Do a lot of people in CO smoke pot? Should MJ be legal? (Denver: moving, land)

[Bideshi]

Originally Posted by McGowdog

Smoke em if you got em.

Congrats to that I guess. Is there anything positive that can come of this?

Where exactly will the money from this go?

Well, it puts a dent in the illegal drug dealers bottom line. They are probably crying right now.

[mommabear2]

"Rocky Mountain Hiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigh Colorado..."

[jazzlover]

The Executive Branch of the Federal government (meaning the President and the agencies he oversees) have violated their oaths of office by allowing states (like Colorado) statutorily or state constitutionally permit use of a drug that is federally illegal. The President should be impeached for that, but probably won't be. Proponents of those laws think that because the Executive Branch is derelict in its duty in this matter, that everything is OK. Well, it won't be. As the Supremacy Clause states, it is the JUDICIARY that is duty-bound to strike down laws that are deemed in violation of the Supremacy Clause--and the judiciary over the years has shown that it is generally more than willing to do just that. All it will take is just one person filing for an injunction to prohibit the marijuana law from being allowed to take effect, and we will be off to the races. I would suspect that lawsuit will be filed within a week or two, at most, after the effective date of the initiative.

[lalahartma]

States' rights, ya'll.

[JGC97]

Originally Posted by mommabear2

"Rocky Mountain Hiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigh Colorado..."

I never thought about it that way but maybe that's what John Denver was singing about.

[DurangoJoe]

Originally Posted by jazzlover

Go toke up and continue to delude yourself, soButt. First thing that is going to happen is someone is going to go to Federal Court to obtain an injunction to prohibit the initiative from being actually put into force. They will argue that the initiative violates the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution. Just as was the case with the folks that legally challenged Colorado's Amendment 2 of a few years ago that essentially violated the Federal anti-discrimination laws, they will likely win and the marijuana legalization initiative will be declared unconstitutional.

Drink up Jazz, this is a repeat of alcohol prohibition and we all know how that turned out. The difference is that some of us learned from the experience. And actually I'm in the Denver airport at the moment so I really can't toke up here but thanks for thinking of me. BTW, regarding the supremacy clause, it has been used before in Gonzalez vs Raich (CA medical marijuana patient), although the court ruled in favor of the federal government's right to ban marijuana, it stopped short of applying the supremacy clause. It did so because Congress cannot pass a law that forces a state to make a federal crime also a state crime. Congress also cannot force state or local police to arrest people for a federal crime. That is apparently something you were not aware of. That by the way, is settled law. Do you seriously believe that the legalization side has no lawyers? Talk about deluding yourself..... geez.

Originally Posted by jazzlover

If by some slim (and very stupid) chance that the marijuana initiative actually gets enacted, all it will take to get things really interesting is for some stoner high on "legal" marijuana to kill someone on the public highways. All hell will break loose because the victim's family will sue the living hell out of not only the stoner (who probably doesn't have any money, anyway), but the state for allowing the stoner to legally buy an intoxicating drug for recreational use that remains illegal at the federal level. I'm sure the Colorado Attorney General is pondering that eventuality right now, and it probably has a lot to do with why Gov. Hickenlooper opposed the Amendment.

Jazz, substitute the word alcohol for marijuana and you have the same thing. No different. Anybody who wants to smoke currently does. If they want to drive high, they already do. Where are the bodies? Why do you suddenly think that people will be out driving high & killing others with their cars? Nothing has changed in that respect, only that the state penalties have changed. You're very selective in your rage as you flail away grasping at straws to counter this initiative that you obviously don't approve of. Here's a clue: nobody needs your approval. Guaranteed that more lives have been affected by the beer that John Hickenlooper has sold over the years than have been impacted by marijuana. Alcohol is responsible for 30,000+ deaths every year, year after year. Marijuana is responsible for zero.

Originally Posted by jazzlover

Whatever else you may be, soBut, you are completely ignorant about the law. I'm not even an attorney (but I know plenty about law) and I could tear you apart in a Courtroom.

Wow, Jazz you are just so very impressive. Did you watch yourself in the mirror while you typed that line so you could see & perfect your angry face? Actually Jazz, I am well versed in the federal laws around marijuana. Considering the fact that 18 states have now approved medical marijuana and the sky hasn't fallen, none of the state laws have been declared unconstitutional, and the fed is only able to close dispensaries by sending letters threatening property forfeiture, and still can't shut 'em all down. The fed will very quickly shut down laws they don't like when those laws are passed by state legislatures. They have not shown a willingness however to challenge approved voter initiatives. Whole different ball game. You don't understand everything you think you know about this.

Originally Posted by jazzlover

Oh, and as a gay, Josseppie should not be celebrating this, either. If the marijuana initiative is allowed to stand a Supremacy Cause challenge, there would be nothing to stop a new "anti-gay" Amendment 2 to be voted in by the Colorado voters and possibly survive a court challenge invoking the Supremacy Clause. A good attorney would point to the marijuana law and say, "Well, you allowed the marijuana law that violated the Supremacy Clause to stand, so why not this one?" Ugly case law has a nasty way of showing up in unexpected places.

Wow, now you're really reaching (or as Monty Python would say: "and now for something completely different"). Once again, a voter initiative that was discriminatory based upon sexual preference would never pass, voter sentiment is not in line with it and it also would directly contradict the bill of rights and wouldn't make it very far in the courts. For someone who is "completely ignorant about the law", even I know that.

This genie was out of the bottle years ago and will never be put back in. There is too much popular support behind it and it will continue to grow & spread. The cover is off of the entire marijuana prohibition scam that the federal government has been running since 1937. The majority of Americans (58% recreational & 78% medical) support this action. And truthfully, I'd be glad to debate you in a courtroom at any time, even after a few good bong hits. I'm sure your vast experience with federal law would be a sight to behold.

[Ghengis]

Hi, Congratulations on your progressiveness. I don't have time to drive there to get my free bag, could one of you send it to me?

Thank you

[Colorado^]

Congratulations Colorado! Job well done Today (or was it last last night?) you made history!

[HurricaneDC]

Originally Posted by McGowdog

Good point, but what's your actual experience with drinking booze as a minor? I drank like a fish.

Oh, and about smoking weed pre-21, what's your actual experience with that?

They called me Aqua-lung. I had a gal write in my Senior HS yearbook, something to the effect; "Congrats and good knowing you these 7 years. Must be nice to get good grades, do good in sports, music, etc. and party the way you did. You'll go far in life if you don't die of alcoholism or lung cancer first."

True story. I thought smoking weed was something you got out of your system by the time you hit 26.

I didn't drink much in high school. I started college as a commuter and didn't really have friends over 21 so it was hard to get alcohol. My second year I moved into a house with two roommies over 21 and yes it did become easy to buy alcohol. But when they weren't around, it was still hard.

I never smoked in high school but I could have easily gotten pot if I wanted to, a lot more easily than alcohol. With alcohol, if you don't know somebody over 21, you're out of luck. With weed, you just need to know someone who smokes it and they'll refer you to their dealer. The dealer will look at your cash and hand you the bud, no questions asked.

So with the regulation of it, I think it'll be harder for high schoolers to get marijuana but it won't be any harder for college students since they'll be more likely to know folks who are 21+.

[Josseppie]

Originally Posted by jazzlover

Oh, and as a gay, Josseppie should not be celebrating this, either. If the marijuana initiative is allowed to stand a Supremacy Cause challenge, there would be nothing to stop a new "anti-gay" Amendment 2 to be voted in by the Colorado voters and possibly survive a court challenge invoking the Supremacy Clause. A good attorney would point to the marijuana law and say, "Well, you allowed the marijuana law that violated the Supremacy Clause to stand, so why not this one?" Ugly case law has a nasty way of showing up in unexpected places.

There is a key distinction between the two. The "anti-gay" amendment 2 used the constitution to take away rights from a group of people while amendment 64 expands rights. It is going to be interesting to see the federal reaction to this but I think it will not be the same as it was when Colorado passed amendment 2 especially since the national dialogue is different as well.