cannabisnews.com: No for Denver Pot Initiative





No for Denver Pot Initiative
Posted by CN Staff on October 25, 2005 at 08:56:53 PT
Editorial
Source: Denver Post 
Denver -- Colorado and the nation need to have realistic debate about decriminalizing marijuana, but ballot initiative I-100 in Denver doesn't contribute much to that discussion. If passed by voters, I-100 would legalize possession of an ounce or less of pot by people over 21 in Denver. The Post recommends a "no" vote. As The Post has said previously, the war on drugs has been an abysmal waste of time and resources.
We think it probably would be preferable for the state and federal governments to legalize, tax and regulate marijuana use. Law enforcement resources - and jail cells - can be put to better use than rounding up pot smokers. But as long as federal and state laws make marijuana illegal, local legalization efforts do nothing more than send a message to higher levels of government. Under state law, possession of an ounce or less of pot is a Class 2 petty offense, punishable by a fine of up to $100. Denver cops would continue to enforce that law even if I-100 passes, according to the City Attorney's Office. (Last year, there were 2,072 such busts in Denver, down from 3,500 in 1998.) We don't think there's any point in passing a law that will have no effect. Snipped:Complete Article: http://www.freedomtoexhale.com/denverpot.htmSource: Denver Post (CO)Published: October 25, 2005 Copyright: 2005 The Denver Post CorpWebsite: http://www.denverpost.com/Contact: openforum denverpost.com Related Articles & Web Sites:Safer Choicehttp://www.saferchoice.org/Change The Climatehttp://www.changetheclimate.org/SAFER Could Still Be Smarterhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread21223.shtmlThe 'Virtues' of Pothttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread21220.shtmlPot Backers Try Againhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread21210.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #36 posted by FoM on October 26, 2005 at 11:08:17 PT
Hope
Thank you. I am so happy he is doing so well. The construction work this summer helped him tone up and he dropped about 8 pounds. He now weighs 164 and is almost 6 feet. He looks healthy and a couple years ago I wasn't sure if he was going to live more then a few years. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #35 posted by Hope on October 26, 2005 at 11:03:55 PT
FoM and Stick
That's just wonderful that Stick's doing so well with the hepatitis. That's wonderful. I'm so glad.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #34 posted by Dankhank on October 26, 2005 at 09:46:54 PT
Ltr to Denver Post
Editor, Denver PostYour editorial board wrote, "We don't think there's any point in passing a law that will have no effect. This said after stating:  "But as long as federal and state laws make marijuana illegal, local legalization efforts do nothing more than send a message to higher levels of government."  Is this not an effect SAFER would likely consider important?Then the board stated that a better argument SAFER should have made would be to, "educate the public about the issues raised by war on drugs, such as the drain on government budgets and the balance between treatment (which tends to be underfunded) versus imprisonment (which tends to be overused).Those are serious arguments that the major newspaper of a large American city should offer free gratis. You seem to believe your last statement. I ask you to cover that issue yourselves, for Denver.I-100 is good for Denver.Dankhank
OklahomaP S some driving study results for your edification:
I received them from NHTSA. DOT HS 808 078 "Marijuana and Actual Driving Performance" Final Report, Nov. 1993 Conclusions on page 108 are interesting and informative. A sample : "It is possible to safely study the effects of marijuana on driving on highways or city streets in the presence of other traffic." "Drivers under the influence of marijuana tend to over-estimate the adverse effects of the drug on their driving ability and compensate when they can; e.g. by increasing effort to accomplish the task, increasing headway or slowing down, or a combination of these." DOT HS 808 939 "Marijuana, Alcohol and Actual Driving Performance" July 1999 Conclusion on page 39 midway of paragraph 5.1: The addition of the new data, (for marijuana), broadens the range of reactions that may be expected to occur in real life. This range has not been shown to extend into the area that can rightfully be regarded as dangerous or an obviously unacceptable threat to public safety.
 
DOT HS 809 020 "Visual Search and Urban City Driving under the Influence of Marijuana and Alcohol" March 2000: Conclusion 1 on page 24. "Low doses of marijuana taken alone, did not impair city driving performance and did not diminish visual search frequency for traffic at intersections in this study." General Discussion on page 22 . Previous on-the-road studies have also demonstrated that subjects are generally aware of the impairing properties of THC and try to compensate for the drug's impairing properties by driving more carefully (Hansteen et al, 1976; Casswell, 1979; Peck et al, 1986; Robbe 1994). DOT HS 809 642 "State of Knowledge of Drug Impaired Driving" Sept 2003: Experimental Research of Cannabis, page 41 midway: "The extensive studies by Robbe and O'Hanlon (1993), revealed that under the influence of Marijuana, drivers are aware of their impairment, and when experimental tasks allow it, they tend to actually decrease speed, avoid passing other cars, and reduce other risk-taking behaviors." DOT HS 808 065 "The Incidence and Role of Drugs in Fatally Injured Drivers" Oct. 1992 In discussing the "Distribution of Ratings on Driver Responsibility" Table 5.12 page 64, paragraph (p.65); "Responsibility, drugs and alcohol”, third paragraph, the following appears: "Note that the responsibility rates of the THC-only and Cocaine-only groups are actually lower than that of the drugfree drivers. Although these results too are inconclusive, they give no suggestion of impairment in the two groups. The low responsibility rate for THC was reminiscent of that found in young males by Williams and colleagues (1986).” This study is remarkable in it's propensity to attack itself as inconclusive. Forensic Science Review Vol. 14, Number One/Two, Jan 2002, surely must be the reference of note regarding metabolic functions and where the THC goes following ingestion. This review discuses THC and it's metabolites; THCCOOH, 11-OH-THC to mention the most discussed. Location and type of measured quantities of these and other metabolites should be easy to use to determine if a driver is "stoned" or was stoned yesterday, or last week. Mention was made of a man who had measurable levels of metabolites sixty-seven days after ingesting Cannabis.
 
Chap IX paragraph D, "Summary" appears to be of two minds. While stating: "Studies examining Cannabis' causal effect through responsibility analysis have more frequently indicated that THC alone did not increase accident risk …," it continues optimistically suggesting that further exhaustive research may rebut that. All of the studies agree that combining Cannabis with any other drug, such as Alcohol ... a major deleterious effect on driving skills, as is benzoates with Cannabis ...it rapidly becomes evident that Cannabis in combination with any number of other drugs is not to be desired, but that Cannabis and Cocaine alone in all six studies have the smallest measured safety risk of all the drugs and drug combinations tested and against drug-free drivers.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #33 posted by mayan on October 25, 2005 at 18:02:28 PT
Thanks Again!!!
The Post recommends a "no" vote. As The Post has said previously, the war on drugs has been an abysmal waste of time and resources.The war on drugs is a complete failure so let's continue it.Sure.I believe AlvinCool (I think) had it right on a previous thread. The Denver media is giving I-100 so much free publicity that they have to be for it, regardless of their nonsensical arguments against it. Their arguments for voting "no" seem to give more reasons for voting "yes"! YES for I-100!!!   
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #32 posted by FoM on October 25, 2005 at 17:34:10 PT
Just a Comment
My husband went for his doctor's visit to the VA. He said to my husband whatever you are doing keep it up. He is so surprised that my husband isn't taking any drugs at all considering he has HepC and B. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #31 posted by E_Johnson on October 25, 2005 at 17:24:12 PT
Oops the link didn't work
http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20051025/ts_usatoday/whowilltakecareofanolderpopulation
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #30 posted by E_Johnson on October 25, 2005 at 17:18:01 PT
Could medical marijuana save Medicare?
Here's an interesting story that made me think of another interesting story -- medical marijuana patients don't use as many expensive new medicines as other patients with the same illnesses.Sometimes I look at these poor people on the outside of our cannabis world and I feel so sorry for them because of what they are denied because of their fear.
