridays.
Page 1 of 1

Article Tools

Viewing Comments 1 - 10 of 16

06 Alum

posted 4/18/08 @ 11:05 AM EST

I would like to know where you got your lack of data from? Do you really know what percentage of prisoners are in there for marijuana possession? I really doubt that it's any real percentage. (Continued…)

Terrible piece

posted 4/18/08 @ 1:39 PM EST

Summary:
1) I don't actually know how the University handles marijuana possession, so I asked two people and used that as my data set.

2) I don't actually know how many people are locked up for pot possession, so I'll just say that a lot are. (Continued…)

Full of falsehoods

posted 4/18/08 @ 1:42 PM EST

The author here makes ridiculous conclusions based on false information. The Penn Police handle pot possession the same way the Philly PD do, in accordance with the law. (Continued…)

WTF?

posted 4/18/08 @ 4:12 PM EST

This is one of the worst piece of writing I've ever read. I think a middle schooler from Northeast Philly would have written a more insightful piece on this subject. (Continued…)

Derek

posted 4/18/08 @ 7:08 PM EST

What's more important that actual incarceration rates is arrest rate. In that respect, the race discrepancy is most prominent. For example, in 2006 in Philadelphia county, according to the Pennsylvania Unified Crime Report, 6,572 people were arrested. (Continued…)

To Derek:

posted 4/19/08 @ 6:40 PM EST

Oh please, this isn't a racial issue. If someone breaks the law, then the police arrest them, regardless of race, and if coincidentally those persons who break the law are disproportionately of one race then they'll comprise the majority of arrests. (Continued…)

(2 replies)   Details   Reply to this comment

Back at You (To Derek):

posted 4/19/08 @ 9:41 PM EST

"The marijuana sold today has much higher THC chemical content than the marijuana sold in the '60s and '70s. THC content has increased from 1 percent THC in 1975 to 6 to 14 percent THC in 1985 due to hybridization techniques. (Continued…)

(1 reply)   Details   Reply to this comment

Derek

posted 4/20/08 @ 2:13 AM EST

Correction: The American College of Physicians link I posted was the wrong one, this one is correct:

http://www.acponline.org/advocacy/where_we_stand/other_issues/medmarijuana. (Continued…)

Back at You (To Derek):

posted 4/20/08 @ 2:43 AM EST

Sadly, the late hour is most likely going to remove all eloquence from the following post, but here goes:

"Better for their health because they inhale less smoke:" Best of all to inhale none at all :) Lung cancer, my friend (not that I'm a radical anti-tobacco type). (Continued…)

(1 reply)   Details   Reply to this comment

Back at You (To Derek):

posted 4/20/08 @ 2:47 AM EST

Oh, and I forgot to mention: there must be a reason rehab centers exist and why they are assigned. Allow me to explain simply:

Symptoms indicate presence of disease (addiction) --> medical community develops treatment for disease --> treatment works, resulting in increase of patients and success. (Continued…)

Post a Comment

  • NOTE: Email address will not be published

Type your comment below (html not allowed)

  I understand posting spam or other comments that are unrelated to this article will cause my comment to be flagged for deletion and possibly cause my IP address to be permanently banned from this server.


Advertisement

Register for the e-mail edition.
Popular Stories
News Tip
Latest Interactive
See an interactive graph showing how crime changed between 2007 and 2008.
see more interactives

Election 2008!

Latest Post:
Images of a fall day... (Oct 11, 9:54pm)

Follow The Daily Pennsylvanian on the campaign trail as the whole political circus comes to town!

Advertisement