Time to think about the future

[bahnzo]

First, this was *NOT* a complete loss, we proved that a significant amount of people in this state disagree with the current marijuana laws, and for that everyone should be proud. Re-legalization is not a one shot thing, it's a series of small steps towards a goal. There has been just too many years and too much misinformation for people to suddenly change thier minds.
=============================================
Tax and regulate I think needs to be our rallying cry! It's always been my way of thinking that it's the illegal sales of marijuana that causes the most harm to society. Now I know Mason and SAFER talked about the DEA and fed's and it's not possible until thier laws change. But until the states show that we want a change, and go ahead and impliment taxation and regulation ourselves, then nothing will ever change on a federal level.

We need more women (especially mothers) leading this effort. It was women who reversed prohibition in the 20's and I believe it will be women who make the most difference in changing marijuana laws. No offense to Mason or anyone at SAFER, but we need a 35-45 yr old, professional business-type woman to lead this effort.

We need to include hemp in this iniative as well. Allowing farmers another crop will bring many of these normally anti people on board. The fact that hemp is illegal is even more ridiculous than marijuana. The use for paper production alone is a good enough reason, and all those farmers on the eastern plains may very well come on board.

Education, taxation, regulation. This is where we start again. Instead of a simple change, lets go all out and make a true amendment. Let's make sure no loopholes can be claimed; lets shore up laws for underage sales and possession; let's allow for personal cultivation; let's setup guidlines for how it's produced and sold in stores; let's earmark funds for education and substance abuse programs. ETC ETC ETC.

-Ken (that other one)

[Patrick]

I completely agree with you, Taxing and Regulating is a great idea.
However I believe Mason said it wont happen because its a class 2 petty offense under the federal government and it can't happen through the state like that.
( I don't know specifics but it was on the 850 KOA radio debate )

Explaining that the reason marijuana use exploded for kids in Alaska and Amsterdam is very simple. In Alaska it wasn't taxed and regulated so minors could still get it from the many drug dealers at high schools. ( there are several, I could name more pot dealers names then liquor store names. 'i am not in high school' ) Also in Amsterdam there is no age restriction so yeah of course minor use will go up. IF Marijuana were taxed and regulated like alcohol, one the black market for Marijuana would disappear ( due to price driving them out of business ) and DEA agents could focus on more serious drugs like cocaine and heroin. Two, I believe teen use would decrease or stay the same. If kids were getting ID ed and marijuana selling was taken more seriously than alcohol selling ( for example not letting fake ID's slide and always IDing then it will make it MUCH less accessible to kids ) I'm sure they'd figure out a way to get their pot still but I think it's safe to say it would decrease.



NOT to mention all the cash flow for the state from the stuff being taxed and not punished.
Mentioning benefits of Hemp for next round would be useful also.

Well thats my thought on it being taxed.

[tokinglx]

i fully support the tax and regulation clause, but i do not think we should push for that, i think the simple legalization will have a better chance at passing, and if we can pass it, it will catch on in other states as well, and eventually, the federal government will be forced to set up their own system of regulating it, or we try that the election after we legalize posession.

pot education needs to be our focus until then. as quoted from the comments on the safer blog - "OH I GOT IT>>> If everyone worked having Jehova's witnesses...pass out flyers concerning all the TRUE FACTS about Marijuana...all over this country. That could possibly work hmmm...they seem to be very good about going door to door...LOL either that or start doing as they do...everyone take a territory and hit the pavement and start knocking on doors...thats what they do....hmmm
Mary Lou Berry"

if we all have pamphlets that list all of the basic facts and bust the popular myths that our opponents use to turn those uninformed peoples against us. i certainly have no problem talking to people about the lies about the devil weed, and if i can do it, i know other people would be willing as well.

[bahnzo]

I don't think marijuana can be legalized without a plan to regulate and tax it. Also, many voters (and prohibitionists) listed the fact there was no system in place for legal purchase as why they disaproved of the amendment, citing that more drug dealers would crop up here due to the legal status w/o a system to regulate it's sale.

Amsterdam is 18 for marijuana purchase and use, BTW. Dunno about Alaska, but I'm sure that all use of MJ went up around the country during the middle to late 70's when Alaska decriminalized, not to mention more people moving there due to the oil pipline being built.

