PDA

View Full Version : Colorado: Recreational marijuana being put on ballot



Acid Trip
02-28-2012, 03:28 PM
If it passes I may just have to move to Colorado :mrgreen:

Recreational marijuana measure to be put to voters
By Keith Coffman | Reuters – 11 hrs ago

http://news.yahoo.com/recreational-marijuana-measure-put-voters-034555395.html

DENVER (Reuters) - Colorado voters will be asked to decide whether to legalize the recreational use of marijuana in a November ballot measure, setting up a potential showdown with the federal government over America's most commonly used illicit drug.

The measure, which would legalize possession of small amounts of marijuana by adults, is one of two that will go to voters in November after a Washington state initiative to legalize pot earned enough signatures last month to qualify for the ballot there.

"This could be a watershed year in the decades-long struggle to end marijuana prohibition in this country," Art Way, Colorado manager of the Drug Policy Alliance, said in a statement. The Alliance supports the initiative.

"Marijuana prohibition is counterproductive to the health and public safety of our communities. It fuels a massive, increasingly brutal underground economy, wastes billions of dollars in scarce law enforcement resources, and makes criminals out of millions of otherwise law-abiding citizens."

Colorado is one of 16 states and the nation's capital that already allow marijuana use for medical purposes even as cannabis remains classified as an illegal narcotic under federal law - and public opinion is sharply divided on the merits of full legalization.

No states allow marijuana for recreational use, and California voters turned back a ballot initiative to legalize the drug for such use in 2010, in part because of concerns about how production and sale of the drug would be regulated.

Since then, the U.S. Department of Justice has cracked down on medical cannabis operations in several mostly western states including Colorado and Washington, raiding dispensaries and growing operations and threatening landlords with prosecution.

A spokesman for Colorado Attorney General John Suthers said on Monday that the office opposes the legalization proposal.

"The attorney general will oppose any measure that makes marijuana more accessible," spokesman Mike Saccone said.

The Colorado measure, if approved by voters, would legalize possession of up to an ounce of marijuana or up to six plants for cultivation, said Mason Tvert, co-founder of the Campaign to Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol.

It would also set up a regulatory framework for the sale of cannabis products and the application of sales and excise taxes, in addition to legalizing the cultivation of industrial hemp.

WOULD EARMARK TAX REVENUE FOR SCHOOLS

A provision of the measure would also annually earmark the first $40 million in tax revenue generated from pot sales to fund public school construction, Tvert said, although he could not estimate how many tax dollars would be generated.

Any remaining money over $40 million would go to the state's general fund, he said.

Colorado voters rejected a measure to legalize small amounts of cannabis in 2006, but Tvert said the new proposal with its taxing provision, and potential jobs created through the marijuana industry and peripheral businesses would make it more palatable to voters.

"The time is right," he said, citing a December poll by Public Policy Polling that showed 49 percent of Colorado voters now support legalization.

Nationwide, an October 2011 Gallup Poll that found a record 50 percent of Americans polled supported legalizing marijuana use, up from 36 percent five years earlier.

Under a medical marijuana law enacted in 2000, Colorado currently maintains a registry of more than 80,000 card-carrying patients and rules governing how physicians and distributors operate.

However, federal prosecutors launched a crackdown last month against nearly two dozen medical marijuana dispensaries located within 1,000 feet of schools, giving proprietors 45 days to cease operations or face civil and criminal penalties. That deadline lapsed on Monday.

Jeff Dorschner, spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office in Denver, said an investigation was underway to determine if the alleged violators complied with the ultimatum.

A second round of notifications to other pot dispensaries who federal authorities said were in violation of the 1,000-foot law will be notified "sooner rather than later," Dorschner said.

Proponents of legalized recreational possession initially submitted more than 163,000 signatures on a petition to place their measure on the ballot, but the state's secretary of state declared the petition insufficient on February 3.

