cannabisnews.com: Officials Sniff at Bid To Legalize Marijuana 





Officials Sniff at Bid To Legalize Marijuana 
Posted by CN Staff on December 29, 2005 at 06:57:48 PT
By Bill McKeown
Source: Gazette
Colorado -- Two top law enforcement officials in the Pikes Peak region think proponents of a statewide initiative to decriminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana will not find much support here. The group Safer Alternative for Enjoyable Recreation, or SAFER, held a news conference Wednesday at the state Capitol to announce plans to seek voter approval to legalize possession of an ounce or less of marijuana for those 21 years or older.
The group said it will try to gather the signatures of 100,000 registered Colorado voters; it needs about 68,000 valid signatures to put the initiative on the November 2006 ballot. Fourth Judicial District Attorney John Newsome said he thinks the group won’t find a receptive audience in El Paso or Teller counties. “I have yet to hear any discussion or clamoring for legalization of drugs,” said Newsome, who said he has spoken to 60 groups since taking office in January. Newsome said he has not seen the proposed initiative and he would have to study it before commenting directly on it. But he said he is generally opposed to any effort to legalize drugs. “I can tell you in my line of work we see people destroyed by drugs,” he said. The advocacy group said that even if the measure passed, all home-rule cities in Colorado, including Colorado Springs, would have the ability to penalize marijuana users. The measure also would not change current law that makes selling marijuana, smoking it publicly or driving under its influence illegal. The effort is patterned after a successful campaign by the group to decriminalize possession of an ounce or less of marijuana in Denver. Almost 54 percent of Denver voters approved the initiative last month, although Denver police have continued to cite drug users under state law that makes possession of such amounts a petty offense subject to a $100 fine. Rick Millwright, commander of the El Paso/Teller Metro Vice, Narcotics and Intelligence Unit, said he thinks SAFER will run into demographic and philosophical differences it didn’t have in its bid to legalize pot in Denver. “Colorado Springs is different than Denver,” Millwright said. “Passing something like this in Denver is one thing, but I think it will be an uphill fight here in this very conservative community.” Colorado Attorney General John Suthers and House Speaker Andrew Romanoff, D-Denver, said they will oppose the measure if it gets on the November 2006 ballot. “You would basically give people in Colorado a free pass,” Suthers said. “My personal opinion is that it’s not good public policy.” Romanoff said Colorado already has one of the highest drug-use rates in the nation but ranks near the bottom for drug treatment. He said that if the initiative passes, it could be tied up in courts for years. Although Newsome doesn’t believe there would be much support locally for legalizing marijuana, he said he has seen some change in thinking among residents about how to handle drug use. He said he thinks there is some support for allowing marijuana use for serious medical conditions, and he thinks many people would rather see drug users get help rather than being sent to jail. He said his office is creating a drug court in Teller County, patterned after one in El Paso County, that would offer treatment rather than incarceration for some drug users. In 2000, a majority of El Paso County and Colorado voters approved an initiative allowing the use and cultivation of of marijuana for people whose doctors prescribed it. Newsome said such state laws can conflict with federal drug laws, and there are ongoing legal cases, particularly in California, about which laws should take precedence. He said he could envision a similar problem if the proposed initiative passes. Mason Tvert, the executive director of SAFER, said federal laws focus on distribution, not possession, and probably would not be used to prosecute personal marijuana consumption. Tvert also said he does not believe Colorado lawmakers would try to change the law back if voters agree to relax it. Karen Flowers, spokeswoman for the Denver office of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, said the Supreme Court has upheld the supremacy of federal drug laws over state and local laws, and she thinks any change decriminalizing state law would fail. She also said federal drug laws make simple possession of marijuana a civil offense. She said the DEA believes the Denver group’s latest initiative is part of a concerted effort by well-funded lobbying groups in Washington, D.C., to decriminalize all drugs. “This is not a grass-roots Colorado effort,” she said. “They’re trying to make us guinea pigs.” The Associated Press contributed to this report. Source: Gazette, The (Colorado Springs, CO)Author: Bill McKeownPublished: December 29, 2005Copyright: 2005 The GazetteContact: gtop gazette.comWebsite: http://www.gazette.com/Related Articles & Web Site:Safer Coloradohttp://www.safercolorado.org/ Pot Measure Rolled Out at Capitolhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread21418.shtmlPro-Got Group Aims at State Law in '06http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread21417.shtmlPro-Pot Group Seeks State Votehttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread21416.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #11 posted by The GCW on January 03, 2006 at 17:52:53 PT
LTE's
US CO: PUB LTE: Senseless War
http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v06/n009/a10.html?397US CO: PUB LTE: It's Time To End The War On Marijuana
http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v06/n009/a08.html?397
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by FoM on December 29, 2005 at 14:44:36 PT
State Law
Here are some details of Ohio's laws. Ohio's laws were not voted in like an Initiative but I'm not sure exactly how the laws got changed but the state appears to honor the change in the laws that were done sometime in the 70s.http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?wtm_view=search&Group_ID=4557
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by Toker00 on December 29, 2005 at 13:48:03 PT
Seems these folks live in another world.
"The advocacy group said that even if the measure passed, all home-rule cities in Colorado, including Colorado Springs, would have the ability to penalize marijuana users." No they didn't. They said the state law would change, and cannabis users could still be prosecuted by Federal law, which they doubt would be used against small scale possession. When state law changes, local laws will not be far behind. The whole point is to end the "PENALIZING" of Cannabis users. Of course they would be able to vote wet/dry like they do with alcohol."Colorado -- Two top law enforcement officials in the Pikes Peak region think proponents of a statewide initiative to decriminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana will not find much support here."Just because these two officials "think" they will not find much support there is suppose to be an incentive for Cannabis law reform activists to just give up? I'd say you probably had to really LOOK for a law official who actually thinks that. Mostly, John Newsome, Rick Millwright, John Suthers, Andrew Romanoff,and Karen Flowers have vested employment and/or financial interests in continuing Cannabis Prohibition. Mason Tvert and Twenty Million + Experienced Cannabis Users (With a heavy concentration in Colorado) "KNOW" Cannabis is a Safe Alternative For Enjoyable Recreation. We "KNOW" Cannabis is Medicine and many other necessary things to humanity, and are about to drive it home to the world! "Karen Flowers, spokeswoman for the Denver office of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, said the Supreme Court has upheld the supremacy of federal drug laws over state and local laws, and she thinks any change decriminalizing state law would fail." There she goes thinking again. Look, Karen. We are changing the local law, then State law, then we are coming for your job when we change Federal laws, through Congress, prohibiting Cannabis possession. It's simple. The People are Speaking. You would do yourself a favor to listen.Wage peace on war. END CANNABIS PROHIBITION NOW! 
 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by observer on December 29, 2005 at 10:17:26 PT
analysis
[9]
The advocacy group said that even if the measure passed, all home-rule cities in Colorado, including Colorado Springs, would have the ability to penalize marijuana users.
(Sentence 9) re: "marijuana users" - "This strategy equates the use and abuse of drugs and implies that it is impossible to use the particular drug or drugs in question without physical, mental, and moral deterioration." [W.White,1979] (Use is Abuse (propaganda theme 4) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme4.htm#alluseisabuse ) re: "advocacy group" - Because they hold differing opinions on drug policy, say prohibitionists, "legalizers" should be silenced or jailed. (Dissent Attacked (propaganda theme 8) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme8.htm#8 ) 
 
 
[12]
Almost 54 percent of Denver voters approved the initiative last month, although Denver police have continued to cite drug users under state law that makes possession of such amounts a petty offense subject to a $100 fine.
(Sentence 12) re: "drug users", "users" - Prohibition propaganda often uses crude forms of name-calling to link a targeted drug with groups the majority dislikes. (Hated Groups (propaganda theme 1) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme1.htm#1 ) re: "drug users" - Prohibition propaganda claims that all use of any "drug" is abuse. (Use is Abuse (propaganda theme 4) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme4.htm#alluseisabuse ) 
 
 
[13]
Rick Millwright, commander of the El Paso/Teller Metro Vice, Narcotics and Intelligence Unit, said he thinks SAFER will run into demographic and philosophical differences it didn t have in its bid to legalize pot in Denver.
(Sentence 13) re: "legalize" - Drug policy options are presented as either total prohibition, or as total "legalization." No middle ground is contemplated in the "zero-tolerance" world of prohibition. Absolute prohibition executed with religious fervor and purpose! (Total Prohibition or Access (propaganda theme 7) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme7.htm#7 ) 
 
 
[21]
Although Newsome doesn t believe there would be much support locally for legalizing marijuana, he said he has seen some change in thinking among residents about how to handle drug use.
(Sentence 21) re: "legalizing" - With God on Their Side (prohibitionists assure us), only the continued rooting out of the sinful drug users (total prohibition) will do. All else is portrayed as the slippery slope to total legalization of all drugs for toddlers. (Total Prohibition or Access (propaganda theme 7) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme7.htm#7 ) 
 
 
[22]
He said he thinks there is some support for allowing marijuana use for serious medical conditions, and he thinks many people would rather see drug users get help rather than being sent to jail.
(Sentence 22) re: "drug users", "users" - Prohibitionists try to link targeted drugs with people already accepted as hated. (Hated Groups (propaganda theme 1) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme1.htm#1 ) re: "drug users", "marijuana use" - Prohibitionist propagandists repeatedly assert that "use is abuse." Details about "using" as opposed to "abusing" drugs are ignored. (Use is Abuse (propaganda theme 4) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme4.htm#alluseisabuse ) 
 
 
[23]
He said his office is creating a drug court in Teller County, patterned after one in El Paso County, that would offer treatment rather than incarceration for some drug users.
(Sentence 23) re: "drug users", "users" - The rhetoric of prohibition tries to link drugs with marginalized people. (Hated Groups (propaganda theme 1) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme1.htm#1 ) re: "drug users" - Any use of an illegal drug is deemed to be "abuse," weasels the propaganda of prohibition. (After all - it is illegal!) (Use is Abuse (propaganda theme 4) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme4.htm#alluseisabuse ) 
 
 
[31]
She also said federal drug laws make simple possession of marijuana a civil offense.
(Sentence 31) re: "possession of marijuana" - Prohibitionists try to hammer in the idea that 'all use is abuse.' The rhetoric of prohibition needs to deny that many people can use currently illegal drugs without abusing them. (Use is Abuse (propaganda theme 4) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme4.htm#alluseisabuse ) 
 
 Note the relentless pounding on the words "drugs" (plural) and "legalize". Even though this is about cannabis only (singular), prohibition propaganda will label it "drugs" (plural) to evoke images of crack, speed, and herion users to scare people away from cannabis. The "legalize" word is a bugaboo that has already been defined (in mainstream media) as giving crack to toddlers in gum-ball machines, so that is why the police talking points say to stress "legalize" in every soundbite as they do. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by The GCW on December 29, 2005 at 09:47:23 PT
The Ecologian didn't say: PUNISH ONE ANOTHER.
BINGO !"even if the measure passed, all home-rule cities in Colorado, including Colorado Springs, would have the ability to penalize marijuana users."In these parts, sometimes, Colorado Springs is thought of a place where some Christian leaders and groups have set up shop and have created influence into the areas politics...One of the traits of disobedient Christians is to harm others.  "the ability to penalize marijuana users" is their fruit.They will kill for their fruit.Disobedient Christians punish instead of love; they don't get IT.Colorado Springs is a sort of micro look at that reality.If We take that same bunch of rotten fruit and put it in Boulder, the same thing would happen; Boulder government would increase punishments and their homicide rate would begin to increase to triple digits instead of single digits.This is a catch 420 type situation. If You don't love, then You don't have access to the truth to know not to punish.Perhaps one of their problems is after they pray, they say, amen.Often, Amen, ends prayer.I suggest going into prayer and not coming out.No Amen to end a prayer; stay there.Meditation. Prayer and worship can acheive meditation; when people meditate they don't want to get done and end the benifits of meditition; they want the benifits to continue.If they (The Colorado Springs type that is refered to in the story) would sincerely go to Our Heavenly Father, who loves Us, all, GO IN HIM, and stay close to Him, they would stop punishing others...They wouldn't support the military in Colorado Springs; they way they do...The military is a Disobedient Christian tool used to punish.Killing / punishment.?Is this clear? - "expose" their "unfruitful deeds of darkness" just like We are requested in Ephesians 5:11.  http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=56&chapter=5&version=49 So when the "Man of Lawlessness" is exposed, He will appear as a punisher, not a lover. -see "man of Lawlessness" 2 Thes. 2, where it even explains the problem they have (A CATCH 420) in verse 11 etc. "For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false."   http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=60&chapter=2&version=49 Truth has been coming; it is not static. Truth travels fast and yet from afar, appears to not even move.The Green Collar Worker
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by ekim on December 29, 2005 at 08:07:41 PT
Howard Wooldridge is lobbing call or email him
Officer Howard J. Wooldridge (retired)Education Specialist, Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (www.leap.cc)Washington, DC Howard J. WooldridgeFrederick,MD 21701817-975-1110wooldridge leap.cc
http://www.leap.cc/events
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by OverwhelmSam on December 29, 2005 at 08:03:55 PT
John
Personally, I think the American people should vote everyone out of office and elect a whole brand new government.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by FoM on December 29, 2005 at 07:54:34 PT
John Tyler 
It really is something isn't it?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by FoM on December 29, 2005 at 07:43:27 PT
OverwhelmSam 
I agree.***You said: “I can tell you in my line of work we see people destroyed by drugs,” Really? Is marijuana one of them? Or is it alcohol, herion, crack and meth? Grow up. Marijuana is no big deal.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by John Tyler on December 29, 2005 at 07:37:25 PT
Walk the walk
Isn’t it weird to hear “public officials” complain against the ballot proposal to legalize personal cannabis possession? This sounds like the same “public officials” who were against civil rights, the repeal of alcohol prohibition, women’s right to vote, etc., etc., you name it and “public officials” are bound to be against it, until they are forced to, or voted out of office. This is a legal process. Put the issue before the voters. Let them decide. Are the “public officials” afraid of democracy? Our “public officials” like to "talk the talk" about Iraq. Shouldn’t we be able to "walk the walk" here?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by OverwhelmSam on December 29, 2005 at 07:35:47 PT
Talking Heads
Some people who are in a position to make real reform are so prejudice that they really can't tell the difference between marijuana and crack. Shows you how mentally challenged an ill concieved belief can make people.“I can tell you in my line of work we see people destroyed by drugs,” Really? Is marijuana one of them? Or is it alcohol, herion, crack and meth? Grow up. Marijuana is no big deal.On another note, I read about this lobbyist who is going on trial for fraud. An interesting revelation came from the article, he influenced members of Congress, but he focused on the Congressional staffers. I've workedd in huge organizations and it seems to me that we should be talking to the staffers, because they are the ones who are advising the members of Congress, and therefor the ones who are really making the decisions.
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment