What's new
  • Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
  • Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!

Colorado Voters Will Likely Decide Whether To Legalize Pot Statewide

mars2112

always hopeful yet discontent
Veteran
From KMGH ABC 7:

Voters Will Likely Decide Whether To Legalize Pot Statewide

DENVER -- Voters could be deciding on whether to legalize marijuana
statewide this fall.

Members of the group Safer Alternative For Enjoyable Recreation dropped off
129,000 signatures at the Secretary of State's office Monday morning. The
signatures of 68,000 registered Colorado voters have to be verified before
the measure can be placed on the ballot.

"The fact that we collected nearly twice as many signatures as are
required under statute highlights the widespread support for ending the madness of marijuana prohibition in Colorado," said SAFER Campaign Director Mason Tvert.

The measure, if approved by voters, would make possession of one ounce of marijuana legal in Colorado for those 21 or older.

SAFER helped get a similar measure on last fall's ballot that made the same
amount of marijuana legal in Denver. Initiative 100 was approved by a
majority of Denver voters and made the city the first in the country to vote
to remove all penalties for private adult marijuana possession.

However, state authorities had said Denver's Initiative-100 was virtually
meaningless because of state and federal laws that make even small amounts
of marijuana illegal.

Tvert said even though Denver voters had expressed their opinion that a
small pinch of pot should be legal, people were still being arrested and
prosecuted under state law and he wants that to stop.

The statewide proposal would get rid of the state's prohibition of marijuana
and allow cities to make the rules about pot use.

"Last year's victory in Denver clearly demonstrated the support we're
receiving in the state Capitol," Tvert said. "But tens of thousands
of signatures poured in from Colorado Springs, Grand Junction and other areas
of the state outside the Front Range. This just goes to show that regardless
of Colorado citizens' political persuasions, many agree that punishing
adults for using a substance less harmful than alcohol is an absurd waste of
time, money and life."

The state's attorney general, John Suthers, does not buy the argument that
pot is safer. He and the governor feel the measure would be defeated in the
fall. Colorado House Speaker Andrew Romanoff -- a Denver Democrat -- oppose changing the state law. He thinks drug use in the state is already too high and said the matter would wind up in the courts.
 

9Lives

three for playing, three for straying, and three f
Veteran
So when do we know if anythings gonna change ?
 

supernerd

Member
I got 20 bucks that says even if it's legalized state wide the state troopers will still nail you with federal law.
 
Local municipalitys have already stated that if the State initiative passes, they will prosecute under Home Rule. One Police Chief has already said in an interview that a State legalization will have no bearing in his city. Possession of an oz or less can draw 6 months in County Jail and a $500 fine.
It will all depend on the locale. Telluride quit arresting people for simple possession years ago and Boulder is very lax as well.
 
G

Guest

supernerd said:
I got 20 bucks that says even if it's legalized state wide the state troopers will still nail you with federal law.

sup supernerd?
(we goin ridin soon...bro?)

Legal statewide would be Ideal

the "state troopers" cant bust you on a federal level. (that has to involve the DEA or FBI)...so your gonna really have fuk up bad to get a "federal charge".....they dont have money or resources to go around slapping pot smokers/hobby growers on the wrist.

In colorado the only concern unless your a BIG dealer/grower is gonna be "local laws".

u know how I'm gonna vote.
 
G

Guest

breckenridge colorado "city limit" has had a possession tolerance for over 10 years (u can possess legally for personal in town)
 
G

Guest

if Boulder was gonna prosecute all the pot smokers..they would just fence in the entire county.

...might as well throw that fence around (summit, clear-creek, park, jefferson, denver, gilpin, and douglas too)....shit throw the fence over the whole state.... ok colorado smokes pot...whats the big deal.
 

gr0wm4g3

Member
rockymtnbuds said:
Local municipalitys have already stated that if the State initiative passes, they will prosecute under Home Rule. One Police Chief has already said in an interview that a State legalization will have no bearing in his city. Possession of an oz or less can draw 6 months in County Jail and a $500 fine.
It will all depend on the locale. Telluride quit arresting people for simple possession years ago and Boulder is very lax as well.

This kind of thought process that's in LEO and politics around the country really pisses me off - "DOPE kills!, DOPE is bad...etc.." all because their daddy's and the government of THEIR childhood told them so. They can't seem to think for themselves, maybe it's because they think it leads to harder drugs, maybe they think it makes people lazy. It shouldn't be like this in a democracy, when the people speak they should be heard. This country derrives it's power from the people, not the president or the army. The government should be afraid of their people, the people should not be afraid of their government.

sorry, I had to rant.
 

supernerd

Member
yukon said:
sup supernerd?
(we goin ridin soon...bro?)

Legal statewide would be Ideal

the "state troopers" cant bust you on a federal level. (that has to involve the DEA or FBI)...so your gonna really have fuk up bad to get a "federal charge".....they dont have money or resources to go around slapping pot smokers/hobby growers on the wrist.

In colorado the only concern unless your a BIG dealer/grower is gonna be "local laws".

u know how I'm gonna vote.

I will vote the same way even though it may be useless. Anyways, it's still summer man we have a couple months before it snows haha. No boarding yet.
 

mars2112

always hopeful yet discontent
Veteran
it's still significant when initiatives like this pass.. it means the VOTERS wanted this as a law.. very significant and very good progress for our cause
 

mars2112

always hopeful yet discontent
Veteran
Voters may have say on pot's legality

By MIKE SACCONE The Daily Sentinel
Monday, August 14, 2006

When Lori Fickey was cited for possessing less than an ounce of
marijuana Thursday, she said she was not doing anything dangerous and
was hardly a threat to other people.

Fickey, 24, of Grand Junction, who was ticketed after an officer
searched her truck outside a restaurant on North Avenue and discovered
a small amount of marijuana, said she thought it was absurd that
possession of miniscule amounts of "an herb" in Colorado is even a
crime.

"It shouldn't be illegal", she said.

"You have people out there who do things with alcohol. That's where
you see most of your crime."

Come November, Colorado voters will likely have a chance to agree or
discount Fickey's sentiment that there's nothing wrong with
responsible use of marijuana.

A ballot measure pending approval by the Colorado Secretary of States
office would, if passed, modify the state's drug laws and allow adults
21 and over to legally possess an ounce or less of marijuana.

The ballot measure would not affect any other marijuana law.

Currently, possession of an ounce or less of marijuana is a class 2
petty offense, punishable by a fine of up to $100.

An analysis of the ballot initiative, compiled by the state's
Legislative Council staff, reports that there were roughly 3,700
convictions last year for possession of an ounce or less of marijuana.

According to the records division at the Grand Junction Police
Department, there were 378 petty, 15 misdemeanor and 21 felony
citations involving marijuana within the city limits last year.

So far this year, the department has recorded 217 petty offenses, 14
misdemeanor and 14 felony incidents involving marijuana.

Based on the police statistics obtained by The Daily Sentinel, it was
unclear how many of the reported petty offenses involved an ounce or
less of marijuana.

Mesa County District Attorney Pete Hautzinger said he could see no
good reason to decriminalize possession of less than an ounce of
marijuana.

Hautzinger said while he had initially questioned assertions that
marijuana was just as powerful a gateway drug as cocaine, barbiturates
or amphetamines early in his career, his experiences now have shown
him that marijuana offenses are usually paired with more serious
crimes.

"In the last couple years more on anecdotal than statistical evidence
I've become convinced of marijuana's effect," Hautzinger said.
"Practically every case I have seen come across my desk, as elected
DA, that has involved marijuana has involved methamphetamine. It's
rare that we see just marijuana possession cases anymore."

Hautzinger said the ballot measure's supporters also are mistaken when
they assert that police have more pressing matters to pursue than
enforcing marijuana possession laws.

"Outside of marijuana dealing we aren't directing resources at
combating the drug," Hautzinger said. "We're not sending officers
out
door to door to find people smoking a joint."

Hautzinger said the marijuana charges are usually part and parcel of
larger cases.

If any reforms are going to be made, Hautzinger said they need to be
passed at the federal level. He said state-level reforms like the
proposed ballot measure "especially when marijuana use is so closely
tied to methamphetamine cases" are simply not good policy.

Mike Saccone can be reached via e-mail at msaccone@gjds. com.

http://www.gjsentinel.com/news/cont...allot_measure.html?cxtype=rss&cxsvc=7&cxcat=7
 

msdtds

Member
it really amazes me that the freaking assholes are still argueing even though there is nothing to argue. like how the feds just said there are no medical benefits with weed. bullshit. many many credible studies have shown otherwise. pressure from the pharm companies i imagine(?). and then the god damn cops have the god damn gull to not follow what 'the people' say, the very same people who they are supposed to protect and serve. :rant: anyways, i'll be voting in november mos def, and ya'll know which way i'll be swinging.
 