How long can Americans afford to live?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #29 posted by FoM on October 25, 2005 at 16:59:35 PT
Taylor
Thank you. We have been demonized by drug issues. After years of seeing it happen it's hard when I see it surfacing again. If they only concentrated on Cannabis it would really help us. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #28 posted by Taylor121 on October 25, 2005 at 16:54:28 PT
Understandable FoM
Please bear with me, I hope you aren't getting the wrong idea. I didn't mean to attack you or anyone here, I'm starting to understand better what perspective you are coming from. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #27 posted by FoM on October 25, 2005 at 16:51:07 PT
Thanks Taylor
ekim posts information about Leap and some may be following it and that fine with me. I just am not interested. I've seen drug issues hurt us one too many times and that's why I feel we need to keep our issue close to our heart. Each issue has it's own purpose and that's a good thing.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #26 posted by siege on October 25, 2005 at 16:49:06 PT
Mendo Spiritual Remedies 
Cannabis cultivator charged by D.A.By QUINCY CROMER/The Daily JournalThe owner of Mendo Spiritual Remedies in Laytonville and Hemp Plus Ministry in Ukiah -- who says he provides medical marijuana to more than a thousand people in Mendocino County -- will be in court next week to face charges for cultivation of marijuana. http://www.ukiahdailyjournal.com/Stories/0,1413,91~3089~3105093,00.html
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #25 posted by Taylor121 on October 25, 2005 at 16:43:48 PT
No Problem
I wasn't aware that you weren't into leap. Most reform folks I know that are even into the cannabis only issue are excited to have cops speaking out against the war on marijuana. I won't mention them anymore.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #24 posted by FoM on October 25, 2005 at 16:40:46 PT
Taylor
It's good you are into LEAP. I tried but too much talk about drugs for me. Please respect my wishes. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #23 posted by Taylor121 on October 25, 2005 at 16:33:54 PT
FoM
I am not trying to convince you to jump on board the all drugs issue right now, LEAP is relevant to cannabis they help the cannabis movement. Howard J. Wooldridge went through Colorado and specifically talked about legalizing only marijuana which directly correlated with the initatives going on down there.LEAP is helping the cannabis movement. You don't have to agree with their whole message, I just thought it was fairly relevant and empowering to have credible folks speaking on behalf of the cannabis community.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #22 posted by FoM on October 25, 2005 at 16:30:08 PT
Taylor
I don't follow what LEAP does because they mix up drugs with cannabis. If it was cannabis I would pay attention. I'll stick with NORML, ASA, Drug Policy Alliance and MPP. DPA does drug issues so I don't pay as much attention to them as I do those only involved in Cannabis issues.I thought you were going to respect the request about cannabis but you still want to push drug issues it seems. DrugWarRant is good for drug policy issues.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #21 posted by Taylor121 on October 25, 2005 at 16:25:42 PT
Whoops
Correction on blog.http://libertyindex.blogspot.com
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #20 posted by Taylor121 on October 25, 2005 at 16:24:55 PT
LEAP 
LEAP is doing more good for cannabis legalization than most realize. Having a cop speak out against prohibition enhances our message to legalize cannabis by leaps and bounds. Did you hear Tucker? He even admitted all of the cop's arguments held clearly true for at least marijuana.LEAP is a fantastic organization. O'Reilly clearly used a straw man on him, you can check my letter to O'Reilly to see why most of his points were mute on my blog.http://liberyindex.blogspot.com
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #19 posted by siege on October 25, 2005 at 16:22:46 PT
on the same thought
say a person thinks they know you and they want you to do something that they know you would say no to, then they put it so you think it is a good idea, or you do it to show them it can be done. this is what is done in the Mental Hospitals.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #18 posted by FoM on October 25, 2005 at 16:18:42 PT