Advocates then submitted an additional 14,000 signatures two weeks ago, and after a second review, the state certified that the proposal would qualify for the general election ballot on November 6, 2012.

PorkChopSandwiches
02-28-2012, 03:42 PM
How will you vote Lance?

Teh One Who Knocks
02-28-2012, 03:48 PM
How will you vote Lance?

Even though on social issues I'm nearly a strict libertarian, I will vote against this because of the attitude of weed users. Almost all of them that I know, especially in this state, love to put down people that drink, yet claim that there is nothing wrong with getting high.

Once they become a little less holier than thou, then I would consider voting yes on it.

PorkChopSandwiches
02-28-2012, 03:55 PM
40 million to schools and you hold a grudge instead?

Teh One Who Knocks
02-28-2012, 03:56 PM
40 million to schools and you hold a grudge instead?

Yup...wanna put me down because I like alcohol, then face the consequences...'reap what you sew' I believe is how the old proverb goes ;)

Acid Trip
02-28-2012, 03:58 PM
Even though on social issues I'm nearly a strict libertarian, I will vote against this because of the attitude of weed users. Almost all of them that I know, especially in this state, love to put down people that drink, yet claim that there is nothing wrong with getting high.

Once they become a little less holier than thou, then I would consider voting yes on it.

Voting just to spite someone? That's pretty low.

PorkChopSandwiches
02-28-2012, 03:58 PM
Hahahahah, what a ridiculous way to make a decision. :dance:

Teh One Who Knocks
02-28-2012, 04:09 PM
Voting just to spite someone? That's pretty low.

Like I care :)

Teh One Who Knocks
02-28-2012, 04:11 PM
Hahahahah, what a ridiculous way to make a decision. :dance:

Do unto others :dance:

Southern Belle
02-28-2012, 04:19 PM
I wouldn't have a problem with recreational pot use being legal, but it would never pass in the South. Ever.

MrsM
02-28-2012, 04:32 PM
In this time - I see it as a potential tax boom. However once it's legal it will very likely never be made illegal again.

Makes sense to me - however I don't see this happening any time soon.

PorkChopSandwiches
02-28-2012, 04:34 PM
As more states stand up to the fed it will lead to the fed having to follow suit. Aside from the massive tax opportunities it will also create massive saving in the jails/prisons which would be a savings to the state. Its really a win win financially.

Southern Belle
02-28-2012, 05:09 PM
Freeing law enforcement funding from pursuing marijuana and concentrate on dangerous drugs like meth.

Iffy
02-28-2012, 10:37 PM
Freeing law enforcement funding from pursuing marijuana and concentrate on dangerous drugs like meth.
I don't know that they are actively "pursuing" marijuana and I seriously doubt law enforcement budgets take a major hit from this.

My concern is how do you monitor driving restrictions or even test for it at traffic stops? Urinalizer?

..and for those users who will claim that marijuana doesn't adversely affect you ability to handle heavy machinery you are either full of shit or have been using too long to know the difference.


"Marijuana prohibition is counterproductive to the health and public safety of our communities. It fuels a massive, increasingly brutal underground economy,
Umm... :-s
Brutal? Any pot dealer I have ever met has been laid back as shit

wastes billions of dollars in scarce law enforcement resources
I would lay heavy odds that the portion devoted to marijuana when illustrated in a pie chart would be the equivalent of hetero-sexual males that have no desire to have a 3-way with their choice of Victoria's Secret models.

and makes criminals out of millions of otherwise law-abiding citizens."
Insert any other law and the statement still holds true. True, but not pertinent

Southern Belle
02-28-2012, 11:38 PM
It's a pretty big deal down here. Helicoptor searches and stings that take months to get the dealers.

PorkChopSandwiches
02-28-2012, 11:49 PM
I don't know that they are actively "pursuing" marijuana and I seriously doubt law enforcement budgets take a major hit from this.

My concern is how do you monitor driving restrictions or even test for it at traffic stops? Urinalizer?

First the actual pursuing is probably more for DEA, which it would indeed free them up from searches, which they do by helicopter out here as well. But, the processing/arrests of marijuana crime is go to be costly.

As far as driving, if you are "sober" enough that they cant tell you are fucked up. Then where is the harm. If you are to impaired to drive it should be fairly obvious by looking at you, and if you can't pass a normal DUI sobriety test, then there you go, off to jail for DUI. But, if you can, then where is the issue?

deebakes
02-29-2012, 03:17 AM
:dance::cheerlead:

Joebob034
02-29-2012, 06:22 PM
:bong:

PorkChopSandwiches
02-29-2012, 06:55 PM
http://www.lgblog.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/1174-0-0-0_358852.jpg

Acid Trip
02-29-2012, 07:51 PM
I don't know that they are actively "pursuing" marijuana and I seriously doubt law enforcement budgets take a major hit from this.

My concern is how do you monitor driving restrictions or even test for it at traffic stops? Urinalizer?

..and for those users who will claim that marijuana doesn't adversely affect you ability to handle heavy machinery you are either full of shit or have been using too long to know the difference.

,
Umm... :-s
Brutal? Any pot dealer I have ever met has been laid back as shit

I would lay heavy odds that the portion devoted to marijuana when illustrated in a pie chart would be the equivalent of hetero-sexual males that have no desire to have a 3-way with their choice of Victoria's Secret models.

Insert any other law and the statement still holds true. True, but not pertinent

What Iffy fails to acknowledge is that the pot dealers he's met are at the bottom of the food chain. The guys who bring weed into the country bring in cocaine and meth in too. Different branches of drug cartels specialize in different drugs but they're all under the same umbrella. Bank of America is a bank but it has divisions that specialize in different things (loans, deposits, investments, etc).

Anyone who thinks weed (and hemp) should remain illegal has an agenda (paper/cotton/medicine manufacturers) or they are the kind of person who believes what they are told despite mounds of scientific evidence saying otherwise.

Iffy
02-29-2012, 10:37 PM
What Iffy fails to acknowledge is that the pot dealers he's met are at the bottom of the food chain. The guys who bring weed into the country bring in cocaine and meth in too. Different branches of drug cartels specialize in different drugs but they're all under the same umbrella. Bank of America is a bank but it has divisions that specialize in different things (loans, deposits, investments, etc).

Anyone who thinks weed (and hemp) should remain illegal has an agenda (paper/cotton/medicine manufacturers) or they are the kind of person who believes what they are told despite mounds of scientific evidence saying otherwise.

There needs to be a statement or point made before one can fail to acknowledge it.
I imagine the dealers I have met are on the bottom rung. I've never had any desire to meet anyone who would deal in more lucrative substances. Common sense tells me the possibility of danger involved would not be worth the risk or reward

Though your second paragraph isn't labeled directly at me it infers that they are my thoughts. State your opinion and/or make your argument. Being individually antagonistic isn't going to prove anything or get you anywhere. You do not know me. I do not have a hidden agenda nor am i foolish enough to believe what I am told. I have merely pointed out the sensationalization of the benefits listed in the article.

Having said that I would not say that I am against the legalization though I also do not see the point of it. I would say the same thing about alcohol and modern tobacco. Now if there is "scientific" information available that shows positive outcomes beyond those written in this article (which I think I have already made clear that I don't care enough about to change my opinion on the subject) then by all means present them. Edumacate me if you feel the need

PorkChopSandwiches
02-29-2012, 10:40 PM
:vuvu:

Acid Trip
03-01-2012, 03:10 PM
I would lay heavy odds that the portion devoted to marijuana when illustrated in a pie chart would be the equivalent of hetero-sexual males that have no desire to have a 3-way with their choice of Victoria's Secret models.

