Posted on 11/09/2007 8:39:20 AM PST by SubGeniusX
By 57-to-43-percent margin, Denver voters have approved a ballot initiative that instructs police to make possession of marijuana in small quantities (less than an ounce) their lowest law enforcement priority. Denverites already had voted to repeal local penalties for possession of less than an ounce, with no noticeable effect on arrests; police just charged pot smokers under state law instead. Citing this history, the Rocky Mountain News says, "once again, the vote likely means nothing." But Mayor John Hickenlooper has promised to appoint a Marijuana Policy Review Panel to decide how the new ordinance should be implemented. Initiative organizer Mason Tvert says:
Although these officials say adult marijuana possession is already a low priority, it could undoubtedly be lower. For example, the City of Seattle, which adopted a very similar lowest law enforcement priority measure in 2003, handled just 125 cases of adult marijuana possession in 2006, whereas Denver -- a city with fewer residents -- handled nearly 1,400.
Tvert also notes that a similar initivative has had a significant impact in Missoula County, Montana, where the local prosecutor has told police to lay off pot smokers.
PING
Gotta keep those black musicians away from the white women ...
Man, MrLeRoy must be singing, “Rockey Mountain High” this morning.........
Then they will stop smoking it.
I’m sure it’s 4:20 somewhere in the world.
How are local govt’s gonna replace all the revenue that possession charges generate by the courts?
Why with higher cigarette taxes of course.
I'm polishing up my parady of Paultards. What do you think?
“Instead of getting high it makes a person want to take a shower and go look for a job.”
Now that’s funny!
Seems to me that people come in contact with the police most often while driving. Are they saying that driving while stoned is ok?
Cheech and Chong zombie stoner lung cancer ping !
No
I see that no place in the article...
I would think that if a person was "driving while stoned"... that would easily be covered under the statutes for DUI/DWAI. It would simply mean the the possession of the substance was not the top priority ... again this measure simply lowers the priority of enforcement tor "possession" if a person is DWAI I'm sure that the added misdemenor charge of possession would be used to support the primary case.
“Cheech and Chong zombie stoner lung cancer ping !”
I’m sure you’ll be relieved to learn that marijuana doesn’t cause lung cancer. In fact, it appears to have an anti-cancer effect (the linked article doesn’t talk about that, but if you search on the same study you’ll find it).
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=0002491F-755F-1473-B55F83414B7F0000
“Seems to me that people come in contact with the police most often while driving. Are they saying that driving while stoned is ok?”
I’m sure you don’t want to hear this, but studies have shown that being high on pot is not a major impairment to driving. Your cell phone is a much greater hazard.
How many major accidents have you heard of on the news lately where the leadin was “Smoking marijuana lead to a major collision today...”?
The solution to a lot of social problems would either be a) cheap taxis or b) self-driving cars. Then people could drink and/or talk on cell phones without being traffic hazards.
Hey, I’m not innocent, I’ve driven many times after smoken. I can remember the wondering if I drove thru a red light. But that was many moons ago, way before the stuff became as potent as it is today.
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.