Amendment 64 approved: Mason Tvert celebrates, John Hickenlooper talks Cheetos

Categories: Marijuana

john hickenlooper 126x126.jpg
John Hickenlooper.
Update 2: Also just in: a statement from Governor John Hickenlooper, who, as noted in the Smart Colorado missive above, opposed Amendment 64. The comment has a decidedly wacky tone. He's quoted as saying:
The voters have spoken and we have to respect their will. This will be a complicated process, but we intend to follow through. That said, federal law still says marijuana is an illegal drug so don't break out the Cheetos or gold fish too quickly.
Note that "gold fish" was not capitalized in Hickenlooper's remarks. Presumably, though, he's talking about the crackers, not that little guy swimming in the bowl on your counter.

john walsh.JPG
John Walsh.
Update 3: The latest reaction to the passage of Amendment 64 comes from the U.S. Attorney's Office. As you know, U.S. Attorney John Walsh has overseen the issuance of closure letters sent to dispensaries within 1,000 feet of schools, under the rationale that doing so protects children from dangerous narcotics.

The following is credited to Jeff Dorschner, U.S. Attorney's Office spokesman:

The Department of Justice's enforcement of the Controlled Substances Act remains unchanged. In enacting the Controlled Substances Act, Congress determined that marijuana is a Schedule I controlled substance. We are reviewing the ballot initiative and have no additional comment at this time.

More from our Marijuana archive: "Marijuana: Amendment 64 given 68 percent chance of passing by Intrade."


My Voice Nation Help
261 comments
DonkeyMonkey
DonkeyMonkey

IN case you haven't read it, (IF you can read, that is) there are 2 Washington state prosecutors who have dismissed a total of 220 marijuana cases. Have you any idea how much money that will save the involved court systems??? How many cases will be dropped from the already overworked legal system? The public servants who must transport these 'prisoners'. Public Defenders are so overworked by cases of indigent and poor people who can't afford to pay for legal counsel, they are starting to files lawsuits against the counties they work in. GEEZ.

 

The part of my comment with 'Anti-Prohibitionists' in my first post should read 'PROHIBITIONIST'. This stuff makes me angry when people try to force their control on the rest of us. Go to your bar, or your church, and mind your own business, please.

DonkeyMonkey
DonkeyMonkey

Wonder why the government keeps printing money, everyday? It's to replace the truckloads of cash the cartels push across our southern border, everyday, all day. Those couple of hundred thousand dollar busts they make? A drop in the bucket. Gangs are the unions that push these illegal drugs across the border to answer the demand in this country. Let's control and tax this stuff and pull some of the power from the hands of these violent criminals. BTW, if big pharma companies would stop paying the government to keep this stuff illegal, they would have tons more cash to put towards solving the problem with stuff like, um, cancer, lupus, MS, and other diseases that respond in a positive manner, to the CBDs found in cannabis plants and our bodies. They were made for each other, and man will never that. The companies who make all these chemicals they call 'medicine' will never, ever surpass what nature can do. Commercials on television are half happy faced people, and the other half is warnings about the dozen or so, potential problems their garbage MIGHT do to you. Than they whitewash it with 'ask your Doctor, if it's right for you'. This is after they have offered some of those very same physicians kickbacks to push the newest drugs on us, because the previous ones now have generics which COULD save US millions of dollars every year. Exactly why do you think they Doctors have samples of the newest stuff in the first place???

DonkeyMonkey
DonkeyMonkey

What some of you anti-intelligence, anti-prohibitionists seem to forget, is that the very first gateway drugs are cigarettes and alcohol. BOTH have horrible effects on the human body as evidenced by the numbers of people who die from both substances in a year, in this country. Like alcohol prohibition, it won't work, it never worked, and resulted in a lot of innocent people being killed or wounded, because some narc got the address wrong on the warrant. You have never felt the pain, the anguish and horror of having your family busted up by the very people you elect to GOVERN, who perpetuate this mythical 'WAR'. This is NOT a war. Wars end. We just finished a war. Even the thousand years war ended, and in a considerably shorter amount of time. the other possible reason they love to arrest cannabis users, is that they are both passive, and yes, even peaceful, and are more careful at operating a motor vehicle than some of you are on your best days. Like the ones who park in the handicapped zone at the store. More kids use than it than you care to admit, and drug dealers don't ask for ID. Jails even have it in there. Ask your local sheriff. If he tells you absolutely not, he IS lying. They do shakedowns all the time for it. Wonder why that is??? It is easier to get than your favorite beverages or burning substance, and they can and do know someone who can have it in their hands in less than an hour. Give it up, wake up and check your kids for illegal substances in their blood. You may be unpleasantly surprised/shocked.

Corey Donahue
Corey Donahue

Because they think Colorado legalized cannabis, like alcohol, and poor journalism allowed people to believe that lie.

Bob Tyler
Bob Tyler

Population boom in CO. Boulder was great"

Ben Barr
Ben Barr

Because it is long overdue.

Lucas Jeffery
Lucas Jeffery

Colorado and Washington are the first modern societies to legalize marijuana. People are anxious to see if we've discovered a better way to control marijuana use. Hopefully the federal government does not interfere with this process so we can determine if regulation is truly a better method for dealing with the marijuana demand.

Jordan Nicole Montoya
Jordan Nicole Montoya

Yep, Washington. So I don't know why they would only be interested in Colorado.

Serendipity Gonzales
Serendipity Gonzales

Because the majority of adult Americans want it legal too, they just can't figure out how to get it done

painatyourdoorstep
painatyourdoorstep

This Corpulent DREG pushing this crap on Colorado needs to stay away from ILLEGAL MARIJUANA and Twinkies!!! You Plebeians have nothing better to do with time then to smoke marijuana. No wonder why Barrack Hussein Obama won this suspected rigged election. If your such a loser, that you need an illegal drug to relieve you from your drab lives,  then try not to hang yourselves in the closet. It would break my heart.

nemopunk15
nemopunk15 topcommenter

Well we were all hopping the Donk would die of shock. Clearly that did not happen, but we can all take a little joy in the fact that Donkey was wrong, and all that effort spamming the living shit out of the westword had 0 effect!

theSeeker8042
theSeeker8042

So can anyone tell me, can I show up at a dispensary tomorrow, prove my age, and buy an eigth?

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

A64 proves the adage -- Never Underestimate the Power of Stupid People in Large Groups

 

hth.

Ed Barcas III
Ed Barcas III

Our former Democrat now turned right wing corporate whore for Coors and Anheuser Busch governor John Hickenlooper is already back peddling on legalization of marijuana! Funny because if some fascist bill like life begins at conception would have passed, he would have signed it into law without problem. I encourage you to BOMBARD him and Barack Obama with emails, faxes and letters that state "the people of Colorado have spoken, we want marijuana to be legal". Not decriminalized, not just for medical use, but LEGAL!

nemopunk15
nemopunk15 topcommenter

And the Donkey has come unhinged!

 

Colorado spoke loud and clear!

 

WE DON"T AGREE WITH YOU DONKEY!

 

Now take a hike toll!

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

 @DonkeyMonkey "IN case you haven't read it, (IF you can read, that is) there are 2 Washington state prosecutors who have dismissed a total of 220 marijuana cases. Have you any idea how much money that will save the involved court systems???"

 

Save $$ ??

 

LOL! -- the State will LOSE  thousands of $$$ ... the thousands of $$$ in Fines and Court fees that these offenders would have been forced to pay.

 

Of course you don't seem to have any problem FORCING others to pay $40,000,000.00 or more in MANDATORY pot taxes, do you?

hell2pay
hell2pay

 @painatyourdoorstep

 Screw you. You are exactly what is wrong with America today. It's an "illegal" drug because prissy little punks like you are too narrow minded and religion driven to open you god damn mind to see the obvious. Go drink your ethyl alcohol and consume your prescription benzos and opiates. You are a disgrace to freedom and a disgrace to this nation. Please move elsewhere, quickly.

RobertChase
RobertChase topcommenter

 @nemopunk15 Maybe he is not an agent of the drug-police-parasites; maybe he is just insane.  He's back working away at pretending to be indignant on behalf of those under twenty-one, not covered by the Amendment -- shoring up the misimpression he cultivates that he is some radical in favor of teenagers smoking cannabis.

Ryan
Ryan

How does it taste there Donkey?  Just how much time did you waste trolling here?  

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

 @nemopunk15  Colorado does NOT agree with 2 (two) ounces for EVERYONE! as authorized by Statute!

 

The People of Colorado have spoken! -- they only want 1 (one) pathetic ounce, and they don't want ANYONE under 21 years old to have ANY LEGAL ACCESS to recreational marijuana!

 

Obey the Will of The People! -- reconcile the liberal statute with the retrograde conservative prohibitionist Will of the Voters !!

 

 

painatyourdoorstep
painatyourdoorstep

 @hell2pay  @painatyourdoorstep

(hell2pay) It sounds like you already arrived at PERDITION, coach seating of course. I'm not some weak minded soul like you. I not a filthy drug addict, who can't control themselves to save their worthless life like you!!! Given your mediocre attempt at an affront, I can't even decipher whether your a man or a woman!! So I'll go ahead with woman. Go smoke a fat one and kill some more of your limited brain cells, PAUPER!!

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

 

*******************************************************************************

"Amendment 64 would NOT stop unjust imprisonment for offenses related to cannabis, legalize cannabis, or regulate it like alcohol "

-- Robert Chase

********************************************************************************

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

 @Ryan  How much time did you waste reading my posts?

 

 

nemopunk15
nemopunk15 topcommenter

 @DonkeyHotay A-64 did not change the Decrim laws you so love! DEAL with it donkey, YOU LOST! Your crazy copy and paste rants did NOTHING at all. Much like your hard work on I-70, you FAIL AGAIN!

 

Way to go Colorado!

 

Yes We Cannabis!

painatyourdoorstep
painatyourdoorstep

 @jose257  @hell2pay

Is that the best you could do you naïve? Panties at the doorstep? If there were panties at my door step, it's probably because your adipose mother left them there on her way out? Jose (257), you sound like a filthy dope smoking occupier. Obviously, you lack common sense like that other plebian (hell2pay) for even considering use of illegal marijuana. Did you forget tough guy, marijuana is still illegal under federal law? You sound like one of the drug industry concubines, that are lining their pockets off of dumbasses that smoke marijuana (apparently) you can relate! Hopefully, you graduate from marijuana and start smoking crack next. That's all we need another pauper looking for a free hand out. Just in case, you have some pathetic medical reason to smoke marijuana, they have a prescribed pill named marinol, so you don't have to offend anyone with your marijuana smoke or your crap breath. YOUR WELCOME.

jose257
jose257 topcommenter

 @painatyourdoorstep  @hell2pay Panties at the doorstep, marijuana doesn't kill brain cells.  It awakens them by dilating the blood vessels surrounding brain cells that have never been awake, in your case it would allow you to use more than 2% of your brain.  When those dormant brain cells are awakened with oxygen carrying blood, a certain amount of training is required to bring them up to speed with the 2% of the brain you are using now.  Unfortunately, all you have for reference is material put out by Pfizer to maintain their market on drugs that actually do harm to the body, such as statins.

 

Ryan
Ryan

 @DonkeyHotay Very little.  I began skipping them after only a couple of message boards.  I had to skip a hell of a lot of comments though.  

mattleising
mattleising topcommenter

@Adamsmom @DonkeyHotay@RyanLmao!

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

 @ccapra  A64 is about recreational marijuana, always has been, always will be. Do try and follow the subject matter at hand.

 

So, answer the question -- Why is Marijuana so harmful and dangerous to the Public Health and Safety that ALL ADULTS under 21 must be denied any legal access to it as per the provisions of A64?

 

Tell us the Public Health and Safety harms that marijuana use by those under 21 incurs?

 

 

ccapra
ccapra

 @DonkeyHotay

 I love how you add RECREATIONAL into the mix just now.  All your previous assertions stated

 

"Why is Marijuana so harmful and dangerous to the Public Health and Safety that ALL ADULTS under 21 must be denied ANY ACCESS to it, as A64 states?"

 

Which is blatently false.  People under 21 are not denied ANY ACCESS TO IT, they have MMJ access to it should the need the medicinal benefit.  If not, they have to wait like with alcohol for 21.  You must really be mad at the Car Rental industry because of the 25 and up rule.

 

You're running out of spins.....why don't you and Kathleen get together and date?  Perhaps you may get some joy and stop being such an angry liar all day behind your screen.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

 @hell2pay  @ccapra 

 

Why do lowlife un-American shitbags like you seek to DENY 10s of Thousands of ADULTS under 21 the same rights you'd attempt to claim for yourself?

 

Eat shit and die, fascist scum.

 

 

hell2pay
hell2pay

 @DonkeyHotay  @ccapra Why the hell do you care so much about people under the age of 21 being able to use it? You know, one day you will be old enough too, Donkey.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

 @ccapra  "As you know and have been told a thousand times, they are covered by the MMJ laws and that will not change.  "

 

How are RECREATIONAL Stoners < 21 yrs old covered by MMJ laws?

 

Are you once again asserting that the "medical" marijuana program is just a giant scam for recreational stoners to abuse in Colorado?

 

 

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

 @Fook  -- What part of SHALL REMAIN ILLEGAL don't you comprehend? ... that's a positive affirmation and directive.

 

So answer the question -- Why is Marijuana so harmful and dangerous to the Public Health and Safety that ALL ADULTS under 21 must be denied ANY ACCESS to it, as A64 states?

 

 

 

 

ccapra
ccapra

 @DonkeyHotay  @Fook

 As you know and have been told a thousand times, they are covered by the MMJ laws and that will not change.  Move on dipshit.

Fook
Fook

 @DonkeyHotay Donkey... "HipTip" you dumbfuck: "Under 21" encompasses 0 - 20, not just 18-20.  My rereading of your dumbshit posts confirm that you have continually said, "Under 21," meaning all ages up to 21, thus including minors.  Thanks.

 

Also, read the part of the amendment  you just posted: "NOTHING IN THIS SECTION IS INTENDED TO PERMIT [...] OR --  TO ALLOW A PERSON UNDER THE AGE OF TWENTY-ONE TO PURCHASE..."  Read it, then read it again. Then apologize for having a head filled with steaming shit.  Nothing in that section MAKES ANYTHING ILLEGAL.  It is saying it that this amendment does not expressly PERMIT IT. There is a big fucking difference between not expressly PERMITTING IT and expressly PROHIBITING it. It is neither giving permission, nor telling you that you can't.  It is saying that the legality IS NOT ADDRESSED HERE.

 

Jesus, man.  Were your parents farts?  Are you the offspring of a pair of big fucking farts?  "Cause that's what you sound like.

mattleising
mattleising topcommenter

@DonkeyHotay @Fook Well Donkey if you want the age of marijuana use to go down to 18 you need to write to Hickenlooper to get the drinking age down as well. Before you start with the whole,"marijuana isn't alcohol" nonsense rant that you have ready, remember, Coloradans want marijuana regulated like alcohol. And before you go off on your whole,"why regulate a harmless plant like dangerous alcohol" rant, the reason is there's already good legislation down for alcohol and Coloradans would like to mimic that type of legislation for marijuana. Sorry I used some big words. I know how much trouble you have reading sometimes. We'll meet up though and we'll get those reading and comprehension skills up to at least high school level for ya :)

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

 @Fook 

 

HipTip -- ADULTS age 18 - 21 are NOT MINORS, dipshit.

 

"NOTHING IN THIS SECTION IS INTENDED TO PERMIT THE TRANSFER OF MARIJUANA, WITH OR WITHOUT REMUNERATION, TO A PERSON UNDER THE AGE OF TWENTY-ONE -- OR --  TO ALLOW A PERSON UNDER THE AGE OF TWENTY-ONE TO PURCHASE, POSSESS, USE, TRANSPORT, GROW, OR CONSUME MARIJUANA."

 

God damn, are all stupid stoners as pig-ignorant of the law they just voted on as you are?

 

 

Fook
Fook

 @DonkeyHotay The part where it doesn't say "possession of marijuana" anywhere in that passage. Selling to minors is, and remains illegal, as it should.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

 @Fook = another idiot who didn't even read, much less comprehend the amendment.

 

"SELLING, DISTRIBUTING, OR TRANSFERRING MARIJUANA TO MINORS AND OTHER INDIVIDUALS UNDER THE AGE OF TWENTY-ONE SHALL REMAIN ILLEGAL"

 

What part of REMAIN ILLEGAL don't you comprehend?

 

TheWatcher
TheWatcher

 @DonkeyHotay  @TheWatcher  @nemopunk15 If A20 remains unaffected then you still have options. If you are under 21 simply get a red card. If you need more than 1oz get a red card. It's not that big of a deal, unless your under 18, but if you are truly in need of marijuana under the age of 18 then there is still an avenue to get it via A20. Personally I dont think anyone under 18 that does not have a medical condition (there are some youth who actually suffer conditions where it is needed) should have access to marijuana. Anyone over 18 that wants it can get a red card, because A20 is available to those over 18. Instead of complaining why don't you learn to work within the law. Yes, voters have spoken, it isn't ok for minors to have unfettered access to marijuana, and I wholly agree.

 

Under A64 I cant go to the state pen for personal cultivation, and they cant regulate personal cultivation, nor will it be easy to get a search warrant just because they smell it since smelling it is no longer reasonable suspicion/probable cause, and a good lawyer will argue that without first hand knowledge of the grow parameters there is no way to prove reasonable suspicion/probable cause you are even over limit (don't show anyone your grow). As a bonus I can still possess enough harvested plant to get me through a few days without worrying about a ticket. Works for me!!!

 

If I got any of that wrong please let me know, but I do get where your coming from on the change to C.R.S. Is it safe for me to assume you are between 18-21 and not qualified under A20, hence you displeasure over A64?

 

One side note, we can all hope the feds reclassify marijuana and lessen restrictions even more than the state has done with A20 and A64, but that may be some time coming.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

 @TheWatcher  @nemopunk15 

 

You are correct, up to your last sentence. This has nothing to do with A20.

 

The conflict exists between the new A64 and current CRS that decriminalized recreational marijuana possession for everyone.

 

A64 states that the conflict must be resolved in favor of the constitution -- A64 -- and therefore the conflicting statute must be reconciled. 

 

The Will of the Voters have spoken via A64, they have mandated that ONLY 1 (one) ounce of recreational marijuana should be allowed, and ONLY for those over 21 yrs old. 

 

CRS currently allowed 2 (two) ounces, for everybody without age restriction. The Voters of Colorado have gone to the extreme step to AMEND the CONSTITUTION to the contrary.

 

C.R.S must be brought into compliance with A64, the current 2 (two) ounce limit must be reduced to only 1 (one) ounce. It's what The People demanded! It must be further restricted to EXCLUDE EVERYONE under 21 yrs. old. The People have declared via A64 that it would be against the "Public Health and Safety" to allow ANY recreational access for those under 21.

 

The Will of the People via the CONSTITUTION must be followed !!

 

 

 

 

TheWatcher
TheWatcher

 @jayconnor2  @DonkeyHotay  @Matt_in_Boulder Now that A64 has passed C.R.S. 18-18-406(1) will have to be revised to read "Any person under the age of 21......", as well as any other STATUTES that may be in conflict. To my understanding A64 will not alter A20 because A20 in not a statute. MMJ Patients (A20) will still be allowed 2oz's and caregivers will still be allowed 5 patients if they coninue to register each year with CDPHE. Someone besides Donkey that has some legal expertise want to weigh in on this?

TheWatcher
TheWatcher

 @DonkeyHotay  @nemopunk15 Correct me if im wrong here, but isn't a constitutional amendment and state statute two different things?  If the language in the amendment says any statutes in conflict must be reconciled doesnt that simply say nothing more than the C.R.S. must be brought into compliance? Don't understand how you come to the conclusion it will change amendment 20.

RobertChase
RobertChase topcommenter

 @DonkeyHotay  @Matt_in_Boulder Kathleen never understood that Amendment 64 legalized an ounce, and did not affect the decriminalized status of possession of between one and two ounces; she also thought that the State CSA took precedence over the Amendment -- Aaron Sawyer (alias DonkeyHotay doesn't care about the truth; Kathleen doesn't care to reconsider convenient (to her rhetoric) but totally erroneous assumptions.

 

Kathleen, want to tell the GA to repeal some of the prohibitionist statutes (that the Amendment did not) now that the People have spoken, or are you determined to stay irrelevant?

pitchman101
pitchman101

 @DonkeyHotay  @Matt_in_Boulder

 Not sure why theres even a discussion regarding 1 oz as aposed to 2oz. I cant smoke 1oz in a night and even if I could,My friends  would still have there own as well so What realy is the point in this issue?.  Go buy another oz when your out.either way, I can get an oz a day if I can smoke that much!, wich I cant so what a waste of conversation.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

 @jayconnor2  @Matt_in_Boulder 

 

So marijuana IS harmful and dangerous ?

 

Fascinating.

 

 

Note -- A64 will NOT REDUCE a Single Arrest for Marijuana Crimes in Colorado, as its puny limits and arbitrary restrictions are already BELOW the existing arrest threshold in Colorado.

 

A64 also explicitly declares that Public Display or Use shall remain illegal -- so zero reductions even for the Puerile Pot Clowns who are over 21 acting up in public.

 

A64 does not repeal or modify a SINGLE FELONY marijuana crime in Colorado -- they ALL remain in full force.

 

 

 

 

 

 

jayconnor2
jayconnor2

 @DonkeyHotay  @Matt_in_Boulder

 Decriminalization reduces the PENALTY but does not make the substance LEGALA64 makes it LEGAL.. and the age of 21 isn't arbitrary, it is linked to the development of teenage brains.  This won't STOP them from using MJ, any more than it being an illegal substance does, but it is illogical for a society to make legal a substance for CHILDREN which is known to directly harm them by causing chemical changes.from Colo. Rev. Stat 18-18-406(1)  //“Any person who possesses not more than one ounce of marihuana commits a class 2 petty offense and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars.”//  In 2010 the amount was raised to 2 ounces HOWEVER:Even though Colorado supposedly "decriminalized" marijuana possession in 1975, police there continue to arrest more than 10,000 pot smokers every year. That's because possession of small amounts (less than an ounce at first, two ounces since 2010) remains a crime, albeit a "petty offense."

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

 @Matt_in_Boulder  once again proves his abject ignorance of marijuana law to the world.

 

Are you now going to make the same idiotic mistake that Kevin Hunt and Robert Chase embarrassed themselves with by repeatedly misstating Colorado Statute?

 

Colorado Legislature decriminalized marijuana possession back in 1975 -- one ounce for EVERYBODY, without arbitrary age restriction. The Legislature INCREASED the decrim possession limits to 2 (two) ounce in 2010 -- again for EVERYBODY without arbitrary and discriminatory age restrictions.

 

Stupid Stoners like you don't even know what existing marijuana laws are, no wonder you fell for the putrid turd that is A64.

Matt_in_Boulder
Matt_in_Boulder

 @DonkeyHotay 

Where does the CCSA specify 2 (two) ounces?  Must be in Donkey's alternate universe.  I just read the document (great reading, highly recommended) and I didn't find your mythical 2 ounces in there.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

 @Matt_in_Boulder  

 

In Matt's alternate universe, 1 (one) ounce is more than 2 (two) ounces.

 

 

Matt_in_Boulder
Matt_in_Boulder

 @DonkeyHotay  @nemopunk15 

Read the Colorado Controlled Substances Act and Amendment 64, then get back to us once you understand that resolving the conflict between the two will result in MORE LEGAL ACCESS, not less.

DonkeyHotay
DonkeyHotay topcommenter

 @nemopunk15 

 

A64 explicity states that any conflict with Statute shall be resolved in favor of A64!

 

A64 clearly states that only 1 (one) pathetic ounce shall be allowed, and that EVERYONE under 21 shall be denied ANY LEGAL ACCESS to recreational marijuana.

 

Statute must be reconciled in favor of The Will of The People as declared in A64!

 

 

Now Trending

Denver Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...