Marijuana.com

Lit_Match

Opponents, Proponents Tangle Over Marijuana Ballot Issue
10-28-06|redorbit.com|By Charles Ashby

Oct. 28--DENVER - Legalizing small amounts of marijuana in Colorado will lead to increased drug trafficking in the state, law enforcement officials said Wednesday.

That, at least, was the message Pueblo Police Chief James Billings Jr. and other ranking officers from across the state conveyed at an anti-Amendment 44 press conference on the west steps of the Colorado Capitol Building.

Because the initiative on this year's ballot would allow Coloradans to possess less than an ounce of marijuana - but would still leave it illegal to grow, purchase or sell - means people would have to break the law in order to possess the weed.

And that, the law enforcement officials said, will lead to increased drug trafficking.

"We have major problems with the people who are transporting the drugs," Billings said immediately after the press conference. "There's already so much violence related to drug trafficking. The ramifications of a society that openly condones through its laws the use of marijuana is dangerous. Currently, there's already a huge amount of marijuana that's being trafficked into Colorado."

Amid loud heckling from proponents of the measure, the sheriffs spoke out against the amendment along with Gov. Bill Owens and Attorney General John Suthers, who also said the initiative would lead the state's teens to try other, harder drugs.

Suthers, who was shouted down the loudest by supporters of a group calling itself Safer Alternative For Enjoyable Recreation, said there is nothing safe about marijuana.

The attorney general said the active chemical substance that is responsible for the high from marijuana, tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, has been increasing in the marijuana plant.

"Corresponding to the increase in the THC content of marijuana is a six-fold increase in the number of emergency room admissions attributable to marijuana," Suthers said over the proponents' chanting. "There are now 4.6 million Americans who suffer from marijuana dependency. The drafters of Amendment 44 were extremely sloppy. If the voters approve Amendment 44, they will be legalizing the transfer of less than an ounce of marijuana (to a teen). That is truly irresponsible." (Admin note: Marijuana has never been known to cause health problems great enough to have to visit the emergency room. The real reason people are admitted to the emergency room is because they have had a panic attack and don't know what else to do. If Suthers had included the doctors' reports of those marijuana users who visited the e.r. you would see that they were in otherwise good health at the time.)

In a press conference of his own immediately following, SAFER campaign manager Mason Tvert chastised the governor for not being willing to debate him on the issue.

Presenting a former police chief of his own - one from Seattle - Tvert said there is no evidence that marijuana is more detrimental than alcohol or leads people to try other illegal substances.

That former police chief, Norman Stamper, has written a book, "Breaking Rank: A top cop's expose about the dark side of American policing."

"I heard a steady stream of untruths," Stamper said of the opponents' press conference. "I will not call them lies because I think people who believe what they're saying and go ahead and say that are not lying; they're uninformed. I think it's tragic that police officials particularly, as well as other elected officials, don't do their homework. Marijuana is not a gateway drug. If there is a gateway drug, it's a combination of tobacco and beer."

Though Owens was smiling at the shouting opponents at the beginning of the press conference, he attacked them at the end, saying their heckling marked a sad day for open political discourse.

"This is a sad day for Colorado when people who have a permit aren't allowed to speak," the governor said. "We have a permit today, we have men and women who really care about the future of Colorado, and we're literally being shouted down by the other side.

"I've been involved in Colorado policy for almost three decades," he shouted at the proponents. "I have never seen a time when legitimate debate is shouted down like we're seeing today. If the citizens of Colorado have any doubt as to who's right on this issue, I hope they'll look at the (law enforcement) men and women behind me this morning, look at this audience that isn't allowing free debate in the state of Colorado, and judge accordingly."

-----

Source: The Pueblo Chieftain

 

Buzzby

Legitimate debate? Here we have a citizens' initiative being lambasted by people on the public payroll acting in their official capacities. Where are the citizen opponents of Amendment 44? If this is an issue put on the ballot by citizens then the legitimate opponents are other citizens, not public officials with an axe to grind.


Who's right on this issue? The citizens of Colorado who object to public officials who are unjustly campaigning against a citizens' initiative or the public officials attempting to squelch the will of the voters? Law enforcement types trying to maintain their little empires or citizens looking for relief from unjust laws?

__________________

dedbr

I would just have one question for these people.

How many of these public officials were on the damn clock on my tab when they were at this so called debate?

Cause I sure as hell don't want my money spent on anti pot law meetings!


Some Where In Ded Land.........

__________________
Sometimes you can cut your own throat with your tongue.....
So remember to check out our most wonderful Posting Guidelines!

Lit_Match

I find myself asking the same question. Whatever the topic may be, it is never acceptable that representatives of the majority to ignore the will of the voter, or decide they know better. Hopefully in the future, should people ever regain their sence of democracy, such officials will be pulled from their respective offices and replaced.

28g

I object to Colorado's Public Officials. Period. I know I intend to do some serious 'replacing' this next vote! 'Nuff said...