Video: Amendment 64's first campaign ad encourages marijuana talks

Drsnitch

for those who were not aware 420 wellness is owned and operated by richard gaetano a convicted felon and a crimial from south florida!!! only reason they are operating is because the company is in his wifes name kimberly gaetano as a cover up...is this really the kind of people colorado is allowing to operate a marijuana dispensery?? wow.. beware of kimberly and richard gaetano.. hopefully the dea along with the state of colorado will take a closer look into both of these criminals and shut them down and send them back to florida..

Donkey Hotay

Dear Mom,

I used to drink alcohol, but started also smoking pot because they told me A64 "legalized" marijuana and all my 21+ year old friends were doing it.

Now I'm in PRISON with a Felony Drug Record because I grew a single pot plant in my dorm room, and even though I'm an adult of 20 years old, the assholes who promoted A64 deceived and excluded me from ANY PROTECTION WHATSOEVER!! ... and to think I was stoned-stupid enough to vote for their lies.

I should have stayed with Coors Light.

Your wayward daughter,

Stoner SallyPrisoner #6969Colorado Women's Correctional FacilityDenver CO

PS: please send commissary $$ asap, or else my new cellie, Big Bertha, says I'll be eatin' box lunches from now on ... whatever that means.

Robert Chase

Amendment 64 explicitly makes the cultivation of six or fewer cannabis plants (no more than three flowering) legal. You are deliberately misrepresenting it. Why would you do that, unless you are a police agent?

"(3) Personal use of marijuana. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION OF LAW, THE FOLLOWING ACTS ARE NOT UNLAWFUL AND SHALL NOT BE AN OFFENSE UNDER COLORADO LAW OR THE LAW OF ANY LOCALITY WITHIN COLORADO OR BE A BASIS FOR SEIZURE OR FORFEITURE OF ASSETS UNDER COLORADO LAW FOR PERSONS TWENTY-ONE YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER: (a) POSSESSING, USING, DISPLAYING, PURCHASING, OR TRANSPORTING MARIJUANA ACCESSORIES OR ONE OUNCE OR LESS OF MARIJUANA. (b) POSSESSING, GROWING, PROCESSING, OR TRANSPORTING NO MORE THAN SIX MARIJUANA PLANTS, WITH THREE OR FEWER BEING MATURE, FLOWERING PLANTS, AND POSSESSION OF THE MARIJUANA PRODUCED BY THE PLANTS ON THE PREMISES WHERE THE PLANTS WERE GROWN, PROVIDED THAT THE GROWING TAKES PLACE IN AN ENCLOSED, LOCKED SPACE, IS NOT CONDUCTED OPENLY OR PUBLICLY, AND IS NOT MADE AVAILABLE FOR SALE. (c) TRANSFER OF ONE OUNCE OR LESS OF MARIJUANA WITHOUT REMUNERATION TO A PERSON WHO IS TWENTY-ONE YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER. (d) CONSUMPTION OF MARIJUANA, PROVIDED THAT NOTHING IN THIS SECTION SHALL PERMIT CONSUMPTION THAT IS CONDUCTED OPENLY AND PUBLICLY OR IN A MANNER THAT ENDANGERS OTHERS. (e) ASSISTING ANOTHER PERSON WHO IS TWENTY-ONE YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER IN ANY OF THE ACTS DESCRIBED IN PARAGRAPHS (a) THROUGH (d) OF THIS SUBSECTION."

Donkey Hotay

You lying piece of shit -- A64 explicitly EXCLUDES ALL ADULTS age 18-20 years old from ANY protection whatsoever!

You just can't stop telling LIES, can you you Lying Liar ?

Donkey Hotay

So tell us then, why is marijuana so harmful and dangerous that ADULTS age 18-20 should be denied ANY access, and punished with CRIMINAL sanctions ?

btw: +2 points for using vituperative and tendentious.

I'm not at all obsessed, and I don't want to send anyone to prison. But you have written hundreds of times of the injustice of making kids wait to buy dope until they are also old enough to drink. That's obsessed. Plus, you sound like a psycho, a moron, and a pervert all in one with your vituperative, tendentious rants.

Donkey Hotay

Why are you obsessed with sending "kids" to prison for using a "harmless plant that never killed anyone" ?

I can't figure out, Donkey, why you are so obsessed with getting high with kids. Don't you have any adult friends to hang out with?

Donkey Hotay

The age group 18 up to 21 are the group MOST LIKELY to be arrested/cited for marijuana use, they represent approximated 20% of all marijuana "arrests" according to NORML.

Why would you deliberately exclude and sacrifice the very group of people who needs the most protection from the Prison Industrial Complex ?

Why do you hate adults < 21 years old?

Robert Chase

Your point is utterly irrelevant and insignificant -- most adults 18-20 attain the age of twenty-one, and will be able to enjoy cannabis legally for most of their lives if Amendment 64 passes.

The most important part of the text of the Amendment is reproduced above, so only people with impaired reading comprehension cannot see that it legalizes use of cannabis and contradicts the lies you just repeated about people being charged with growing a single plant under its auspices.

Guest

Dear Sally,

It's your fault for being ignorant of the laws. You would have faced the sane punishment without 64 passing.

Now, quit blaming other people for your problems. You are starting to sound like your crazy aunt Kathleen.

Don't drop the soap,

Mom

Donkey Hotay

Dear Mom,

I always knew I could count on you.

As drunken Uncle Robert used to whisper in my ear late lateat night while you were unconscious in the neighbor's trailer after a 4 day crack-binge -- "Don't do the crime if you can't do the time ...now be a good little girl ..."

Thanks for caring.

Stoner SallyPrisoner #6969Colorado Women's Correctional FacilityDenver CO

PS: Your grandaughter Sally-Mae is also your niece.

Happy Mother-fuckers Day !

NO on AM 64

Remember, paid pot pimp Betty Aldworth and the Am. 64 campaign sent out a press release on 4/20 and was interviewed by all major TV stations PUBLICLY CONDEMNING THE 420 RALLY IN DENVER!

That's right. Am. 64 doesn't want you to have the right to smoke pot in public!

Am. 64 gives MORE CONTROL AND FUNDING TO LAW ENFORCEMENT, specifically the DOR, who has already proved INEPT and INCOMPETENT. $10 million burned through and NOT ONE SINGLE MMC LICENSE GRANTED. Now they are out of money, and the greedy dispensaries, that Betty Aldworth used to represent with CMMR, precursor to MMIG, are trying to steal money from the patient registry fund, from PATIENTS THAT DON'T EVEN SHOP AT MMCs.

NO ON 64! No more funding for law enforcement!

Robert Chase

"That's right. Am. 64 doesn't want you to have the right to smoke pot in public!" -- you have got to be kidding! Amendment 64 would not allow me to light up in public, would not allow high school seniors to enjoy cannabis?!? What a self-referential little world you must inhabit! We need to take all you anti-legalization users of cannabis on a tour of Colorado -- not of the Front Range, but of all the little, conservative communities. We'll sit you all around a small conference table and have local leaders explain what they think about cannabis and what public policy regarding those who use it should be. You have to be psychotic to think that we are on the verge of totally legalizing cannabis while 40% of the electorate still wants to put us in jail!

All half-dozen of you anti-Amendment 64 posters should tune in to CPR and other media (besides pro-cannabis online forums) to find out how successful your crazy campaign against it is -- CPR just characterized Amendment 64 as "complete legalization". While you denounce the Amendment as not legalizing cannabis, the vast majority of people who use cannabis and can read know better (and will vote for it), and the mainstream media suggest to the contrary that the Amendment is radical and sweeping reform. You have, to an individual, failed to demonstrate any connection to the political and social reality around you (other than your small circle of friends who use cannabis too). You cannot take in information such as the facts that 40% of voters want to jail us or that 80% of Coloradans do not use cannabis, but if you could, you might be able to begin to think politically. If you had even the tiniest clue, you would be focusing your efforts on those people who might defeat Amendment 64 -- not people with all the cannabis they can smoke, but older voters, parents, and women.

Homegrown Care

Weak arguments! Robert you should be able to light up anywhere Alcohol can be consumed. You toss in in High School students as a crusade for the children.

Vote no on 64 so Robert has a stroke. He is so mean.

Donkey Hotay

"Amendment 64 would not stop unjust imprisonment for offenses related to cannabis, legalize cannabis, or regulate it like alcohol " -- Robert Chase

***** Vote NO on deceptive, bogus A64!! *****

Homegrown Care

Where can I read A 64? So I can decide with out all your "insights".

Donkey Hotay

Why do you hate Walter Cronkite ?

Robert Chase

"Why do you hate Democracy?"

Donkey Hotay

Why do you hate Freedom ?

Robert Chase

"Why do you hate America?"

Donkey Hotay

"There is no such thing as a little freedom. Either you are all free, or you are not free."-- Walter Cronkite

Robert Chase

"Amendment 64 is far from perfect" -- Robert Chase

Ending criminal penalties for the personal use and cultivation of cannabis would be a major reform of our laws against it, and will allow most adults who want to use it to do so entirely legally (with regard to Colorado law).

******* Vote Yes on Amendment 64! *******

Cayce Goldberg

Westword Readers,

Do not be thrown off by the negative commentary by people like Donkey_Hotay and his cohorts, go look up any article on Amendment 64 on Westword and you'll see dozens of identical smear comments, very few with any actual substance to the complaints.

Let me spell it out for you - anti-64 people believe it's not 'true' legalization because it leaves limitations on the table. You cannot have a pound of marijuana, you can't grow a forest of weed, and you have to do it in the private confines of your own home so there will not be cannabis cafes. While a full-on supporter of marijuana can easily see why weed should be completely legal, it's not so clear to everyone else. Some people think excessive use of cannabis is dangerous (which is up for debate), others think it will lead to increased DUIs and use by children. These voters are the ones who could derail our entire attempt at legalization, they're the ones that need convincing.

So Amendment 64 is softer legalization so that it actually has a chance at passing. What really upsets me about people like Donkey_Hotay is that by spreading anti-64 propaganda, they're sabotaging the entire legalization movement. Would you really throw this all away because you want 8 plants and not 6? You want 2 ounces and not 1? You want to be able to smoke not just in the comfort of your home but also in public? It's ridiculous, childish, baby-like pandering which basically leaves no room for negotiation with public opinion. You simply argue that if you don't get exactly what you want, then the entire movement is a fraud.

Please, ignore these people. Amendment 64 represents the largest step every taken by any state in the country to end marijuana prohibition. It will get the ball rolling in the national and international courts, it will restructure the entire discussion about the drug war, about law enforcement's use of resources and time, about our bloated prisons, about the Mexican drug war which has claimed around 60,000 lives... More is on the line than your personal stash and plants.

Go to the Amendment 64 website and please read it for yourself. Do not trust in the words of puppets on the internet. Don't even believe what I say at face value, do some research for yourself and make your own informed decision. I think after reading about it on your own you'll feel like voting yes come November.

Homegrown Care

Who frigin' cares Robert when it is the WRONG amendment. Pushing A64 is pushing the Man's political agenda.

Kathleen Chippi

minute 26, 26 seconds

Mr. Ramie, "The last thing the proponents want to do ......is to do anything that would mislead anybody or have anything in the title that might arguably be misleading to any of the voters."

minute 29, 10 seconds

Mr. Ramie, "If there is a concern "in a manner similar to alcohol" suggests it would be legal at all levels, a, we don't want to have that concern out there...from our prospective, a, we would, it would be acceptable to us in all 8 of the titles to drop the words "in a manner similar to alcohol."

Robert Chase

Your precious transcript -- AGAIN?!? Your conceit that the backers of Amendment 64 have engaged in deceit because they conceded that the characterization of the Amendment as regulating cannabis like alcohol was not critical to its description makes no sense. I sat through both Title Board hearings on the Amendment, and your fixation on this point is bizarre, as is your belief that you are revealing something perfidious or hidden about the campaign.

As I have pointed out only about a dozen times, provisions regulating retail sales to adults are moot for the foreseeable future due to the operation of Federal law. You cannot take in contradictory information at all, but at the risk of being ignored yet again, letting the DOR regulate cannabis is what we now do with alcohol and tobacco -- the characterization of the Amendment as regulating cannabis like alcohol is not even inaccurate (much less duplicitous), but if you want to scream to the heavens that that the parallel is far from exact, be my guest.

Donkey Hotay

The LIES of A64 Pimps EXPOSED !

Robert Chase

The decision voters will make about Amendment 64 in November will not be a choice between "Peaceful Pot" or "Violent Alcohol"; it will be to keep all use of cannabis by non-patients illegal in Colorado, or to allow adults (twenty-one years of age or older) to grow up to six cannabis plants (no more than three flowering) and use that cannabis legally.

Donkey Hotay

What kind of fools would deliberately associate and conflate Peaceful Pot with Violent Alcohol ?

Marijuana = "a natural herb that never killed anyone"

Alcohol = an evil poison that harms, maims and KILLS 10s of THOUSANDS every YEAR!

Only a marijuana-hating sponge-brained alcoholic would dare conflate them, much less make it the foundation of a political campaign. With idiot propagandists like the A64 pimps, who needs DEA disinformation?

Are you and Mason Tvert old drinking buddies?

Robert Chase

If only you all were the least bit accurate in your accusations, you could be accused of being hyperbolic, but you are just ridiculous. Your dupes are not even that.

Kathleen Chippi

"So Amendment 64 is softer legalization so that it actually has a chance at passing. What really upsets me about people like Donkey_Hotay is that by spreading anti-64 propaganda, they're sabotaging the entire legalization movement."

Give it up, Cayce--the proponents attorney Mr. Ramie and the Title board did way back last year because the critiques on A64 are VALID--out of your own campaigns mouth.

Title Board hearing on A64 July 5, 2011

minute 32, 10 secondsMr. Ramie (A64 attorney), "I'm hearing allot of objection and I can't honestly say that the objections that I'm hearing are completely crazy or off the wall and

I know Mr. Hobbs has heard me for many years that the objections are without merit, I really can't say that for these...

So lets take the phrase out. And if we want to present the message in campaigning, where we can do that, we'll do it-but we absolutely do not want to have something floating around in the title that could either be characterized as a catch phrase and tilt the argument one way or the other in the official title or have anything in there that can mislead the voters."

minute 43, 39 secondsMr. Hobbs, "It sort of gets back to my concern about regulation verses legalization."

Mr. Ramie, "Exactly, and if we're suggesting "in a manner similar to alcohol", if that phrase, and I see how it could, carry the suggestion that we're now wholly legal on all levels, we don't want to suggest that because we're not."

Mr Hobbs, "And I agree with you, it's a good faith argument that they have made here."

So we have merit in our arguments and it's not okay to MISLEAD (LIE) the voters in the title (per Ramie) but it is okay to mislead in the marketing? Sweet. I'll let the voters know.

VOTE NO on A64!

Robert Chase

Amendment 64 would regulate cannabis like we do alcohol and tobacco (in that it makes the DOR responsible for regulating general retail sales if in no other way). This simple fact serves to demolish the rotten structure of your argument.

Amendment 64 would legalize the personal cultivation and use of cannabis, and this fact should make anyone who uses it marvel at your opposition and search what you have written in vain for any possible justification for keeping it illegal to grow six cannabis plants (no more than three flowering) in private.

You have never even attempted to explain why we should vote to keep cannabis completely illegal for non-patients, because you can't. It is insane for people who use cannabis to vote to keep it illegal, and it is insane for you to try to persuade people who use cannabis to vote against it, because such an effort cannot succeed. If you were genuinely intent on killing the Amendment, you would be telling the people who might do so (i.e. older voters, parents, and women) that the Amendment will cause slaughter on the highways, students' failure, disease, and death -- you know those claims are false.

Donkey Hotay

¡Venceremos!

Homegrown Care

Thank goodness you are here Donkey Hotay! That whole 'conversation colorado legalize ' and all is funded with 5 million to push their lies and agenda. That Amendment to the CO Constitution for MMJ has been shate all over, layers of regulation which were not authorized.

Donkey Hotay

For limpwristed milquetoasts like you, it's Preemptive Surrender Day.

Are you French ?

Robert Chase

November 6 is not Begging Day; it is Election Day.

Donkey Hotay

Little Minds of Little Courage beg for Little Freedom.

Stay little, Robert.

Robert Chase

It is deceptive to represent partial quotations as accurate -- you just did it again! If I were to pore over your posts excerpting words out of context, I could make you out every sort of villain. It is a measure of your pathology that you do this automatically. I do not lie.

"Amendment 64 would regulate cannabis like we do alcohol and tobacco (in that it makes the DOR responsible for regulating general retail sales if in no other way)". Clearly, the analogy is very far from exact, and I do not favor the comparison -- I mention it because certain people have become unhinged by it, and have somehow convinced themselves that this characterization of the Amendment by the campaign is more important than its provisions, which legalize the personal use and cultivation of cannabis.

November 6, vote to legalize a little cannabis for personal use,

******* Vote Yes on Amendment 64! *******

Donkey Hotay

You just can't stop your pathological lying, can you Robert?

"Amendment 64 would regulate cannabis like we do alcohol and tobacco"

"Amendment 64 would not stop unjust imprisonment for offenses related to cannabis, legalize cannabis, or regulate it like alcohol " -- Robert Chase

Donkey Hotay

What kind of idiots would deliberately associate and conflate Peaceful Pot with Violent Alcohol ?

Marijuana = "a natural herb that never killed anyone"

Alcohol = an evil poison that harms, maims and KILLS 10s of THOUSANDS every YEAR!

Only a marijuana-hating sponge-brained alcoholic would dare conflate them.

Donkey Hotay

Why is marijuana so harmful and dangerous that it should be treated, controlled and regulated like deadly alcohol?

Robert Chase

"Peaceful Pot", "Violent Alcohol"? You seem to be having trouble distinguishing drugs from their effects. As long as a majority of voters think that cannabis has any harmful effect, they will support either continued criminalization or regulation. Given a choice between those two, I choose regulation.

Donkey Hotay

A64 written by Alcoholics for Alcoholics who don't actually use, possess or cultivate marijuana.

A64 promoted by LIES from self-confessed LIARS.

1 ounce and 3 plants and excluding 10s of Thousands of Adults 18-20 provides NO MEANINGFUL change.

Why haven't the prevaricating pimps behind A64 provided the actual statistics to support their empty initiative?

1) Exactly how many Adults age 21+ are ARRESTED for possessing 1 (one) OUNCE or LESS in Colorado ?

2) Exactly how many Adults age 21+ are ARRESTED for cultivating 3 (three) or fewer flowering plants in Colorado ?

3) Why is marijuana so dangerous and harmful that 10s of THOUSANDS of Adults 18-20 are deliberately EXCLUDED from ANY coverage under A64, and left exposed to CRIMINAL FELONY DRUG PENALTIES if they so much as grow a single plant, or possess a single joint?

Robert Chase

The campaign's rhetoric is very weak -- does our base still need to come out to their parents, as opposed to urging them to vote for Amendment 64 directly? The campaign clearly is trying to leverage the normalcy of (some of) those who use cannabis into a low-key acceptance of limited legalization, but I think we need a little more fire and a few more facts.

It would be insane for anyone who enjoys cannabis not to legalize the cultivation and use of some this November.

Vote Yes on Amendment 64!

Homegrown Care

Next you pro A64 folks will do is claim to allow Hemp farming. Oh - yeah with the sizable cost and regulation. So far CO ballot issues - which you can't find to read - are big political claims backed by republican funds. Everyone should question why Republicans are pushing Marijuana ALL of a sudden this election year.

Donkey Hotay

There is no such thing as part freedom. -- Nelson Mandela

Cayce Goldberg

Donkey, all you do is go around spreading anti-A64 rhetoric. You complain that A64 restricts smokers in the amount of marijuana and plants they can possess and so therefore you don't consider it full legalization. What about booze? You can't just brew your own hard alcohol at home and sell it without a license, that's in violation of state regulation laws. If you violate the stipulations set forth by A64 then you've committed a crime just like any other law on the books.

Amendment 64 is trying to reach a crowd beyond the average smoker. They're trying to reach the non-smoker, the parent, the uninformed conservatives. By limiting the amount of marijuana you can purchase and grow, it's an assurance to these voters that it won't get out of hand. They are much more likely to vote yes on A64 because it's rather mild, yet from the perspective of a person who wants to end marijuana prohibition entirely, it's a huge leap in the right direction.

Amendment 64 is not the end-all be-all of legalization. Vote yes on it and we can fine tune the details in the future. It's a very strong proposal with nearly unanimous bi-partisan support. Check out the A64 website and educate yourself! Don't believe the honeyed words of people on the internet, not even me. Please make your own informed decision.

Homegrown Care

Go Donkey, Go!

Donkey Hotay

"Amendment 64 is trying to reach a crowd beyond the average smoker."

The crowd beyond the average smoker DOES NOT NEED a marijuana law ... because THEY DON'T SMOKE MARIJUANA !!

The crowd who DOES need a FUNCTIONAL, SUSTAINABLE and PROTECTIVE change in the laws ARE the ones who DO SMOKE, POSSESS and CULTIVATE marijuana.

The pathetically small, and dysfunctional limits set by A64 -- 1 ounce, 3 flowing plants -- are a JOKE. No grower can sustain a personal supply with such absurdly low limits.

Excluding Adults age 18-20 years old is OUTRAGEOUS and PERVERSE, since that is the exact demographic age group that needs THE MOST PROTECTION!

They are the group that represents approximately 20% of marijuana arrests/citations in Colorado.

A64 will do NOTHING to protect 10s of THOUSANDS of College Age Adults from CRIMINAL FELONY prosecution if they so much as sprout a single seed. A64 would likely even provoke an increase in arrests of that age group, as they attempt to mimic their 21+ year old friends, and those 21+ year old friends will face FELONY charges under A64 if they share/sell their pot with their 18-20 year old ADULT friends.

A64 is an empty farce, a LIE being promoted by self-confessed LIARS.

Only suckers, chumps and shills would vote for such unmitigated crap.