Posted on 08/17/2006 3:38:19 PM PDT by Wolfie
Marijuana Amendment Will Be On Ballot
Denver -- Coloradans are to decide this fall whether to make it legal under state law for anyone age 21 and older to possess up to an ounce of marijuana. Secretary of State Gigi Dennis said Wednesday that backers of that initiative had turned in enough signatures to qualify for the Nov. 7 general election. The proposal will be Amendment 44 on the state ballot, Dennis said.
Under Colorado law, anyone in possession of an ounce or less of marijuana can be charged with a Class 2 petty offense, punishable by a fine of up to $100.
Legislative staffers preparing an analysis of the initiative report that during the 2005-06 state budget year, state courts convicted 3,700 adults for possession of such amounts of marijuana.
The legalization proposal is being pushed by SAFER, an organization that asserts that marijuana is a “Safer Alternative For Enjoyable Recreation” than alcohol.
“The campaign will highlight the hypocrisy of laws that prohibit the use of marijuana while allowing and even encouraging the use of alcohol, an infinitely more harmful drug,” SAFER spokesman Mason Tvert said Wednesday.
If approved by voters, Amendment 44 would change state law to allow adults age 21 and older to possess or use small amounts of marijuana, according to the legislative staff analysis, as long as that use doesn’t occur in public. It still would be illegal for anyone younger than 21 to possess any amount of marijuana or for people 21 and older to possess amounts more than an ounce.
It also would still be illegal for individuals age 18 and older to transfer any amount of marijuana to anyone younger than 15.
State laws also would continue to ban: growing or selling marijuana; open and public display, use or consumption of marijuana; and driving under the influence of marijuana.
SAFER has noted that even if voters OK the initiative, home-rule cities and towns would still have the ability to ticket and prosecute marijuana users under local ordinances.
Last year, SAFER successfully campaigned for an ordinance change to make it legal for an adult to possess up to an ounce of marijuana in Denver, but the organization has complained that Denver continues to prosecute people under state law.
Tvert said in an interview that voter passage of a state legalization measure would “send a large message” to home-rule municipalities “about how the people of Colorado feel about this.”
Tvert said alcohol abuse “contributes to social problems like fighting, sexual assault, property damage and domestic violence. Marijuana use has never been linked to these types of issues.”
Tvert said he expects Amendment 44 to be opposed by members of the state’s law enforcement community, including Colorado Attorney General John Suthers.
Suthers spokeswoman Kristen Holtzman said Wednesday that “the attorney general’s position on this issue has not changed. He is adamantly against the legalization of marijuana.”
Foes of SAFER’s proposal have argued that marijuana use can lead someone to other illegal drugs and thus increase overall drug use and drug abuse in Colorado.
Yes. How long have you been posting on FR?
And you don't know better?
The idea that we should just let everybody and and anybody (adults) take and sell any kind of drug on the face of the earth without government interference is a recipe for social disaster.
Excuse me, but maybe you don't read english, Jorge. This is about MARIJUANA. Get your own life! You're trying to tell us how to live ours! Sorry, but this is not Amerika...
No, MAYBE YOU didn't READ THE POST I was responding to. Put down the crack pipe, Go back and READ IT AGAIN, and try to put together a coherent response this time.
If anybody is hitting the crack pipe, it sounds as if it may be you.
I have read every post on this short thread, and the only one discussing crack is YOU. The poster to whom you responded said he wanted to know why the gum't should be involved in vegetable usage.
When you have something besides your knee-jerks, rewspond. But, since you only have your emotions to sustain your ideology, shove it where the sun don't shine! Some of us understand that this isn't a role for gum't. Some of us must have spent more time in civics class!
Nice try, but only the fringe kooks think ALL substances should be legalized and government should stay out of it.
"Some of us" defines the fringe kooks I'm talking about and you know it.
You are now, and ALWAYS will be on the losing end of this debate. Get used to it.
You are now, and ALWAYS will be on the losing end of this debate. Get used to it.
Wishful thinking. Go back to your pipe! You are the one living in a dream!
Great. Colorado's doing its best to ban smoking but trying to legalize grass.
robertpaulsen and usmcobra y'all better fall in here quick - Jorge needs some jack-boot back-up!
I would assume that folks who believe in States' rights wouldn't make an exception for a pet issue they may or may not agree with. But then again, look at the anti-smoking nazis. They are for personal property rights (aka business owners or homeowners) and yet when it comes to their own personal agenda, they vote to have those rights abolished. Never has the word "hypocrit" been more clearly defined.
You make absolutely no sense.
I'm the one arguing AGAINST legalizing drugs, yet in your responses you say "Go back to your pipe".
What are you talking about?
Do realize how stupid and incoherent your response are?
Back-up? I'm having way too much fun!
I know exactly what I am posting. do you?
I am only inferring from your rabid approach to the possible de-criminalization of marijuna use, that you are on something besides air! You are tilting at windmills, and blowing gaskets!
I recommend a doobie and a coke! Your mileage may vary.
(Disclaimer: I do not think this is an accurate photo of CINC! It may have been altered to demonstrate a political viewpoint. I didn't do it, I was in Cleveland!)
Well, that didn't take long. ROFL!
So, society was an unmitigated disaster before the 1937 marijuana tax act and has been a blissful picnic ever since?Life before the FDA was established around the turn of the century was a disaster but has been a day at the beach ever since? Is that your point Jorge? Could you flesh it out a bit for me, it seems a bit weak.
BTW, since you asked, I've been here longer than you have.
"rabid approach to the possible de-criminalization of marijuna use"?
What are you talking about?
I SAID I don't think pot is any "big deal".
You should try reading posts before you respond to them.
Just a suggestion.
I know you're desperate to find targets to satisfy your need to post your carbon copy rants...but they are boring.
Congratulations.
You should try reading posts before you respond to them.
You're right. This is fun. It's like shooting ducks on a pond!
.......
Yes. How long have you been posting on FR? And you don't know better?
The idea that we should just let everybody and and anybody (adults) take and sell any kind of drug on the face of the earth without government interference is a recipe for social disaster.
21 posted on 08/17/2006 6:02:26 PM PDT by Jorge
Nice try, but only the fringe kooks think ALL substances should be legalized and government should stay out of it.
Nice coherent apology for your position... (do I need to /sarcasm ?)
Since when is it unusual for a conservative to believe a person can actually do what they want to themselves without a nanny state? I donate $ to NORML every year.
DUH. The phrase is "shooting fish in a barrel".
I mean it's bad enough your debate positions are so unpopular and your arguments so weak....can you at least try to get your cliches right?
This is a joke right?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.