Taylor
I very reluctantly watched it last night on O'Reilly. I don't watch Fox News but CNN because they are more into issues that are important to me. Once again Cannabis and kids gets shown as the culprit. That's why drug issues should always be separate from drug issues. They will keep trying to demonize cannabis to keep the war going on.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #17 posted by Taylor121 on October 25, 2005 at 16:13:21 PT
Norm Stamper on msn.com front page
Norm Stamper, the former police chief that wrote the op ed in the LA Times about legalizing all drugs, now has a video up on msn.com interviewed on msnbc. He was interviewed by O'Reilly the night before. 2nd one down on the right side, he is interviewed check it out.http://video.msn.com/v/us/v.htm?...v.htm? f=msnhome
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #16 posted by Toker00 on October 25, 2005 at 15:54:04 PT
Yes No
Yes No we don't support prohibition. Yes No we don't support locking up pot smokers. Yes No the people of Colorado and the nation need to have a discussion about LEGALIZING cannabis. Yes No we don't think there's a point passing a law to LEGALIZE cannabis. Yes No we don't. Yes No we do.Well, they are stuck between No and Yes. That is better than No. Next time around, they may just say Yes.Wage peace on war. END CANNABIS PROHIBITION NOW!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #15 posted by siege on October 25, 2005 at 15:45:12 PT
maybe
reverse communication or reverse Psychologue
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #14 posted by global_warming on October 25, 2005 at 15:27:28 PT
These are dark and confusing times...
While Patrick Fitzgerald sorts out the criminals, we can hope that our model of a hell is not used by the purest of evils and God has the final say.In a blink of an eye, the connection can be made, we are all bound by our first breath when we entered this world, even the lowest dog at times reflects, it is that moment of reflection, that moment when you quickly glimpse your place in this infinite universe, for one fleeting moment you see the earth you are standing on, the footpaths that you have followed and the path to Glory.Vote and choose wisely, some may not believe in God and the Devil's evil, to continue this blinded path of prohibition only fattens the number of jailhouses, it fattens those that make unholy money, it destroys lives, lives who might otherwise join all in our temples so that we can in larger numbers and voice, sing to the stars.YesVote
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #13 posted by FoM on October 25, 2005 at 15:18:51 PT
DPFCA: RIP Jane Weirick 
California NORML regrets to report that Jane Weirick died this morning, October 25th, 2005. Jane was a tireless and dedicated worker for the cause of cannabis reform. She was co-founder of the SF Patients Resource Center at 350 Divisadero, which set a model for MMJ cooperatives in SF after closure of Dennis Peron's club. She went on to found the Hayward Patients' Resource Center, working successfully with local officials to establish one of the first city agreements to permit dispensaries to operate. She was a leading advocate for responsible self-regulation of dispensaries and was known for her devotion to her friends, patients, and customers. Jane had been incapacitated by a mysterious nerve disorder for the past year. According to her doctor, she may have suffered an allergic reaction from exposure to a pesticide that was sprayed on medicine she handled. She died peacefully and unexpectedly. Deepest sympathies to Jane's husband, Ray, her daughter, Jessica, and her many friends and comrades. She will be sorely missed. - Dale Gieringer, Cal NORML Dale Gieringer (415) 563-5858 // canorml igc.org
2215-R Market St. #278, San Francisco CA 94114
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #12 posted by dongenero on October 25, 2005 at 15:15:47 PT
what is this nonsense?
Yes, they don't want to pass a referendum that will have no effect so , they support a set of prohibition laws that they say are ineffective.Huh?Oh and they say by the way, we don't support the prohibition laws either.???????????Huh, okay then, why would they even write such circular nonsense?The only valid point they made was that the referendum would only send a message to government.
 
Well that is THE point.....and they seemed to miss it despite the fact that THEY said it!.Good God!.....they're having a full melt down in the media.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by 420toker on October 25, 2005 at 14:45:07 PT
so.....ummm....send a mesage
a. The Post has said previously, the war on drugs has been an abysmal waste of time and resources. b. We think it probably would be preferable for the state and federal governments to legalize, tax and regulate marijuana use. Law enforcement resources - and jail cells - can be put to better use than rounding up pot smokers.c. But as long as federal and state laws make marijuana illegal, local legalization efforts do nothing more than send a message to higher levels of government. d. We don't think there's any point in passing a law that will have no effect. I'm still trying to figure these statements out.
statement a. We dont like the drug war b. We would like it if we could tax marijuana and not lock up responsible marijuana users c. The state and federal government are responsible for marijuana laws and local residence can only ask that their will be acted upon d. Lets not ask the state and federal government to carry out our willI still don't get the c. to d. connection
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by global_warming on October 25, 2005 at 14:41:53 PT
Do Not Underestimate the Power of the Holy Spirit
Luk 22:17Then He took a cup, and after giving thanks, He said, "Take this and share it among yourselves.Luk 22:18 For I tell you, from now on I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes."
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by FoM on October 25, 2005 at 13:27:36 PT
E-Mail News: DPFCA: Jane Weirick
I just received a call from Wayne Justman.Jane Weirick went to her final resting place this
morning.I have no further information.Jane was one of the first to start a dispensary in San
Francisco. Jane was a tireless worker for medical marijuana. We will miss her and her ideas.Love, peace and health,Michelle and Mike    
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by Jim Lunsford on October 25, 2005 at 12:54:27 PT
E_Johnson
There are no secrets. The all-seeing eye of dick cheney knows all!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by E_Johnson on October 25, 2005 at 12:41:34 PT
Don't underestimate the power of alcoholic denial
Look, the members editorial board all probably went out for a drink after writing this thing.Journalism is a drinking profession. It's hard to get anywhere confronting journalists about alcohol.In fact, I think one reason why the press jumped so eagerly on the Drug War bandwagon to begin with is they all carry some secret shame about the sleazy dysfunctional things they did the last time they all got blind drunk together.I went to J-school for four years -- I learned all their secrets. They have plenty.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by FoM on October 25, 2005 at 11:12:58 PT
BigDawg
You're welcome. Venting is good thing! Sometimes I think I am just numb. Maybe for me that's the best way to be able to keep doing CNews. I sometimes wonder if I will ever get to do something just for fun like what people call a vacation. LOL! I'm only kidding. I'll have a great hoopin and a hollerin day when the laws are finally changed.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by BigDawg on October 25, 2005 at 11:08:45 PT
FOM
Hiya FOM,Thanks for the greeting. I've been here pretty much everyday using this wonderful site you have provided for us. I've just been kinda busy and not posting as much lately.And thanks for the space to publically vent ;)
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by FoM on October 25, 2005 at 10:59:33 PT
BigDawg
It's really good to see you. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by BigDawg on October 25, 2005 at 10:55:51 PT
They MUST be kidding
I've been lurking and reading for quite awhile. Haven't had anything that made me wanna scream for months now... until I saw this.They say that the only thing this law will do is send a message to the higher levels of government.IS THAT NOT WHAT WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO DO?!?!?!?All this time I was trying to get the powers that be to listen to the people. I guess I was wrong... we have some other goal.... I guess.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by sam Adams on October 25, 2005 at 10:35:59 PT
Wow
True 1984 doublespeak! Yes, everything about this makes sense...that's why you need to vote NO. I guess when the prohibs run out of arguments, they'll resort to tactics like this.Yes, absolutely, cannabis should be taxed and regulated. But we need to keep arresting people.That makes about as much sense as attacking Iraq when Osama & friends are still in Afganistan.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by global_warming on October 25, 2005 at 09:08:02 PT
Vote Yes I100
" But as long as federal and state laws make marijuana illegal, local legalization efforts do nothing more than send a message to higher levels of government. "A YES vote will continue to send a message to those hard headed folks in the state house and a YES vote will continue to hammer that message all the way to DC, YESVOTE
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment