Marijuana: Rachel Maddow links Amendment 64 confusion to end of alcohol prohibition

rachel maddow a new leaf.jpg
Video below.
While the passage of Amendment 64 has received national and even international attention (via Mexico president Felipe Calderon's comments about his nation's pot policy in A64's wake), much of the mainstream media's coverage has been less than thoughtful. But as usual, MSNBC's Rachel Maddow is an exception. Last night, she drew a parallel between the measure's approval and the end of alcohol prohibition. See the video and get more details below.

As is her style, Maddow snuck up on the subject rather than hitting it head on. She began the segment (backed by an Amendment 64 celebration photo emblazoned with the phrase "A New Leaf") with an examination of Utah's weird alcohol rules, exemplified by the state's list of liquors approved for sale there. Example: Only two types of mezcal have been blessed by officials, with one of them boasting the brand name Ilegal.

ilegal mezcal.jpg
Ilegal Mezcal is legal in Utah.
From there, Maddow ran down the variety of ways assorted states treat alcohol -- laws that sprang up following the abolition of alcohol prohibition in 1933 -- en route to noting that a similar dichotomy would have been established for cannabis had Oregon voters joined those in Colorado and Washington in approving marijuana measures last week. The Oregon proposal would have put the state in charge of purchasing and selling marijuana, as opposed to private businesses.

Instead, Colorado and Washington wound up approving similarly structured approaches -- but that doesn't mean enacting the separate measures will be a cinch. Maddow pointed out that in one part of Washington, prosecutors have dropped pending marijuana prosecutions under the theory that the conduct at the heart of them will be legal in a short period of time. In contrast, she noted that "in the eastern part of Washington state and Spokane County, prosecutors there say they plan to keep arresting people just as they do now for pot-related offenses. Their argument in Spokane is that the only legal way to get pot in Washington even after this new state law goes into effect will be to buy that pot from a state-regulated pot store -- and those state regulated pot stores don't exist yet.

"They might soon be created if the federal government allows that to happen," she goes on. However, "nobody knows that the government will allow them to happen. This is policy soup, and I don't mean this as a munchies joke. This doesn't make any sense yet."

True enough -- and rather than trying to untangle the confusion, Maddow's guest, previous Westword profile subject Neill Franklin, executive director of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, focused on the reasons why he is in favor of broader marijuana legalization. His remarks were the sort that haven't gotten much of an airing on the national airwaves either during the lead-up to this year's election or afterward -- but thanks to folks like Maddow, that may be changing.

See the segment below.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

More from our Video archive: "Video: Marijuana Amendment 64's Mason Tvert should help pass act in Cali, says Bill Maher."


Sponsor Content

My Voice Nation Help
25 comments
WTFK
WTFK

Hers, intended or not, is a great exposition of the stupidity of asking the government to provide services the market can handle. I'm SO glad that I don't live where the state insists on being the liquor store--or the pot store, for that matter. In Colorado, we're rather fortunate we didn't go the "Oregon route."

Juan_Leg
Juan_Leg

This segment was somewhat misleading when associating the violent war on drugs w/ the average pot dealer . Especially when referring to Mexico , marijuana & Colorado . I haven't seen or heard of 'Mexican' or better known as 'Shwag' , in YEARS !!! Heroine in smaller amounts , when compared to the abusing of prescription medications , is hardly anything . We have fucking nut-jobs opening fire in theaters or dissecting small children , NOT crazed pot-heads , as this former COP  was insinuating .....

Ms. Maddows was right on w/ her point though it did take a small shot interviewing that 'cop' ....

Juan_Leg
Juan_Leg

I could use 5 lbs ....

Anyone ???

 

Juan_Leg
Juan_Leg

I wish we could ALL come together w/ both a rational as well as logical stance

on marijuana period .

Is it a drug ? Is it medicine ? Or perhaps a fruit that should be found along side the various bearings we consume off a branch or stem ?

W.T.F. ???

 

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

Colorado Voted! -- and The People have unequivocally said, via A64, that Marijuana is a Public Health and Safety hazard!  

 

So much so that NO ONE under 21 yrs old should be allowed ANY LEGAL ACCESS to it! -- not one gram, not one plant !!

 

The People have spoken -- Marijuana is so harmful and dangerous that NO ONE over 21 yrs old should be allowed to posses more than 1 (one) ounce!

 

The People have spoken -- Marijuana is so harmful and dangerous that NO ONE over 21 should be allowed to grow > 3 (three) flowering plants! -- maintaining ALL CRIMINAL penalties for those who do!

 

The People have spoken -- Marijuana is so harmful and dangerous that NO ONE over 21 should be allowed to personally sell ANY AMOUNT to another consenting adult -- not one gram, not one plant -- maintaining ALL FELONY penalties for anyone who does!

 

The People have spoken -- Marijuana is so harmful and dangerous that NO ONE shall be allowed to Display or Use it in Public! -- not a single joint!

 

The People have spoken -- Marijuana is so harmful and dangerous that NOT ONE FELONY law against marijuana was removed or modified by A64.

 

The People have spoken -- Marijuana is so harmful and dangerous that it MUST BE REGULATED, RESTRICTED and Controlled by THE GOVERNMENT LIKE DEADLY ALCOHOL that maims and kills 10s of thousands of people every year!

 

Big Government Regulation Works! -- for Harmful and Dangerous substances ... like Marijuana!

 

Regulate! -- Restrict! -- Control! -- Restrain! -- Maintain CRIMINAL Sanctions for Violators -- TAX TAX TAX it to DEATH !!

 

It's the ONLY way !!

 

 

Monkey
Monkey

Should be fun to watch. Subdivisions will be within our own State, not just State to State. Every County and every City will have different rules regarding weed sales, and later even possession, when certain locations feel 2oz or even a 1/4lb is not worth pressing charges over, while others try to further restrict. Gun laws are also a good comparison to weed laws. In Colorado, not so long ago, each municipality created their own laws surrounding the possession, sales and use of firearms, that was a disaster for anyone driving through different jurisdictions. So much conflict occurred, the State had to stand up and nullify County and City ordinances, stating they have no power in a Colorado court room. Boulder for example said, no one with a concealed carry license can conceal their gun in Boulder, the required a visible holster with a City of Boulder registration sticker on it. A64 has basically allowed every location to make up their own rules again. Will Boulder require a City sticker on your bag of weed? Will they limit the amount of THC it can contain? Will they make you carry it in the open instead of concealed? A State law should be State wide, just like a National law should be Country wide, otherwise, weed will look like the patchwork of alcohol and gun laws across our Country, within our own State, requiring us to carry a code book with us when we travel from the Springs to Boulder just to make sure we're not in violation of the law. If we legalized it, wouldn't that be allot easier on all of us?

Corey Donahue
Corey Donahue

Yeah, and at the end of Alochol prohibition they neglected to add three words, and homemade beverages, in the law and we went untill the Carter administration with homebrewing being illegal. So Colorado´s microbreweries are only 40 years behind where we should be and that was a minor oversite by a secetary. What the fuck is going to happen to A64. AND MICHAEL WHERE THE FUCK IS THE CONVERSATION BETWEEN HICKENPOOPER AND THE FEDS ABOUT A64? COLORADO NEEDS REAL JOURNILISTS!!

CoreyDonahue
CoreyDonahue

Yeah, and at the end of Alochol prohibition they neglected to add three words, and homemade beverages, in the law and we went untill the Carter administration with homebrewing being illegal. So Colorado´s microbreweries are only 40 years behind where we should be and that was a minor oversite by a secetary.  What the fuck is going to happen to A64.  AND MICHAEL WHERE THE FUCK IS THE CONVERSATION BETWEEN HICKENPOOPER AND THE FEDS ABOUT A64? COLORADO NEEDS REAL JOURNILISTS!!

Matt Planteen
Matt Planteen

The parallels between this and the end of alcohol prohibition are striking. It's all essentially the same rhetoric, the same circumstances leading to state-level repeal, and almost to the letter the same legal language employed. History has shown us how well alcohol prohibition worked. Failed policy is not the way forward.

Mitch Siff
Mitch Siff

Colorado was the first to repeal alcohol prohibiton, so why not.

Juan_Leg
Juan_Leg

Is this a cluster-fuck or what ????

tutonehcc
tutonehcc

I think the righteous thing to do would be help other states legalize at this point.  Not everywhere in the US is as open about high quality cannabis consumption as Colorado.  We must find people in other places who will work the ground fight, convince the bank teller, the grocery store clerk, your mom, that cannabis is great and even greater legalized!

Juan_Leg
Juan_Leg

 @Monkey Will there be aggravated enhancements ,

in possession of a firearm & a regulated amount of marijuana ?

It's okay to go hunting w/ buddies , tugging along a keg & 1/2 a dozen fifths .

Will the same go for a toke , while murdering an elk ???

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

 @Monkey "In Colorado, not so long ago, each municipality created their own laws surrounding the possession, sales and use of firearms, that was a disaster for anyone driving through different jurisdictions."

 

Excellent comparison.

 

Of course, everyone knows the NRA supports Big Government REGULATION, RESTRICTION and Control of their precious pistols! ... and the NRA support only allowing guns for those over 21 ... and the NRA supports only allowing citizens to possess 1 (one) box of ammunition, and a maximum of 6 guns, no more than 3 of which are actually capable of firing bullets ... and the NRA supports a $40,000,000.00+ excise tax on ALL gun manufacturers ... and they support the denial of any Public Display or Use.

 

Looks like the geniuses behind A64 copied the NRA playbook.

 

Who knew?

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

 @CoreyDonahue "COLORADO NEEDS REAL JOURNILISTS!!"

 

Legalize Real Journalism in Colorado !!

 

 

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

 @tutonehcc 

 

A64 did NOT legalize marijuana.

 

How are you going to convince voters in other states to do something that Colorado was too stupid and cowardly to do?

 

 

Juan_Leg
Juan_Leg

 @CloudGang Wish you were serious & I wasn't so paranoid !

Got burned on a shit-load of 'preme' ......!

Monkey
Monkey

 @Juan_LegIn my opinion, 1st question no, 2nd question yes. 1oz and 6 plants is not a crime, and neither is having a gun. You can't be drunk or stoned while playing with guns, or carrying them, but intoxication is hard to prove with weed. At least until they come up with some inaccurate equipment that says your stoned, then we wont be able to carry guns or drive.

Monkey
Monkey

 @DonkeyHotay That's super funny Donkey. The sad thing is, I don't believe the average reader will understand your sarcasm, even with the " 3 of which are actually capable of firing bullets" joke. But I sure enjoyed it.

DMDM
DMDM

 @DonkeyHotay  @tutonehcc  Yes, it did.  Try brewing 1000 gallons of beer and setting up a shop to sell it.  Try building 1000 fully automatic machine guns and try to sell them.  Try building fully armored tanks and try to sell them.  Regulated does not mean illegal.

Now Trending

Denver Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...