cannabisnews.com: Voters Unlikely To Pass Pot Plan 





Voters Unlikely To Pass Pot Plan 
Posted by CN Staff on March 22, 2004 at 10:28:10 PT
By Ed Vogel, Review-Journal
Source: Las Vegas Review-Journal 
Carson City -- Nevadans narrowly would reject a ballot question seeking to legalize possession of an ounce or less of marijuana for adults 21 and older, a poll commissioned by the Review-Journal shows. Forty-three percent of the respondents said they would support the initiative to change the constitution and decriminalize 1 ounce or less of marijuana for adults who use it privately.
But 48 percent said they oppose the idea and 9 percent are undecided. In Clark County, 47 percent favor such legalization, compared with 43 percent in opposition. The results are in sharp contrast with the November 2002 election when a ballot question to allow adults to possess 3 ounces or less of marijuana lost in a landslide. Only 39 percent of Nevadans voted for the ballot question; 61 percent opposed it. The Marijuana Policy Project in Washington, D.C., which backed the failed ballot question, is sponsoring the current initiative. No state ever has approved a ballot question to legalize marijuana. Based on the change since the last election, Jennifer Knight, spokeswoman for the Committee to Regulate and Control Marijuana, expressed confidence the initiative will receive voter approval in November. "The poll shows tremendous progress from the last election," Knight said. "What was a 21 percentage point deficit has shrunk to 5 percentage points. We clearly are moving in the right direction." But Brad Coker, managing director of Mason-Dixon Polling and Research Inc., predicted the initiative will go down to defeat if law enforcement officials embark on a campaign to persuade voters to reject the idea. "A lot depends on what law enforcement does," he said. "The last time when law enforcement came out in opposition, it tanked. This one is a little different, less controversial. People are sympathetic to medical marijuana, but if the marijuana is used as a recreational drug to intoxicate there is no groundswell of support." The survey of 625 Nevada voters, conducted between March 15 and March 17, has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points. Two years ago a poll by Coker's Washington, D.C.-based organization found voters were nearly evenly split concerning the legalization of 3 ounces or less of marijuana. Support dropped after police and district attorneys began speaking out in opposition. Prosecutors already are criticizing the new initiative. "I can't imagine how the community will be better off having more people smoking dope," Clark County District Attorney David Roger said. "There are so many provisions of this initiative that seem ridiculous. They suggest by having the Legislature marketing it and making it more available to the public that there would be fewer juveniles ingesting the drug." Roger also questioned the accuracy of pro-marijuana commercials that claim 72 percent of Nevada teens have used marijuana, compared with 28 percent of Dutch teens. In the Netherlands, marijuana is available in coffee houses. Through his own research, Roger found the use of marijuana by Dutch youth has tripled since the drug became more readily available. Washoe County District Attorney Richard Gammick said citizens should realize the marijuana today is 20 times as potent as varieties used 30 years ago. "Marijuana is a gateway drug," he said. "It is a dangerous drug. It is an addictive drug. No matter what they say, the bottom line is they want to legalize drugs." Knight said she did not vote for the 3 ounce question in 2002 because it went too far, and the new initiative will lead to regulation and control of marijuana. With marijuana furnished by the state, drug dealers would be forced out of business and teenagers could not acquire it, she added. Supporters learned from the 2002 defeat, she added. The new initiative would impose a one- to 10-year prison sentence on someone who sells marijuana to minors and a five-year to life sentence on anyone convicted of vehicular manslaughter while under the influence of marijuana. The Legislature would set up regulations on the manufacture, sale and distribution of marijuana. A tax would be imposed and money would be used to finance alcohol and drug abuse programs. To qualify for a spot on the November ballot, Knight's organization must collect 51,235 valid signatures on petitions by June 15. To change the constitution, voters would have to support the plan this November and again in 2006. Under current Nevada law, the possession of an ounce or less of marijuana is a misdemeanor punishable by a $600 fine. Assemblywoman Chris Giunchigliani, D-Las Vegas, author of the state's marijuana law, backs the new initiative because it might keep it out of the hands of youths. "We have young people who can access marijuana easier than tobacco or beer," Giunchigliani said. Note: Marijuana initiative gains support since last on ballot in 2002.Source: Las Vegas Review-Journal (NV)Author: Ed Vogel, Review-JournalPublished: Monday, March 22, 2004Copyright: 2004 Las Vegas Review-JournalContact: letters lvrj.comWebsite: http://www.lvrj.com/Related Articles & Web Sites:MPPhttp://www.mpp.org/Regulate Marijuanahttp://www.regulatemarijuana.org/Democracy in Peril http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread18521.shtmlFederal Drug Czar Rips Pot Petitionhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread18486.shtmlHigh Times - Las Vegas Review-Journalhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread18387.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #8 posted by jackson1040 on March 27, 2004 at 18:38:54 PT:
Please open your eyes
"I can't imagine how the community will be better off having more people smoking dope," Clark County District Attorney David Roger said.How could it possibly be bad, if at all it will be good because it will keep youth out of being pressured into drugs from there peers and besides a big percentage of americans do smoke marijuana, and from my experiance all the adults I know that smoke it are some very nice people and I hardly ever see someone get near as violent from Marijuana as opposed to alchohol.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by kaptinemo on March 23, 2004 at 04:36:11 PT:
The deciding factor
The author of this piece has the proper persepctive, but as usual fails to follow through:*...the initiative will go down to defeat if law enforcement officials embark on a campaign to persuade voters to reject the idea. "A lot depends on what law enforcement does,"... "The last time when law enforcement came out in opposition, it tanked.*There it is, in a nutshell. Not only will the antis continue to lie in the face of research to the contrary, but they continue to disseminate those lies using taxpayer dollars and use those resources supplied by those tax dollars as a means of being overtly partisan when legally they must declare themselves as lobbyists otherwise.I can only hope the people of the State of Nevada can realize what's being done to them, again, by 'their' so-called 'public servants'.  
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by breeze on March 22, 2004 at 19:37:12 PT
about polls----
The thing that most people need to do when answering a poll is to "vote" the opposite of what their intentions are.
This way, the opponent feels confident that their side is winning, and it increases the number on your side to get more active in spreading the word. If your side looks as if they are losing, it perks the ears of those on your side and you get more accomplished- its not a jedi mind trick, its just an effective way to make sure your side gets fire under their kettle.Remember one thing- its a poll, not a vote. Now do me a favor and tell everyone you know to act this way to increase awarness of how to win.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by Dankdude on March 22, 2004 at 18:27:37 PT:
I hope that it passes.
But what about the same question that is being posed in Alaska??
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by mayan on March 22, 2004 at 16:34:43 PT
Margin of Error
"Forty-three percent of the respondents said they would support the initiative to change the constitution and decriminalize 1 ounce or less of marijuana for adults who use it privately. But 48 percent said they oppose the idea and 9 percent are undecided."Then the article states..."The survey of 625 Nevada voters, conducted between March 15 and March 17, has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points."A margin of error of plus or minus 4 percetage points? Hmmm, let's see here...43 + 2 = 45%48 - 2 = 46%And then there are the 9% who are undecided. Looks like this initiative may very well pass!!! 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by VitaminT on March 22, 2004 at 15:34:40 PT
Landslide?
Is 61% to 39% really a landslide? 11% could swing the election the other way. Now Nixon beating McGovern in '72, THAT was a landslide. Not even 12% could have saved McGovern!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by cloud7 on March 22, 2004 at 14:02:02 PT
some comments
fearfull-- your comments reminded me of one of my favorite quotes Ill paraphrase here:Reporter: Ma'am, do you think people are more likely to smoke marijuana if this initiative passes?Ma'am: Oh heavens yes, wont someone PLEASE think of the children?!R: Ma'am will you be more likely to smoke marijuana if this initiative passes?M: Definitely not, I know better than everyone else.One comment on the article: 
"9 percent are undecided" -- actually probably about 1% are undecided, Id guess the other 8% are paranoid about the government kicking their door down and shooting their dog for giving the wrong answer.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by fearfull on March 22, 2004 at 12:07:50 PT
They still don't get it
"I can't imagine how the community will be better off having more people smoking dope," Clark County District Attorney David Roger said.You are not going to have more people smokeing dope. Instead, you will have the people who already smoke cannabis doing so with out the fear of arrest.
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment