420AM&PM
Well-Known Member
Among the many items on our ballot this year is Amendment 44. If it passes, it will legalize the possession of up to 1 ounce of marijuana by people 21 years of age or older. Currently, such possession is a Class 2 misdemeanor and can result in a fine of up to $100.
It does not change any other portions of Colorado's marijuana laws. There are the medical exceptions that we approved in 1998. Outside those, though, it will still be illegal to cultivate marijuana, to consume it in public, to drive under its influence, to buy and sell it, to provide it to minors, etc.
Nor does it affect any of the federal government's stupid marijuana laws. Nor does it affect marijuana laws passed by Colorado home-rule cities, which would still be free to waste police time and public money.
All Amendment 44 does is legalize possession of less than an ounce, as is already the case in Denver since city voters approved an initiative last year. But it didn't really change much, since the cops can just charge offenders under state law instead of city ordinance.
Predictably, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration opposes this change in state law. Last month, DEA officials were advertising for a professional to lead an opposition campaign - and they were doing this on taxpayer time with taxpayer dollars. When necessary, it can be a propaganda ministry.
The DEA is a federal bureaucracy which likes to protect its turf and make work for itself. Realize that we live in a "free country" where the oxygen in the air that we breathe is a controlled substance, and you can better understand the DEA.
A change in Colorado law would not change the federal laws the DEA is supposed to enforce, but there's always the argument that easing the state marijuana law would "send the wrong message to our children."
In my naive civics-book view, laws exist for the orderly conduct of society, not as a means of communication.
But if we accept that our drug laws are a way of communicating with children, what are we really telling them?
1. Our legal system uses drug laws to oppress minorities. The history of American drug laws makes this clear. Colorado was one of the first states to outlaw marijuana early in the 20th century. The argument then was that it made Mexican immigrants either shiftless and lazy, or else hopped-up and violent, depending on which sensational newspaper of the time you were reading.
Opium laws resulted from hatred of Chinese immigrants. ******* laws were inspired by lurid tales of African-Americans. Alcohol prohibition was an attack on German-Americans during World War I.
In short, if there's a group that troubles mainstream America, then drug laws are constructed to attack that group. That might be a jaundiced view of American history - but what other reasonable conclusion could our kids, or anyone else, draw from the origins of our drug laws?
2. Our drug laws have no discernible connection with the risk of the drug. Thousands of people die every year from tobacco-related diseases, and an alcohol overdose can kill. Yet those drugs are legal.
In all of history, there is not one recorded death from a marijuana overdose. That drug is illegal.
So the main thing kids learn from our drug laws is that our country is run by morons.
3. Government in the United States is not responsive to the public.
Even if voters of a state approve medical marijuana, the feds continue enforcement after running a propaganda campaign. If voters of a city eliminate penalties, the police still pursue possession cases under state law. No matter how clearly the public makes its voice known, the authorities persist.
At the very least, this must make kids chuckle when they hear "government of the people, by the people, and for the people."
Passing Amendment 44 might indeed send a message to children. But think of the messages conveyed by our current drug laws.
Newshawk: 420Am&Pm - 420 Magazine
Source: Denver Post (CO)
Pubdate: September 17, 2006
Author: Ed Quillen, Denver Post Columnist
Copyright: 2006 The Denver Post Corp
Contact: openforum@denverpost.com
Website: DenverPost.com - Colorado's homepage for breaking news, weather, sports, local events and entertainment
It does not change any other portions of Colorado's marijuana laws. There are the medical exceptions that we approved in 1998. Outside those, though, it will still be illegal to cultivate marijuana, to consume it in public, to drive under its influence, to buy and sell it, to provide it to minors, etc.
Nor does it affect any of the federal government's stupid marijuana laws. Nor does it affect marijuana laws passed by Colorado home-rule cities, which would still be free to waste police time and public money.
All Amendment 44 does is legalize possession of less than an ounce, as is already the case in Denver since city voters approved an initiative last year. But it didn't really change much, since the cops can just charge offenders under state law instead of city ordinance.
Predictably, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration opposes this change in state law. Last month, DEA officials were advertising for a professional to lead an opposition campaign - and they were doing this on taxpayer time with taxpayer dollars. When necessary, it can be a propaganda ministry.
The DEA is a federal bureaucracy which likes to protect its turf and make work for itself. Realize that we live in a "free country" where the oxygen in the air that we breathe is a controlled substance, and you can better understand the DEA.
A change in Colorado law would not change the federal laws the DEA is supposed to enforce, but there's always the argument that easing the state marijuana law would "send the wrong message to our children."
In my naive civics-book view, laws exist for the orderly conduct of society, not as a means of communication.
But if we accept that our drug laws are a way of communicating with children, what are we really telling them?
1. Our legal system uses drug laws to oppress minorities. The history of American drug laws makes this clear. Colorado was one of the first states to outlaw marijuana early in the 20th century. The argument then was that it made Mexican immigrants either shiftless and lazy, or else hopped-up and violent, depending on which sensational newspaper of the time you were reading.
Opium laws resulted from hatred of Chinese immigrants. ******* laws were inspired by lurid tales of African-Americans. Alcohol prohibition was an attack on German-Americans during World War I.
In short, if there's a group that troubles mainstream America, then drug laws are constructed to attack that group. That might be a jaundiced view of American history - but what other reasonable conclusion could our kids, or anyone else, draw from the origins of our drug laws?
2. Our drug laws have no discernible connection with the risk of the drug. Thousands of people die every year from tobacco-related diseases, and an alcohol overdose can kill. Yet those drugs are legal.
In all of history, there is not one recorded death from a marijuana overdose. That drug is illegal.
So the main thing kids learn from our drug laws is that our country is run by morons.
3. Government in the United States is not responsive to the public.
Even if voters of a state approve medical marijuana, the feds continue enforcement after running a propaganda campaign. If voters of a city eliminate penalties, the police still pursue possession cases under state law. No matter how clearly the public makes its voice known, the authorities persist.
At the very least, this must make kids chuckle when they hear "government of the people, by the people, and for the people."
Passing Amendment 44 might indeed send a message to children. But think of the messages conveyed by our current drug laws.
Newshawk: 420Am&Pm - 420 Magazine
Source: Denver Post (CO)
Pubdate: September 17, 2006
Author: Ed Quillen, Denver Post Columnist
Copyright: 2006 The Denver Post Corp
Contact: openforum@denverpost.com
Website: DenverPost.com - Colorado's homepage for breaking news, weather, sports, local events and entertainment