G

Guest

The government is short sighted by way of the corrupted old minds who do not realize they hold the keys to unlock government funded genetic engineering on a wide scale of cannabis resulting in near total market domination for them.

This would result in worldwide studies of present remaining forms of the plant both industrial and medicinal while providing solid moral ground to really tamper with a plant which has more than proven itself useful amongst humankind for better or worse without the old skepticisms holding our learning back.


They who call the shots behind the patriotic curtain of the U.S. Government seem to have their reasons, their strategies, and their propaganda telling us why we should not count this plant amongst our allies yet have never truly told us why.




It is about high time the Hipocracy, greed , and corporate funded war of public stupidity end.

========================================================
Originally Posted By Mars2112

"If any reforms are going to be made, Hautzinger said they need to be
passed at the federal level. He said state-level reforms like the
proposed ballot measure "especially when marijuana use is so closely
tied to methamphetamine cases" are simply not good policy.
=========================================================


That type of arguement is a fallacy and stupid since the fact is that the political tool of choice is guilt by association and they would attempt to link toilet paper use to chewing ones fingernails if they thought they could fund the poor into fighting each other a little longer while they leech all the funding away.
 
Last edited:
Like GW would ever consider making FED laws regaurding pot human, Or anyone with the power for that matter. It is far less profitable for them and their agencies.
 
I'll be voting in november also, and I urge as many others to do so. I'm voting independent though... and I don't care who is on the ballot because I just want to send a message to the two major parties that I've had enough. I know it's kinda crazy but eventually enough people will see the light...

Hunt4Hazez, Presidents don't make laws; congress does and that's where we need to focus for time being IMO.

I love when government people spout of facts without backing them up and showing who funded studies etc. I've said it before and I'll say it again (unfortunately) that is called propaganda....
 

mars2112

always hopeful yet discontent
Veteran
Colorado legalization initiative qualifies for ballot!

Colorado legalization initiative qualifies for ballot!

Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 2:14 PM

Subject: News Release: Proposed Initiative Concerning Marijuana
Possession is Found to be Sufficient

Secretary of State Gigi Dennis

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 16, 2006

CONTACT: Dana Williams
Public Information Officer
(303) 894-2200 ext. 6108
Secretary of State's Office

PROPOSED INITIATIVE CONCERNING MARIJUANA POSSESSION IS FOUND TO BE SUFFICIENT

Denver, CO - Today Secretary of State Gigi Dennis announced the
proposed ballot measure concerning "Marijuana Possession" was found to
be sufficient as required by statute. Petitions were submitted to the
Secretary of State's office on August 7. Secretary of State staff
immediately began checking the 5% random sample signatures selected by
computer.

Random Sample Summary:
Total number of qualified signatures submitted: 130,815
5% of qualified signatures submitted (Random sample): 6,541
Total number of entries accepted (valid) from random sample: 3,988
Total number of entries rejected (invalid) from random sample:
2,553
Number of projected valid signatures from random sample: 79,758
Total number of accepted entries necessary for placement on ballot:
67,829
Percentage of presumed valid signatures: 117.59%

After review of the submitted petition sections as provided in
C.R.S. 1-40-116, Secretary of State Gigi Dennis declares that a
sufficient number of valid signatures have been submitted to certify
the petition to the ballot.

Pursuant to CRS 1-40-116(4), if the random sample verification
establishes that the number of valid signatures is 90% or less of the
number of registered eligible electors needed to find the petition
sufficient, the petition shall be deemed to be not sufficient; if the
random sample verification establishes that the number of valid
signatures totals 110% or more of the number of required signatures of
registered eligible electors, the petition shall be deemed sufficient.

Pursuant to C.R.S. 1-5-407 (5.3), this initiative will be
numbered "Amendment 44" on the November 7, 2006 General
Election ballot.

The Secretary of State's office has notified the proponents the
petition was deemed sufficient.

____________

-- Steve Fox, Executive Director
-- Safer Alternative for Enjoyable Recreation (SAFER)
-- steve@saferchoice.org
-- http://www.saferchoice.org
 
Top