U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-11-2016, 01:52 PM
 
3,138 posts, read 873,684 times
Reputation: 2464

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by SVTRay View Post
I think it's just a matter of time before we see a Constitutional Amendment overturning Amendment 64. You already have 25 states and D.C. that have legalized Medical and 4 states that have legalized recreational. California and Nevada is set to legalize recreational this November. You also have about 6 other states with some form of Cannabis law on the ballot this year including Arizona with recreational. I have a good feeling about Arizona with California and Nevada being an almost sure thing. That is half your border states allowing recreational. I think that would put a lot of pressure on New Mexico the following year to try for recreational. Texas is going to be the hold out for recreational for a while but I can see medical in 2-3 years. It's a slow movement but it's happening.
While I agree that marijuana law reform on a massive scale is coming, and that it is a good thing, I would not want the federal government forcing states to legalize. Doing so would just create more controversy and would deepen the divide between the two sides.

I think a smoother road to legalization would be for the feds to completely declassify the plant as a controlled substance, but leave it up to the individual states to decide what level of control they want to leave in place. The same was done when alcohol prohibition was repealed, and eventually all the states legalized alcohol possession without federal intervention.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-12-2016, 12:22 PM
 
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
305 posts, read 180,694 times
Reputation: 1152
Personally I wouldn't think many cannabis users would necessarily want to hang out in a place full of drunks, but that's just me. I don't have anything against alcohol users, in fact I used to drink A LOT, and now can't stand it, or those around it. I'm not speaking to the 'happy drunks" -you guys and gals are cool in my book - it's the egotistical loud mouth 10' tall and bullet proof types with a tendency toward violence that I have a problem with. And being from New Orleans - the city where alcohol flows down the streets like hurricane flood waters....I've dealt with a lot of those types. Now I'm not saying pot smokers can't be A-Holes too, lawd knows I know a few of them too, but for the most part we just want to mind our own business and chill out- something I don't see happen much in wet bars.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2016, 01:56 PM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
3,111 posts, read 4,881,407 times
Reputation: 5429
Quote:
Originally Posted by boulder2015 View Post
Well hopefully a well written fed bill WOULD force the states to make it legal across the board. But im not betting on that...
Don't bet on it because it can't happen. The Feds cannot force the states to make anything legal or illegal. Alcohol is legal, but there are dry counties that still refuse to allow the sale of alcohol. Additionally, the state has the right to set the drinking age (even thought the Feds blackmailed the states with loss of highway funds if they did not set the drinking age to 21).

Quote:
Originally Posted by SVTRay View Post
I think it's just a matter of time before we see a Constitutional Amendment overturning Amendment 64. You already have 25 states and D.C. that have legalized Medical and 4 states that have legalized recreational. California and Nevada is set to legalize recreational this November. You also have about 6 other states with some form of Cannabis law on the ballot this year including Arizona with recreational. I have a good feeling about Arizona with California and Nevada being an almost sure thing. That is half your border states allowing recreational. I think that would put a lot of pressure on New Mexico the following year to try for recreational. Texas is going to be the hold out for recreational for a while but I can see medical in 2-3 years. It's a slow movement but it's happening.
I think you are confused. Amendment 64 applies to the Colorado Constitution only, not the US Constitution.

The US Constitution does not need to be amended to allow marijuana. A federal law will do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2016, 03:46 PM
 
Location: Blah
4,153 posts, read 7,925,023 times
Reputation: 3057
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidv View Post
I think you are confused. Amendment 64 applies to the Colorado Constitution only, not the US Constitution.

The US Constitution does not need to be amended to allow marijuana. A federal law will do.
That explains a lot...I swear I'm not smoking anything lol Anyhow, I never looked into to the State and Federal laws pertaining to Cannabis. In truth, Cannabis is simply not my thing. I'm here simply because I no longer agree with this antiquated law and wasting billions enforcing it. I don't care if a state legalizes it or not, I will leave that up to the individual state and it's people to choose for them selves, I just want them to have the right to choose.

Anyways, Declassifying Cannabis would do the trick.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2016, 03:52 PM
 
Location: In The Thin Air
12,244 posts, read 8,033,606 times
Reputation: 8899
Do you really need a lounge that can serve both weed and alcohol? The reason I ask is you could easily go to a pot lounge and smoke up rather quickly and then possibly walk or get a ride to a bar to drink and hang out.

That being said that would be a lot in your system at once. I could see why a state would like to move away from the idea of serving both in one establishment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2016, 04:26 PM
 
3,138 posts, read 873,684 times
Reputation: 2464
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timmyy View Post
Do you really need a lounge that can serve both weed and alcohol? The reason I ask is you could easily go to a pot lounge and smoke up rather quickly and then possibly walk or get a ride to a bar to drink and hang out.

That being said that would be a lot in your system at once. I could see why a state would like to move away from the idea of serving both in one establishment.
I can see why they would think that too, but it isn't because they would be thinking logically.

Like you said, it is a simple matter of visiting 2 different establishments if partaking in both is your goal. So that law would be easy to circumvent, and not only that, it would increase the chances of a problem simply because the person would have to travel in between at least 2 different establishments in order to achieve their goal.

If you think this would dissuade them from not partaking in both, if that is what they really want to do, then I think you are kidding yourself.

I would prefer more rational thinking, because I don't drink. However, I have friends who do, and other friends who don't, but they have no problems going to a bar together, because the non-drinkers can drink Coke or water. But then there are types like myself, who is not really comfortable in a bar. That is, until I found myself in one in Amsterdam. There, I was able to relax because I was able to partake in the one substance that helps me relax in social settings like that.

So, that is simply a long way of saying that I would like to enjoy the atmosphere and the freedom felt when visiting an establishment where RESPONSIBLE ADULTS can partake (or not) in both plant based and liquid based refreshment, without having to travel to Amsterdam to do it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2016, 05:00 PM
 
Location: on a hill
346 posts, read 391,656 times
Reputation: 454
New bumper sticker sighting a few days ago: "You came. You got high. Now go home."
WANT!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2016, 07:24 AM
 
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
305 posts, read 180,694 times
Reputation: 1152
Quote:
Originally Posted by MtnJam View Post
New bumper sticker sighting a few days ago: "You came. You got high. Now go home."
WANT!
Is that really the sentiment in CO now? The reason I ask is that My wife and I have been planning to celebrate our 10th anniversary in Colorado, specifically COS and Manitou. This is something we've planned for a while and have amassed quite the budget for recreational activities. We tend to tip very well for services and was hoping to spread some cheer around during our celebration, but I'm now wondering if we won't get as warm a welcome from the locals as I would expect. I mean I'm sure we'll be greeted with a smile but will we get the middle finger as soon as we turn around? I wouldn't want to come dump a couple G's into your community and it be unappreciated.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2016, 08:16 AM
 
Location: on a hill
346 posts, read 391,656 times
Reputation: 454
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostintheMatrix View Post
Is that really the sentiment in CO now? The reason I ask is that My wife and I have been planning to celebrate our 10th anniversary in Colorado, specifically COS and Manitou. This is something we've planned for a while and have amassed quite the budget for recreational activities. We tend to tip very well for services and was hoping to spread some cheer around during our celebration, but I'm now wondering if we won't get as warm a welcome from the locals as I would expect. I mean I'm sure we'll be greeted with a smile but will we get the middle finger as soon as we turn around? I wouldn't want to come dump a couple G's into your community and it be unappreciated.


Somewhat of a sentiment, but NOT towards visitors like you. Mainly towards those who come to our annual weed festival, mostly unemployed, and become constant loiterers thereafter.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2016, 08:56 AM
 
Location: In The Thin Air
12,244 posts, read 8,033,606 times
Reputation: 8899
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raddo View Post
I can see why they would think that too, but it isn't because they would be thinking logically.

Like you said, it is a simple matter of visiting 2 different establishments if partaking in both is your goal. So that law would be easy to circumvent, and not only that, it would increase the chances of a problem simply because the person would have to travel in between at least 2 different establishments in order to achieve their goal.

If you think this would dissuade them from not partaking in both, if that is what they really want to do, then I think you are kidding yourself.

I would prefer more rational thinking, because I don't drink. However, I have friends who do, and other friends who don't, but they have no problems going to a bar together, because the non-drinkers can drink Coke or water. But then there are types like myself, who is not really comfortable in a bar. That is, until I found myself in one in Amsterdam. There, I was able to relax because I was able to partake in the one substance that helps me relax in social settings like that.

So, that is simply a long way of saying that I would like to enjoy the atmosphere and the freedom felt when visiting an establishment where RESPONSIBLE ADULTS can partake (or not) in both plant based and liquid based refreshment, without having to travel to Amsterdam to do it.
I totally understand what you are saying. We definitely don't want people driving from one establishment to another especially if they are under the influence of once substance or another.

Your last paragraph really makes sense. A good example is I want to watch the big game with my friends but they drink and say I smoke (I don't). One establishment would be awesome for that type of thing. It would be good for the business too. I think Colorado is quite a ways off from this type of scenario.

Then there is this thing called money. The state would have to benefit off it somehow with a new type of license that would allow both in one place.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado
View detailed profiles of:
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top