.....and I'll huff...and I'll puff..........and I'll vote for I-100!!
As anyone in Denver knows, the upcoming elections have been dominated by referendums C & D which, if passed, will essentially unlink the draconian ratchet-effect of TABOR from Colorado's budget. I'm certainly voting for it as I think its the fiscally proper thing to do; as a citizen of Colorado, I can't have my cake and eat it, so if I want services---like, say, higher education---than I have to ante up. But I'm not here to rave about C & D. Nope, I'm here to alert you--dear voter-- to another issue that will be on November's ballot. It's certainly not getting much press-- which is not surprising given the nature of this obscure ballot measure-- but the Denver Post did run a little article on it a few days ago, detailing how councilman Charlie Brown reacted to the manner in which the measure was being marketed. So what is this measure and what's the big deal??
A "yes" vote for ballot measure I-100 would essentially make it legal for anyone over 21 years of age to legally possess 1 ounce of marijuana IN DENVER. Bear in mind that if the measure passes, state law would still make possession a misdemeanor, but in Denver you'd be off the hook, technically. Alas, the local cops have decreed that they will continue to prosecute anyone in possession under state law, which essentially yanks the teeth from the ballot measure's maw. But that's not the real issue I want to visit. While I agree with councilman Brown that the way in which this measure is being marketed is misleading ( see article ), I disagree with him on the fundamental premise of the measure which suggests that limited marijuana consumption is less dangerous that an equivalent consumption of hooch.
Look, I don't smoke pot. It burns and makes me cough and besides, I prefer to burn my esophagus the old-fashioned way--with delicious, hearty booze. But do I think booze is more dangerous than marijuana consumption? Without question. How many people get shot, raped, hit by a drunk driver, beaten up, gay-bashed, or worse when there is alcohol involved? ALOT. How many of these things happen when someone is stoned or just a bit hazed? I'd venture to guess it doesn't happen alot. I'm 36 years old and have been around my fair share of drunks and stoners in my life and I can unequivocally say that the drunks are ALWAYS the ones who are belligerent and quick to start a fight. The stoners just lay back and enjoy the show. Sure, there are people who abuse marijuana and commit crimes and these folks should be arrested and punished, but what about all of the people who don't abuse it and use it recreationally? Why should they be prevented from using a mind-altering substance based on others' actions? It certainly isn't that way with alcohol. When a drunk Joe Sixpack down the street decides to hit little Susie with his car and then flee the scene, I'm not held accountable for his actions or prevented from consuming the same fifth of gin he did before he decided to be irresponsible. So why should it be ANY different for marijuana? Logically, it shouldn't. But those in power have deluded themselves into believing that marijuana is THE gateway drug to a spiraling vortex of soul-sucking, self-destruction. That's just pure BS. Wanna know what the REAL gateway drug is? 100% Legal Booze!! How many of you can say that marijuana was your FIRST drug? I'd think fairly few. Most of us as teens first experimented with altered states with whatever was in mom and dad's liquor cabinet ( or closet ). I know I did. And from most of the other anecdotes I've heard, so did almost everyone else.
So, I'm voting for ballot measure I-100 for several reasons, despite the fact that it will be a largely symbolic vote:
A "yes" vote for ballot measure I-100 would essentially make it legal for anyone over 21 years of age to legally possess 1 ounce of marijuana IN DENVER. Bear in mind that if the measure passes, state law would still make possession a misdemeanor, but in Denver you'd be off the hook, technically. Alas, the local cops have decreed that they will continue to prosecute anyone in possession under state law, which essentially yanks the teeth from the ballot measure's maw. But that's not the real issue I want to visit. While I agree with councilman Brown that the way in which this measure is being marketed is misleading ( see article ), I disagree with him on the fundamental premise of the measure which suggests that limited marijuana consumption is less dangerous that an equivalent consumption of hooch.
Look, I don't smoke pot. It burns and makes me cough and besides, I prefer to burn my esophagus the old-fashioned way--with delicious, hearty booze. But do I think booze is more dangerous than marijuana consumption? Without question. How many people get shot, raped, hit by a drunk driver, beaten up, gay-bashed, or worse when there is alcohol involved? ALOT. How many of these things happen when someone is stoned or just a bit hazed? I'd venture to guess it doesn't happen alot. I'm 36 years old and have been around my fair share of drunks and stoners in my life and I can unequivocally say that the drunks are ALWAYS the ones who are belligerent and quick to start a fight. The stoners just lay back and enjoy the show. Sure, there are people who abuse marijuana and commit crimes and these folks should be arrested and punished, but what about all of the people who don't abuse it and use it recreationally? Why should they be prevented from using a mind-altering substance based on others' actions? It certainly isn't that way with alcohol. When a drunk Joe Sixpack down the street decides to hit little Susie with his car and then flee the scene, I'm not held accountable for his actions or prevented from consuming the same fifth of gin he did before he decided to be irresponsible. So why should it be ANY different for marijuana? Logically, it shouldn't. But those in power have deluded themselves into believing that marijuana is THE gateway drug to a spiraling vortex of soul-sucking, self-destruction. That's just pure BS. Wanna know what the REAL gateway drug is? 100% Legal Booze!! How many of you can say that marijuana was your FIRST drug? I'd think fairly few. Most of us as teens first experimented with altered states with whatever was in mom and dad's liquor cabinet ( or closet ). I know I did. And from most of the other anecdotes I've heard, so did almost everyone else.
So, I'm voting for ballot measure I-100 for several reasons, despite the fact that it will be a largely symbolic vote:
- I truly believe that most marijuana use is less dangerous than 2-3 legally consumed stiff drinks
- By legalizing a reasonable amount of weed, our jails would become less crowded, the police could focus on REAL crimes, and our citizens wouldn't be harassed for something which is largely a personal choice and affects no one else
- to stand against the utter hypocrisy of allowing citizens to walk 10 blocks in any direction and purchase something far more dangerous than a joint