Pot Taverns? No, That's Not What Amendment 64 Said

function share_this(num) {
 tit=encodeURIComponent('Pot Taverns? No, That's Not What Amendment 64 Said');
 site = new Array(5);
 return false;

  Pot Taverns? No, That's Not What Amendment 64 Said

Posted by CN Staff on December 02, 2012 at 07:36:03 PT
Denver Post Editorial 
Source: Denver Post  

Denver -- Did Colorado voters last month approve the creation of "Amsterdam-style" private coffee shops in which patrons will be able to smoke marijuana? Of course not, and no straightforward interpretation of Amendment 64 can possibly reach that opinion. Imagine our surprise, then, to read in last Sunday's Denver Post a report in which lawyer and cannabis activist Rob Corry suggested that such a scenario is not only legal under the amendment but also desirable. 
It's actually neither. Amendment 64 breaks plenty of legitimate ground on state drug policy without dragging additional novelties into the mix. In referring to the sale of marijuana, the amendment repeatedly uses the term "licensed retail marijuana store." It nowhere uses any term implying that consumption of marijuana on the premises of an establishment might be allowed — as, for example, the words "bar" and "tavern" imply regarding alcohol. To the contrary, the amendment stipulates that "nothing in this section shall permit consumption that is conducted openly and publicly or in a manner that endangers others." According to the news article, Corry believes this phrase offers a green light to "an Amsterdam-style private coffee shop" — a baffling interpretation, in our view.We suppose a shop trying to get around the amendment might impose a nominal "membership fee" in the pretense that it was not a public accommodation, but such a transparent ruse would be an insult to voters. Nor would it be tolerated, in all probability, by the local city or town — or be sustained in court if the dispute ever landed there. SnippedComplete Article: The GCWSource: Denver Post (CO)Published: December 2, 2012Copyright: 2012 The Denver Post Website: openforum denverpost.comCannabisNews  -- Cannabis Archives 

Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help    

Comment #10 posted by The GCW on December 02, 2012 at 15:10:57 PT
No prison.
Pilot accused of flying pot into airport sentencedBOULDER (CO) — A California pilot accused of flying 55 pounds of marijuana into an airport in Boulder (Colorado) has been given two years of probation and fined $10,000. have mixed feelings about this. We realize this really should not be illegal; OK.  But compared to similar situations and in different parts of the country, there have been people will less than 55 joints get caged. I think this guy is relatively lucky.Another sign perhaps, the times they are a changin.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by FoM on December 02, 2012 at 14:07:05 PT

I agree with this:We'd probably be smart to let them settle down for a while though, this came as a shock and they're pretty scared right now.It makes me nervous to know that they don't know what to do.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by sinsibility on December 02, 2012 at 13:21:56 PT

Openly and publicly
As I read it, having on premesis consumption inside a building on private property is not openly or publicly or in a manner that endangers others.It seems to me that if you checked IDs for proof of age, you've complied with the spirit of the law. Reasonable zoning would locate these establishments away from parks and schools, just like taverns are now.The details of how and where can't be dictated by authorities that buy into reefer madness thinking.
We'd probably be smart to let them settle down for a while though, this came as a shock and they're pretty scared right now.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by FoM on December 02, 2012 at 10:09:01 PT

Maybe someday that will be allowed. The law as is right now hasn't done that though. One step at a time. I want to see this work so all states can benefit. What a nice issue though. We have come far.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by MikeEEEEE on December 02, 2012 at 09:39:25 PT

In Amsterdam police ID young people at Coffee Shops, and turn away those who are underage. I did not see marijuana sold on the streets.Their system works better at keeping children from buying from illegal sources.

[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by FoM on December 02, 2012 at 08:39:15 PT

On Your Own Property
I think people should be allowed to smoke with friends as long as it is on their own property even in the yard. I also think smoking areas at concerts in time should be allowed. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by FoM on December 02, 2012 at 08:34:52 PT

For me I would be happy to just allow smoking cannabis in a persons own home. That doesn't infringe on the rights of people who don't want their young children exposed to somethings. I don't think anyone can have an open container in a park. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by HempWorld on December 02, 2012 at 08:28:34 PT

But you can in most other countries!Most laws in the US dealing with alcohol are still from the prohibition era, that's why.Europe never had this stupid prohibiton. Prohibition is akin to fascism or worse.We are now going throught final withdrawals of prohibitionism...It's going to be interesting, can't wait for this coming Thursday the 6th. Will the sky fall?Good Riddance!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by The GCW on December 02, 2012 at 08:24:33 PT

Yes, no public smoking. But what are the exceptions? There is also the now and later...Eventually, public smoking should be allowed in certain situations. Special permit festivals, outdoor beer garden types, private front porches, yard bar-b-q's etc.And what we do now to start with may be conservative and should open up some as law suits dictate.If it's legalized similar to booze, you know... Why should a person be allowed to smoke cigs or drink booze outside and not cannabis??? Discrimination? There is some public drinking that is in fact allowed. Many questions will come up; some will be answered by people being tolerant of each other and some will be answered in courtrooms etc.But in the end the desire is for responsible adults to be able to smoke the superplant in some circumstances but not all.Amsterdam type coffee shops should come with time, but maybe not the 1st month... Why on earth not? Maybe they have a year to open up retail shops and an additional year to open up coffee shops. That would only put it off an additional year and if that's all the hold up, perhaps that would be reasonable.  But I could also see open up the coffeeshop before the retail or at the same time same channel...We shouldn't even have to wait a year since we already waited decades. Is there time credit for good behavior and bad behavior.There are other issues that will come up later also, like the age of 21 seems wrong. We should not punish a 19 or 20 year old for using cannabis. How can government think it ok to send them to kill people in foreign countries but think they are too young to smoke the relatively safe plant?But that off topic for now.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by FoM on December 02, 2012 at 07:43:46 PT

Being Sensible
I am so happy that this is happening so far without interference that I don't want to see it go off the wall like it did in California. The law says no public smoking and I don't think that's a bad thing. You can't walk around with an open can of beer in public.
[ Post Comment ]

  Post Comment