cannabisnews.com: Colo. MMJ Advocates Ponder Amendment 64's Impact
function share_this(num) {
tit=encodeURIComponent('Colo. MMJ Advocates Ponder Amendment 64's Impact');
url=encodeURIComponent('http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/27/thread27145.shtml');
site = new Array(5);
site[0]='http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u='+url+'&title='+tit;
site[1]='http://www.stumbleupon.com/submit.php?url='+url+'&title='+tit;
site[2]='http://digg.com/submit?topic=political_opinion&media=video&url='+url+'&title='+tit;
site[3]='http://reddit.com/submit?url='+url+'&title='+tit;
site[4]='http://del.icio.us/post?v=4&noui&jump=close&url='+url+'&title='+tit;
window.open(site[num],'sharer','toolbar=0,status=0,width=620,height=500');
return false;
}
Colo. MMJ Advocates Ponder Amendment 64's Impact
Posted by CN Staff on October 28, 2012 at 05:08:12 PT
By John Ingold, Denver Post
Source: Denver Post
Colorado -- It has been 12 years since Colorado voters endorsed a big change in marijuana laws by passing a medical-marijuana initiative in 2000. But now that Colorado voters are considering Amendment 64, another big change in marijuana laws, some medical-marijuana advocates are apprehensive. The amendment would make it legal for anyone over 21 to use marijuana and also create a recreational-marijuana retail industry. Amendment 64 is not intended to change anything about current medical-marijuana law.
"We went to great length to ensure that that system is in no way jeopardized," said Amendment 64 proponent Brian Vicente.But that is not to say the amendment wouldn't affect medical marijuana. Indeed, a law protecting marijuana use for any purpose could transform the state's roughly $172 million medical-marijuana industry.There are about 104,000 people who hold a state medical-marijuana-registry card and pay $35 a year — plus the cost of a doctor's visit — to renew. A legal way of obtaining marijuana without those expenses could cause the number of patients to drop significantly.SnippedComplete Article: http://denverpost.com/news/marijuana/ci_21871676/Source: Denver Post (CO)Author: John Ingold, Denver PostPublished: October 28, 2012Copyright: 2012 The Denver Post Website: http://www.denverpost.com/Contact: openforum denverpost.comCannabisNews -- Cannabis Archiveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/cannabis.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help
Comment #28 posted by The GCW on November 01, 2012 at 17:30:29 PT
runruff,
That's more like it.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #27 posted by runruff on November 01, 2012 at 15:37:07 PT
Recreational pot?
Man, when you can keep your joint lit while water skiing, that's recreational pot smoking!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #26 posted by ekim on November 01, 2012 at 09:51:02 PT
one small elected official exception : time 10-31
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-10-16/efforts-legalize-marijuana-recreational-
use/transcript
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #25 posted by museman on November 01, 2012 at 08:25:24 PT
personal use
Yes,We did try that...though only those who got busted -apparently- were aware of it.I do agree however. It's right along side 'cannabis' instead of 'marijuana', 'herb' instead of 'drug', 'mild euphoric' instead of 'narcotic', and most of all 'medically useful for a number of ailments' instead of 'no medicinal use whatsoever'.Negatively Connotative words are part and parcel to emotionally charged propaganda. Too bad truth ceased to be part of 'law' and those who make law, a long time ago. The wording of legalese has used this method to remove the constitution from our grasp. It works for those who accept the TV/internet news as gospel.I'm all for wording 'personal use' into the law. But it didn't happen back when, because that would link the usage to 'personal liberty' which no contemporary self-respecting politician would ever allow. Personal liberties are only allowed if you got the money to pay for it. Thus 'recreational use.' It is not a free society, it is a FEE society. And even though tomatoes and cannabis can grow side by side in your garden without special intervention from so called 'scientific experts' employed by government committees staffed by bored rich people and corporate lackies, the 'experts' are believed regardless of the truth -because Truth and statistics are often not the same at all.In the intent of the people (not necessarily the 'framers') who accepted the US Constitution as the "law of the land" personal use of just about everything is included. The concept of 'presumed innocent until proven guilty' is at the core of our personal liberties. Cannabis prohibition did away with that one in 1936. Though until the '60's only the people of 'color' understood that, because their personal liberties have been under attack since the Reformation after the Civil War.Constitutionally (without the 'supreme court' mucking it up with their little tweaks and 'expertise') 'personal use' falls right in there with with "The right to be secure in their persons and their homes" which we have seen doesn't mean squat to cops, lawyers, and politicians.What you and I do behind closed doors, and in our backyard is simply nobody's damn business. And if we give power to someone to decide otherwise, well whose fault is that?LEGALIZE FREEDOM
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #24 posted by Hope on October 31, 2012 at 09:38:52 PT