I would love to have a full blown discussion here about whether we should try again with the same idea as this year, or try a full-blown tax and regulate. There are many good points for either choice.

And what a Woman heading up the effort? At least a more visible presence from the females would help immensly. I thought the woman that appeared with Mason in the PBS debate was great, and brought a lot of credibility to the argument.

[kenny]

AMENDMENT 44 was a first step.I think you will see a more comprehensive bill in 2008.We all need to kidnap Mason Tvert and Evan force them to work again in 2008(sarcasm)WE NEED TO ORGANIZE BETTER AND GET MORE VOLUNTEERS AND EXPAND OUR MESSAGE AND RESOURCES.THIS WILL HAPPEN ,IF EVERYONE OF US MAKES SURE WE GET MORE PEOPLE INVOLVED.THE TIME TO START IS NOW NOT LATER.KEEP UP THE GREAT WORK AND ORGANIZE YOUR FRIENDS AND FAMILY AND CONTINUE REGISTERING VOTERS AND COUNTER THE PROHIBITIONISTS LIES WITH THE FACTS.YES 2008 YES 2008 YES 2008

[kenny]

hmmmm well amendment 44 won in 13 counties and in denver again as well,i wouldnt call that a loss(more of a first step toward common sense).I would say 40% of colorado wants a change and 13 counties agreed with denver that adult marijuana users shouldnt be criminals or fined. 62% voted for 44 in Summit County,Boulder/53%, Clear Creek/54%, Eagle/56%, Gilpin/61%, Gunnison/57%, La Plata/56% , Lake/52%, Pitkin/72%, Routt/53%, Saguache/51%, San Juan/63%, San Miguel/74%, and Denver/56%(so far still not fully counted hmm??)IF YOU LOOK AT THE TOTALS,AMENDMENT 44 WINS IN 14 COUNTIES.VOTE YES 2008(Common Sense)

[gogreen]

once the campaign gets rolling, focus needs to be given to the eastern and south eastern counties. town meetings, that kind of stuff. There is such a big meth problem is so many of these counties that a sensible argument hopefully is all that's needed to convince 50%.

[bahnzo]

gogreen said:

once the campaign gets rolling, focus needs to be given to the eastern and south eastern counties. town meetings, that kind of stuff. There is such a big meth problem is so many of these counties that a sensible argument hopefully is all that's needed to convince 50%.

These are definitly the counties to focus on, a very noticable difference between these and those counties that voted in favor. Again regulation and taxation could be sold to them, even if the large majority of the counties population would never smoke pot.

Using the meth problem....legalization frees up resources and money. Taxation also generates revenue. A portion of the tax revenue from the cultivation and sale could be earmarked for drug education and enforcement. All this found money and time can be put towards meth enforcement.

Even if you don't support using marijuana, like many people in these eastern and south western counties, having extra support for wiping out meth labs I'm sure is something they would support.

[bahnzo]

Just read this......what do people think about these cities passing "lowest priority" measures against marijuana? I thought it was pointless as here in Denver is a simple fine and pretty low anyways, but check out what Measure K in Santa Cruz, CA states:

Details of the new ordinance that makes adult marijuana crimes lowest priority for police:

* Cooperation with state and federal authorities is restricted in relation to marijuana investigations and arrests.
* Prohibits city from accepting federal funds to investigate, seize or prosecute marijuana offenses.
* Creates a community oversight committee to monitor police reports for marijuana arrests.
* Declares that it is city policy to support policies for taxation and regulation of marijuana.
* Requires city clerk to send annual letters to federal lawmakers in support of marijuana legalization.

And this passed! I especially like the part where the city clerk *has* to write a letter each year.

[umay]

While I'm not sure if groups like LEAP would jump on board a pro-marijuana / anti-methamphetamine initiative campaign, I think there's potentially a lot of law enforcement folks who would support something like that. Putting a few city wide proposals out for a lowest-priority-marijuana-combination-highest priority-methamphetamine might be a step in the right direction.

Or what about passing a few Santa Cruz style ordinances around the state in '07?