Amendment 64 proponent says Denver sniff test might give him no legal place to smoke pot

pot.smoking.205x205.jpg
Might Denver City Council's proposed sniff test, which would outlaw residents' use of marijuana on their porches and balconies if others could see or smell it, give one of Amendment 64's main proponents nowhere in his hometown to legally smoke? That's among the contentions of Mason Tvert, and to dramatize his concerns, he's holding a press event on the balcony this morning, in advance of the council once again discussing the proposal at a meeting this evening. Get details and see the latest draft of the measure below.

The backlash against the sniff test concept from critics such as council member Susan Shepherd led to some tweaking of the ordinance. However, the latest draft included on the Denver City Council website page devoted to this evening's session (see it below) still states that "it shall be unlawful for any person to openly and publicly display or consume one (1) ounce or less of marijuana."

susan.shepherd.portrait.jpg
Susan Shepherd.
Moreover, the terms "openly" and "publicly" are defined, respectively, as "occurring or existing in a manner that is unconcealed, undisguised or obvious" and "occurring or existing in a public place; or occurring or existing in any outdoor location where the consumption of marijuana is clearly observable from a public place," with the latter including but not limited to "streets and highways, transportation facilities, schools, places of amusement, parks, playgrounds and the common areas of public and private buildings or facilities."

Tvert's take, particularly as it applies to pot use on porches and balconies, where it might be seen or smelled by passersby?

"The biggest issue is that they are still trying to prohibit the use of marijuana by adults on private property," he says. "It's currently legal for adults to consume alcohol or smoke cigarettes on their porches or balconies, so we fail to understand why it should be illegal to use a far less harmful substance there."

As for the reason he's holding his press conference on the first-floor balcony of his home, on the 1400 block of Humboldt Street, he notes that "I don't have a private backyard; the backyard is a common area. And if my building were to decide people can't use marijuana inside their units, for whatever reason, I wouldn't have anywhere I could legally use marijuana as an adult."

Moreover, he continues, "the voters made it clear they think marijuana should be treated like alcohol, and adults should be able to use it responsibly. And there's no compelling reason to prohibit adults from using marijuana outside on their own private balconies and porches."

Continue for more of our interview with Mason Tvert, including the latest draft of the so-called sniff test ordinance.


My Voice Nation Help
139 comments
Tony Tafoya
Tony Tafoya

most people named sterling do smell cause they raised on section 8 and cant afford soap

Sterling Meeks
Sterling Meeks

Let's make a law against whiny Lamebook DWEEBS who stink up the threads every single second, minute, hour, and day.

Sterling Meeks
Sterling Meeks

Except when such "freedom to smoke" infringes upon another's natural right to breathe clean air

Sterling Meeks
Sterling Meeks

You couldn't be any more way off base. Prior to the early anti-smoking campaigns of the 1980s/1990s, tobacco usage was at its highest. Since the enactment of stringent anti-smoking (in public) laws and steep rise in cigarette taxes -- in tandem with ongoing anti-smoking awareness by activist groups -- , tobacco usage has steadily declined. This is one of those areas where "the market" has failed miserably while the law has actually been the most successful since prior to that, landlords wouldn't give two shits about a small minority of their tenants raising hell (and a major stink) for the rest as long as those chain smokers would pay on time.

Sterling Meeks
Sterling Meeks

Yet, neither of these aromas cause mind-altering effects. False equivalence fail, buddy. [Speaking of mind-altering effects, perhaps you should be better served lobbying for a ban on endless BUTTHURT on Lamebook for that clearly is contagious and can lead to all sorts of irrational and unruly behavior among its "victims."]

Mozart99
Mozart99

How can they tell if is weed or prosciutto? That is until they have already violated my property.

Tony Tafoya
Tony Tafoya

lets make a law against dog food company that smells up 20 square miles with crap every night

choekonit
choekonit

I think the rule should be framed more around "If someone can smell it, by law, you're obligated to pass it...you greedy B****".

Gerhardt
Gerhardt

IN THE INTEREST OF THE EFFICIENT USE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT

ROFLMAO

fognl7
fognl7

DonkeyHotay aka McShyster aka etc.:

Why are you not downtown RIGHT NOW making your case - whatever that is, b/c nobody here has any idea what it entails - instead of writing comments on the Westword forum?

Puerile.Pot.Punk
Puerile.Pot.Punk

Hey People, there's a reason why it isn't legal to defecate on the sidewalk !!


Noelle Brownson
Noelle Brownson

it is possible for building ownership (apartments or condos) to make their buildings smoke free (from any smoke). My building is & it's wonderful. If someone wants to live in an ash tray, they should be able to, but I also should be able to find a place to live smoke free. Ultimately I think the market will drive this not the law. If apartments/condos can't attract renters/buyers due to smoke, they'll change their policy on smoking.

Cognitive_Dissident
Cognitive_Dissident topcommenter

When all else fails, DonkeyHotay can always thumb up his own posts.

Jason Villalobos
Jason Villalobos

Free country. If someone doesn't like the smell, get away from it...? It's getting crazy out here.

Raziel Talos
Raziel Talos

indeed, then again when do most people think about anyone but themselves anyways

Heather Nichols
Heather Nichols

And why should my 4 year old have to get a contact high walking out the front door because it's legal to smoke weed? She's a little kid that can't help it if others are going to be ignorant about their use.

Sciencegrrl Jones
Sciencegrrl Jones

Anyone else old enough to Remember Denver's Brown Cloud? That probably damaged my lungs as a kid. That is an air quality issue, not someone's annoyance.

Raziel Talos
Raziel Talos

I never said anything about cigarettes, even though i quit a year and a half ago and dont like the smell of that either anymore, but when I smell weed or see my neighbors toking up nearly every time I step out my door or come home from work, it disgusts me

Tanya Cavner
Tanya Cavner

What about cigarettes, the smell and potential health risks are so much worse. How about a law for that. I don't smoke either one, but I'd much rather smell weed than a cigarette.

Monkey
Monkey

I thought both consumption and display are now in the Colorado Constitution.

THE FOLLOWING ACTS ARE NOT UNLAWFUL AND SHALL NOT BE AN OFFENSE UNDER COLORADO LAW OR THE LAW OF ANY LOCALITY WITHIN COLORADO

(a) POSSESSING, USING, DISPLAYING, PURCHASING, OR TRANSPORTING MARIJUANA ACCESSORIES OR ONE OUNCE OR LESS OF MARIJUANA.

(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.

Sounds to me like public display is lawful, and consumption in private, as long as you're not endangering others, is also lawful. My barbecue doesn't become public when I fire it up in my backyard, so why would my bowl of weed? And display, transport and transfer of weed doesn't need to be in private at all.

Donkey_Hotay_is_God
Donkey_Hotay_is_God

@Mozart99 ... if you can't tell the difference between weed and prosciutto, you've got a really crappy dope dealer ...

... or a really cool butcher.

hth.

.

Puerile.Pot.Punk
Puerile.Pot.Punk

@fognl7 Because I really don't care about marijuana reform, I'm mostly here because I grow shitty pot, have no life and get bored easily now that all of my customers have gone elsewhere for their cannabis.

Pity me.

Mozart99
Mozart99

@Noelle Brownson this appears to cover edibles also

..McShyster..
..McShyster..

@Noelle Brownson ... so you'll leave your HEALTH and WELFARE up to the "free market" interests of landlords, eh?

Does your Laissez-faire attitude include asbestos, lead paint, fire hazards and structural dangers?

stupidstuka
stupidstuka

If you don't like the loud rap music your neighbor blasts at 3am, get away from it.

Free country, moron.

GuestWho
GuestWho topcommenter

@Heather Nichols   Did you get a blood test to prove your contact high theory or are you just going with assumptions after a personal sniff test?

"contact high is a psychological phenomenon that occurs in otherwise sober people and animals who come into contact with someone who is under the influence of drugs. It involves a supposed transfer of the physiological state of intoxication."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contact_high

stupidstuka
stupidstuka

There are laws against tobacco smoke, moron.

..McShyster..
..McShyster..

@Monkey "Sounds to me like public display is lawful ..."


Unless it's public use of "medical" marijuana, which the fools and tools who wrote A20 explicitly declared as being unlawful --

(a) 
No patient shall:

(I) Engage in the medical use of marijuana in a way that endangers the health or well-being of any person; or 

(II) Engage in the medical use of marijuana in plain view of, or in a place open to, the general public. 

(b) In addition to any other penalties provided by law, the state health agency shall revoke for a period of one year the registry identification card of any patient found to have willfully violated the provisions of this section or the implementing legislation adopted by the general assembly.

fognl7
fognl7

Just answer the question.

Mozart99
Mozart99

@GuestWho there is considerable evidence that marijuana, in certain forms, can lower blood pressure.

stupidstuka
stupidstuka

ACTUAL high from inhaling the second-hand smoke, fool.

Mozart99
Mozart99

@GuestWho there have been tests all the way back to 1972 showing pot is mostly harmless. the government's response to its own test: the drug war.

GuestWho
GuestWho topcommenter

@McStupid -  What part of ... "I asked heather mom if she had any data (lab tests) to back up her claims of a common myth.  If science supports her theory I will not refute it but the sniff test followed by a placebo high is not science." ....did you fail to understand?  Feel free to "believe" whatever you want but I for one think that a thorough scientific study on the subject by the National Institute on Drug Abuse has more merit than some random mother conducting a biased sniff and bitch solo sample on her neighbors.

GuestWho
GuestWho topcommenter

McStupid believes a sniff test and placebo contact high is a scientific experiment with conclusive results.  LMAO.

..McShyster..
..McShyster..

@GuestWho ... thinks the NIDA had access to any quality bud in 1986 ... schwag so foul and lame that participants couldn't tell the difference between dope smoke and placebo fake smoke.

ROTFLMAO!


GuestWho
GuestWho topcommenter

@..McShyster..    McStupid thinks the NIDA reports lies to help the marijuana industry, mis-representing info like big tobacco companies did for the tobacco industry.  LMAO.  You can't fix stupid!

..McShyster..
..McShyster..

@GuestWho = now he believes the same government shills he disbelieves when it's convenient for his argument.


GuestWho
GuestWho topcommenter

@stupidstuka

Right, don't believe the NIDA or science stupid sucka.  I asked heather mom if she had any data (lab tests) to back up her claims of a common myth.  If science supports her theory I will not refute it but the sniff test followed by a placebo high is not science.

So you think heather is guilty of child abuse for allowing her daughter to be exposed to marijuana smoke which caused a psychologically induced contact high presumed by the parent in question?  Interesting...

stupidstuka
stupidstuka

Lol! ... the same wretched lies that Big Tobacco used to spew about second-hand smoke being safe.

Only a fool would assert that the smoke from one end of a joint is qualitatively different than the smoke from the other end

GuestWho
GuestWho topcommenter

@stupidstuka

"ACTUAL high from inhaling the second-hand smoke"... is largely a placebo effect...a myth, fool.

"Researchers from the National Institute on Drug Abuse investigated the effects of “sidestream” marijuana—the smoke coming from the burning end of the joint—in 1986. They placed participants in an 8-by-7 room without ventilation and burned a series of marijuana cigarettes, removing the mainstream smoke through tubing. When the subjects were exposed to the smoke of four joints over the course of one hour, THC metabolites were detectable in some of their urine tests, but the tests were more often clean. The participants’ subjective assessment of “highness” was not significantly different from when they were exposed to placebo cigarettes."

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/explainer/2012/12/legalized_marijunana_and_second_hand_smoke_is_it_possible_to_get_a_contact.html

http://www.nature.com/clpt/journal/v40/n3/pdf/clpt1986171a.pdf


Now Trending

Denver Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...