First, you assume my 2nd paragraph was aimed at you and it was not. You made a comment that pot dealers aren't violent and that is clearly not the case.

Now let's look at the cost of marijuana prohibition per your quote above.

American taxpayers are now spending more than a billion dollars per year to incarcerate its citizens for pot. That’s according to statistics recently released by the U.S. Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Statistics.

According to the new BJS report, “Drug Use and Dependence, State and Federal Prisoners, 2004,” 12.7 percent of state inmates and 12.4 percent of federal inmates incarcerated for drug violations are serving time for marijuana offenses. Combining these percentages with separate U.S. Department of Justice statistics on the total number of state and federal drug prisoners suggests that there are now about 33,655 state inmates and 10,785 federal inmates behind bars for marijuana offenses. The report failed to include estimates on the percentage of inmates incarcerated in county and/or local jails for pot-related offenses.

Multiplying these totals by U.S. DOJ prison expenditure data reveals that taxpayers are spending more than $1 billion annually to imprison pot offenders.

Then add in lost productivity (44,000 people x minimum wage ($7.25 x 2080 hours) = $663,520,000.00 as a bare minimum)

Then note the number of arrests not resulting in jail time and consider the time of every person, in every courthouse, that has wasted by arresting/giving tickets/etc for marijuana charges. Every cop who wasted time putting weed into evidence, filling out paperwork, taking mugshots/finger prints, etc. Every gallon of fuel used in searching for marijuana, every helicopter, every undercover agent and the list goes on.

The cost of prohibiting marijuana is monumental.

FBD
03-01-2012, 05:55 PM
the cost of prohibiting mj is prohibitive :dance:

Iffy
03-01-2012, 10:11 PM
First, you assume my 2nd paragraph was aimed at you and it was not. You made a comment that pot dealers aren't violent and that is clearly not the case.

I wrote that it inferred which it does because you did not state that it was not directed at until this entry. I also stated the pot dealers that I have met were not violent which is the truth.


Now let's look at the cost of marijuana prohibition per your quote above.

American taxpayers are now spending more than a billion dollars per year to incarcerate its citizens for pot. That’s according to statistics recently released by the U.S. Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Statistics.

According to the new BJS report, “Drug Use and Dependence, State and Federal Prisoners, 2004,” 12.7 percent of state inmates and 12.4 percent of federal inmates incarcerated for drug violations are serving time for marijuana offenses. Combining these percentages with separate U.S. Department of Justice statistics on the total number of state and federal drug prisoners suggests that there are now about 33,655 state inmates and 10,785 federal inmates behind bars for marijuana offenses. The report failed to include estimates on the percentage of inmates incarcerated in county and/or local jails for pot-related offenses.

Multiplying these totals by U.S. DOJ prison expenditure data reveals that taxpayers are spending more than $1 billion annually to imprison pot offenders.

Then add in lost productivity (44,000 people x minimum wage ($7.25 x 2080 hours) = $663,520,000.00 as a bare minimum)

Then note the number of arrests not resulting in jail time and consider the time of every person, in every courthouse, that has wasted by arresting/giving tickets/etc for marijuana charges. Every cop who wasted time putting weed into evidence, filling out paperwork, taking mugshots/finger prints, etc. Every gallon of fuel used in searching for marijuana, every helicopter, every undercover agent and the list goes on.

The cost of prohibiting marijuana is monumental.

How much money is spent on the apprehension, conviction, and incarceration of murderers? I'm guessing its higher than 12% If we make murder legal it would save a lot more money than legalizing marijuana. I realize this point is ad absurdum but saving money not punishing someone who broke the law (whether you agree with it or not) does not seem appealing to me at a savings of roughly $3 tax dollars a year per person (311,000,000 population divided into 1 billion)

As far as lost productivity, well, the country is close to 10% unemployment as it is. Where do these 44,000 jobs come from?

Savings are minimal and in some cases harmful to the people that would lose jobs. What's the upside of legalization?