Don't want to come across as ignorant BUT....... (law, best)

[dude_reino]

You probably won't smell weed that is being smoked in houses or cars around you.

However, if you drive past a grow house, you WILL smell it. Denver can't possibly have that many skunks in the road.

[JMM64]

Originally Posted by otterprods

Note: I didn't say that it's a better/worse place due to being more conservative, because that's a non-issue to me. I know plenty of annoying liberals and conservatives.. and plenty of nice ones too. I also didn't say that it actually is a very conservative place, like many people think. I only sad that that has relatively high % of people who actually vote conservatively compared to many other parts of the state, which it does.

It's funny how people seem to think just because a city is more conservative or liberal, this means the entire city is "crazy extreme" and they knock on your door everyday to control your life in this way.

I know plenty of Hippies/Liberals who live in Colorado Springs, and plenty of Conservative/Republicans in cities like Boulder and Denver. People really misunderstand and blow these types of things way out of proportion.

[JMM64]

Originally Posted by dude_reino

However, if you drive past a grow house, you WILL smell it. Denver can't possibly have that many skunks in the road.

Ha Ha!!

[geographystudies]

Having Tabor is still better than not having it, despite the people who dislike it. Just like legalizing pot is a step in the right direction, and those that don't like not being able to enforce their ignorance about the plant on others can just stew in it.

Originally Posted by davidv

Maybe I just notice it more, but I don't use the A/C in my car so my windows are always down. This means...

I smell pot every time I travel on Broadway, mostly between Belleview Ave (Englewood) and Mississippi Ave (Denver). There are many dispensaries in that area and I think that people just can't wait to get home to take their "pain medication."

Same for Colfax Ave.

Additionally, I can point to several instances in which I smelled pot, and I looked over to see someone in a nearby car lighting up their pipe. I also have noticed an increase in the number of people who are using hash pens/e-cigarettes/portable vaporizers which means either people have decided to replace their cigarettes or they are vaporizing hash oil. I tend to think it is the latter.

Unfortunately it is here to stay, and Colorado is going to bear the brunt of issues that need to be hashed out (no pun intended). I think it is going to be a lot like TABOR - a good idea that was poorly implemented which led to big problems that can't be easily solved because it is enshrined in the Constitution.

[davidv]

Originally Posted by geographystudies

Having Tabor is still better than not having it, despite the people who dislike it. Just like legalizing pot is a step in the right direction, and those that don't like not being able to enforce their ignorance about the plant on others can just stew in it.

Steps in the right direction are made by laws, not amendments. Laws can be tweaked so that everything continues in the right direction.

TABOR was sold as a way to make it so that citizens vote on any tax increase. This was good.

TABOR required any "excess" revenue to be refunded in good times, and the ratchet effect was designed to starve governments when the economy went down. This was bad. Governments were not allowed to save money from the good times so it could be used during the bad times (like businesses do). This was bad.

The legislature, looking for ways to fund things like highway construction, education, etc., needed to find a way to do so, but people would not raise taxes, so they started increasing user fees (which were not covered by TABOR). This is why taxes are low (people won't vote for them) but our fees are very high.

Problem is that this is an amendment, and altering it needs other amendments.

We will find the same thing with Amendment 64. People wanted marijuana legalized so they voted for it. This is good

It was sold as a way to increase revenue for government and education. Problem is that the taxes that are to be levied need to be approved by voters (See TABOR).

It also contains prohibitions against public consumption, which if they are enforced, will result in tickets/drug convictions for people. This could be especially harmful for pot tourists if they get caught, plead guilty to public consumption, and then it shows up on a background check when they try to get a job in another state.

It will increase availability to teens (anyone who says it won't is naive) because now the 21-year-old dealer can legally hold marijuana on him. In the past, cops could approach a person accused of selling marijuana to kids, search him and arrest him if he had marijuana on him. Now the same person can be accused, but if he has less than an ounce (28 grams or about 25 marijuana cigs), he is legal. He will have to be caught in the act.

All of these problems will have to be remedied by new constitutional amendments, not by tweaking laws.

[geographystudies]

If the governments could have tweaked Tabor, they would have tweaked it out of existence.

Those laws against collecting more revenue are a hedge against political pet projects that could have been funded with the excess. You seem to believe that they would have invested it into an account that would grow and produce earnings and then offset years of lower collections. I believe they would have wasted it immediately and set higher precedents for spending, leading to more bemoaning of not being allowed to continue that level of spending in future years. - It appears you have more faith in our public policy makers than I do.

It appears you may consider low taxes and high fees to be a poorly designed system. I feel it is a good system when it aligns the cost with the use.

[chilaili]

I would be a lot more concerned about drunk drivers!

[smdensbcs]

Originally Posted by chilaili

I would be a lot more concerned about drunk drivers!

And the folks who text, talk, or surf the internet on their phones while driving are as or more dangerous than drunk drivers. I'm guessing there's 10 "distracted" drivers at any given time for every drunk driver out there. I suspect there's a far greater likelihood of being killed or injured by someone looking at their phone at this point in history than by someone driving drunk and certainly more so than by someone with THC in their system.

[McGowdog]

What about a stoned texter?

[colleen breska]

That was funny. Im a CO 4th gen. Native and with all the posts ive been reading about pot smokers moving here for that purpose it made me think the same thing. I think its strange when strangers talk about it in an idol conversation at a grocery store or while pumping gas. I might say hello to the person and next thing I know im being told "what I would consider "personal" i dont care to know they just smoked some really good pot and are going back for seconds. "Omg really people" why do you feel the need to talk about it like you would a ball game. Then post it so everyone knows there are people moving here from everywhere just to smoke pot. "pot smoker moving from VT to CO." Are you looking for a speciffic area where you can have town meetings or what?_the neighbors will welcome you and your pot? Whats up with that? I think I will use this to my advantage and post an add that says: "mentapausal woman living in Westminster, CO seeking silence." Lol - thanks for the good laugh.I just hope they all have jobs. this will be interesting to watch.