sinsibility ... Welcome to C-News
and that sounds like a very good idea."I wonder if we need to change the word "recreational" to "personal use"."I never particularly liked the word "recreational" to describe non-medical use, although it can certainly have that effect. Rest, relaxation, calming, gentle stimulation, recovery from exhaustion and daily trauma, and all that. But you're right... no fun allowed. "Personal use" is good.Recreational always makes me think I've got a softball game to play.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #23 posted by FoM on October 31, 2012 at 07:18:14 PT
sinsibility
Very good point. Welcome to CNews.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #22 posted by The GCW on October 31, 2012 at 06:56:34 PT
sensibility,
Very good point.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #21 posted by sinsibility on October 31, 2012 at 06:53:55 PT:
What we'll call it
Being a tireless advocate of repealing prohibition AND someone caught up in the legal system because of it, I wonder if we need to change the word "recreational" to "personal use".If they think we're having more fun than them, they'll never go along with it.The stakes are high and I want this over with.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #20 posted by FoM on October 30, 2012 at 19:27:30 PT
John Tyler
I just looked at the Trailer and I never saw the movie. Hopefully it will show up on one of the movie channels when they are open and I will get to see it. It looks good.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #19 posted by John Tyler on October 30, 2012 at 18:58:23 PT
Peace Love and Misunderstanding
www.imdb.com, the movie database, says it came out in 2011.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #18 posted by FoM on October 30, 2012 at 15:02:46 PT
John Tyler
I think I saw that unless it is very new. As I remember it was a good movie.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #17 posted by John Tyler on October 30, 2012 at 14:03:44 PT
watched a movie
I recently saw this movie on Netflix, Peace Love and misunderstanding.
It is about a high paid “uptight” NY lawyer who gets dumped by her husband after 20 years of marriage. She is hurting emotionally and her attitude and values are distorted. She and her two children go to visit her mother who is a Woodstock hippy. She finds acceptance, healing and love in the hippy community and rediscovers what is real. If you like hippies and hippy culture this is a cute movie with lots of heart.
Here is the trailer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-v_d-9YldL8We liked it a lot.Yes, that is Jane Fonda as the wild haired hippy mother.I know what you are thinking. What’s so funny about Peace, Love and Understanding?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=uuYPCP2RSXA
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #16 posted by Hope on October 30, 2012 at 11:43:27 PT
TroutMask
:0)Whoo hoo!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #15 posted by FoM on October 30, 2012 at 07:31:44 PT
TroutMask
Thank you so much. That made my day!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #14 posted by TroutMask on October 30, 2012 at 07:02:57 PT
Hi FoM!
Thanks for the YEARS of cannabisnews.com. This is the first website I visit every single morning. We're getting really excited about Amendment 64. After it passes and the election results are approved, I'm going to smoke a bong on my porch and wave to the neighbors passing by (who will probably go home and do the same). Keep up the great work FoM, ekim and everyone! We're winning!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #13 posted by ekim on October 30, 2012 at 06:51:19 PT
NPR 10am rebroadcast on Omega-3
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-10-30/assessing-health-benefits-omega-3-rebroadcast
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #12 posted by The GCW on October 30, 2012 at 04:44:56 PT
Color ado green
Summit County: Cops to marijuana business owners torn on Amendment 64Nuanced measure sparks debates over law-enforcement resources, cartelshttp://www.summitdaily.com/article/20121030/NEWS/121029762/1078&ParentProfile=1055
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #11 posted by ekim on October 29, 2012 at 10:09:11 PT
I wanted to say Howard is on leave from COP
so i guess we can leave the comment stand. again thank you.Effective Friday, October 12 I will be taking a leave of absence from COP. Misty and I will trailer out to Colorado (see foto below) to work their intersections like we did in California two years ago.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #10 posted by Hope on October 29, 2012 at 09:32:55 PT
ekim... why would you want to remove that post?
Howard and Misty have been a major blessing for our effort.That's good news and I'm pleased to see them still in the fray. I didn't like the way the announcer that "stick it to" business and I doubt Howard said that. But I like seeing him still out there fighting the good fight. A very brave man and I think he's done his fighting well, and in a good and effective way. He doesn't try to reach the choir... he tries to reach the unbelievers and hopes "the choir" will back him up.Yay, Howard! Yay, Misty! Yay, ekim. Thanks!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #9 posted by FoM on October 29, 2012 at 09:19:22 PT
ekim
I will but why do you want me to take it down?
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #8 posted by Hope on October 29, 2012 at 08:59:07 PT
Comment 5 TroutMask
"MMJ doctors who authorize the MMJ cards". Guess they will have to, instead, do some real doctoring, which can be rough stuff, like some narcs can start doing some real police work, like finding murderers, and rapists, and thieves. It is good to hear from you.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #7 posted by ekim on October 29, 2012 at 07:50:55 PT
FoM please take my last comment down
thanks
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #6 posted by FoM on October 29, 2012 at 07:36:40 PT
TroutMask
It's really good to see you.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #5 posted by TroutMask on October 29, 2012 at 07:24:05 PT
It comes down to money.
Here in Colorado, it's about the money. The big growers and medical marijuana facilities could benefit enormously with Amendment 64, as they will be licensed to grow and dispense for ALL adults, not just those with medical marijuana cards.Those who will lose money when Amendment 64 passes are the MMJ doctors who authorize the MMJ cards; and the small, non-medical growers who will lose in a price war when the big shops can sell to everyone.On the other hand, Colorado will become an even better source for illegal MJ exports to the eastern USA. The large growers will continue to be very reluctant to risk their businesses to sell illegal quantities, especially if they might know where that marijuana is going. But the smaller growers (and illegal large growers) will continue to grow illegally, but their customer base will have to include more out-of-state buyers or they will fail.my 2 pennies...
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #4 posted by ekim on October 29, 2012 at 06:50:33 PT
Howard and Misty are doing it again
URL for TV piece:
http://www.coloradoan.com/article/20121016/NEWS01/310160021www.CitizensOpposingProhibition.org
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #3 posted by Johnobonno on October 28, 2012 at 19:00:57 PT:
Would MMJ advocates side with prohibitionists?
I would hope they wouldn't. It seems silly to think that after years of gathering support from the community for legalizing medical cannabis and then tell that same community to refrain from using it for their own purposes. If as they claim it is safe to use for medical reasons, it also stands to reason that it is just as safe for general purpose use. Perhaps because I see what many call recreational use as simply maintenance of the general peace, I think there really very little difference in recreational and medical cannabis.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #2 posted by Storm Crow on October 28, 2012 at 11:01:09 PT
OT, but you missed a "goodie"!
Can marijuana stop cancer? (news – 2012)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/19/marijuana-and-cancer_n_1898208.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular "Desprez, a molecular biologist, spent decades studying ID-1, the gene that causes cancer to spread. Meanwhile, fellow researcher Sean McAllister was studying the effects of Cannabidiol, or CBD, a non-toxic, non-psychoactive chemical compound found in the cannabis plant. Finally, the pair collaborated, combining CBD and cells containing high levels of ID-1 in a petri dish."What we found was that his Cannabidiol could essentially 'turn off' the ID-1," Desprez told HuffPost. The cells stopped spreading and returned to normal." The cells stopped spreading AND RETURNED TO NORMAL! What would an injection of CBD into a tumor do? FYI - CBD also stops angiogenesis, the growth of new blood vessels that feed the tumor. Cannabidiol Inhibits Angiogenesis By Multiple Mechanisms
(abst – 2012) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22624859 Granny
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #1 posted by HempWorld on October 28, 2012 at 07:45:09 PT
My $0.02 The Time Has Come!
It's not about whether marijuana is good or bad. It's about whether prohibition of something, say alcohol or marijuana, or other, is good policy. And that, we can now say, is a horrible racial divide and a societal devastation. See alcohol prohibition from the 20's. But that one, at least, was not as damaging to minorities then, but it certainly was for society as a whole.To say that marijuana has been given a bad rap over the past few decades is an understatement. If you’re like most Americans, you have been led to believe that marijuana is a dangerous and addictive drug that has destroyed the lives of millions of teens and adults. You have been encouraged to believe that marijuana causes lung cancer and is a “gateway” to harder drugs. The government has even tried to convince you that most people who use marijuana are losers who sit around on couches all day doing nothing. (these are all lies, by the way)Frequently it is something responsible adults choose to do specifically instead of alcohol. And for good reason! Marijuana is, statistically speaking, safer then water! Alcohol is toxic, addictive, harmful to the body, it is more likely to result in injuries, more likely to lead to interpersonal violence than marijuana and alcohol kills, marijuana does not. Let me state this differently; marijuana is not toxic! It is simply something that some responsible adults choose to do because it is better for them without being a nuisance to others. Why would this be a bad thing? Thus, the time has come that we need to regulate/legalize to make it less available to our kids (just like cigarettes and alcohol). And we certainly do not want our kids to grow up as little marijuana dealers, as is the case under the current laws, and has been for decades...Let's hope the US electorate will do the right thing, come this (s)election.
Our Time Has Come!
[ Post Comment ]
Post Comment