War on Drugs 2 | ***Dave Does the Blog

Pot and auto accidents

Lots of people are concerned that legalized marijuana will lead to increased accidents and fatalities, and everyone thinks we need to be keeping track of it — but nobody is (and it's not clear what it would take to do so).

Which sounds like a great basis for a bunch of claims to be made without any evidence to back them up — which is already happening.

Colorado marijuana legalization’s impact on stoned driving unknown
When a 23-year-old Arvada man crashed his pickup into the back of a Colorado State Patrol car in January, authorities said it was an example of what could be a disturbing trend: a rise in dangerous marijuana-impaired driving.

View this post on Google+

Reefer Madness Grips Nation!

Well, not really. But, apparently, the sight of two states legalizing marijuana usage and said states not immediately descending into frenzied anarchy (or slothful munchies) has apparently had an impact on the body politic.

I did notice a few more folks in one of the downtown parks goofing about with the odor of pot in the air at lunchtime today. Of course, it's illegal for them to be smoking in public, but it's also illegal to be drinking in public, and at least these guys weren't leaving their empties on the ground.

(h/t +Zachary Cook)

Legal marijuana support in America soars
Moral outrage is down and support for legalized marijuana is up.

View this post on Google+

RT @mikeleffingwell: IF POT GE…

RT @mikeleffingwell: IF POT GETS LEGALIZED WHAT’S TO STOP SOMEONE WHO WANTS TO SMOKE A HORSE

Unreasonable Searches of Urine

A federal judge has struck down Florida's "Want a welfare check? Pee in the cup" law, saying it's essentially a search without any justification.

Florida's governor, Rick Scott, says he's only thinking of the children:

'Mr. Scott, who had argued that the drug testing was necessary to protect children and ensure that tax money was not going to illegal drugs, said that the state would appeal the ruling. “Any illegal drug use in a family is harmful and even abusive to a child,” he said in a statement. “We should have a zero-tolerance policy for illegal drug use in families — especially those families who struggle to make ends meet and need welfare assistance to provide for their children.”'

Of course, on that basis, Gov. Scott should be able to order urine tests for any user of state services. Entering a state park? Pee in the cup. Getting your driver's license renewed? Pee in the cup. Working in a state job, from janitor to governor? Pee in the cup.

Unless, of course, the only families where we have to worry about "harmful and abusive" drug environments for children are very poor ones. What about that, Governor?

Reshared post from +Susan Stone

quote: Judge Mary S. Scriven of United States District Court wrote in her decision that the state’s testing requirement was unconstitutional. “The court finds there is no set of circumstances under which the warrantless, suspicionless drug testing at issue in this case could be constitutionally applied,” she wrote. The ruling made permanent an earlier, temporary ban by the judge.

Florida Law on Drug Testing for Welfare Is Struck Down
Judge Mary S. Scriven of United States District Court wrote in her decision that the state’s testing requirement was unconstitutional.

View this post on Google+

E-Coffin-Nails

I am not a smoking fan. I actually dislike tobacco smoking quite a bit.

But I've never quite understood the hostility to e-cigarattes. Yeah, nicotine is addictive … but, so what? Yeah, it seems like normal fire-involving tobacco smoking … but, again, so what?

I'm just not seeing the harm, esp. compared to the legal restrictions that various municipalities seem to want to put onto the devices.

I have no desire to puff on an e-cigarette. But that doesn't mean I'm automatically in favor of treating them the same as real cigarettes.

The Government’s War on E-Cigarettes
It’s here, folks. The battle royale between the regulators and the people over e-cigarettes is upon us. It started a few years ago, calmly, but with New York City banning vaping in public places, the knives are about to come out.

View this post on Google+

New York City raises the cigarette sale age

NYC will raise the age at which people can buy cigarettes from 18 to 21.

The only good thing about this is that it brings the age in line with the age of drinking. But, c'mon, folks — if someone can enroll in the military and get married and take on a full-time job and vote for President and sign legal contracts … then I think we really need to leave the question of whether they ought to be smoking (or, for that matter, drinking) to them as well.

And, yes, that's all dangerous, with possible life-changing consequences — but so are all those other things I mentioned.

I am no fan of smoking, by any means — but I can't cognitively justify this.

New York to raise cigarette sale age

View this post on Google+

Pot and Gays: America approves

Both legalization of marijuana and gay marriage are solidly majority opinions in the US. Who'dathunk?

Though, as a commentary on the headline below, while I myself am okay with folks smoking pot, and am cool with gay weddings (having attended same and even played a role in same), if you're smoking pot at a gay wedding that I'm at, I'd rather you step outside to do so with the tobacco smokers. Your right to smoke ends where my clothes are stinky in the morning.

Most Americans Are Totally Cool with Smoking Weed at Gay Weddings
For the first time since the pollster began asking, Gallup finds that a clear majority of Americans support the legalization of marijuana — a 10 point increase since last November.

View this post on Google+

Planting Hemp

And I mean real hemp, for industrial use, not a nickname for marijuana (to which it is related). Hemp used to be a major industrial crop in this country, grown by presidents and non-presidents. Then politics, "reefer madness" scare tactics, and competitors got its growth outlawed on a federal level. Now Colorado, among others, is looking to bring it back.

Reshared post from +The Denver Post

Springfield, Colo., farmer Ryan Loflin on Monday planted the nation's first industrial hemp crop in almost 60 years. Loflin's plans to grow hemp already have been chronicled, and Monday's planting attracted the attention of more media in southeastern Colorado and a documentary film crew.
Read more: http://bit.ly/18GlB4M
(Photo by AAron Ontiveroz, The Denver Post)

View this post on Google+

Marijuana — The GATEWAY DRUG of TERRORISM!

Yes, didn't you know that pot is "a mind-altering substance that can play a role in creating communist or Islamic terrorists"? AIM has the story, which probably played out something like this.

"Dude, what you wanna do tonight?"
"I dunno.. What you wanna do tonight?"
"I dunno."
"Um … wanna go plant some bombs for Marx and/or Allah?"
"Uh … sure. We should order some pizza first."
"Uh … sure. Power to the, uh, people, dude."
"Imshallah, dude."

Right. Sounds completely believable.

Embedded Link

Accuracy In Media Blames Marijuana for Boston Attack
Accuracy in Media’s Cliff Kincaid is citing reports that the two Boston marathon bombers may have been drug dealers and that “the younger brother was a pothead” to argue “that

View this post on Google+

The beginnings of change for federal pot policy?

Well, that would certainly be refreshingly rational.

Embedded Link

APNewsBreak: Effort building to change US pot laws
SEATTLE—An effort is building in Congress to change U.S. marijuana laws, including moves to legalize the industrial production of hemp and establish a federal pot tax.

Google+: View post on Google+

Yeah, well, it's Greenwood Village

I mean, really? Possession and use of pot is so desperate a moral issue to the City Fathers/Mothers/Nannies that not only are you banning its use on city property, but you're defining city property as all streets and sidewalks?

(Hmmm. A few state and county highways go through Greenwood Village, despite their best obstructionist efforts to block all annoying through traffic. Wonder how those play into this.)

Reshared post from +The Denver Post

Greenwood Village ordinance to test limits of pot legalization law
An ordinance passed in Greenwood Village could become a test case for how far cities can go to keep marijuana out of their communities following legalization.
The ordinance bans marijuana use, possession or transportation on city property, which is not so unusual. The catch: the ordinance defines city property to include public streets and sidewalks. That makes it illegal to even drive through the city with an otherwise legal amount of marijuana.
Supporters of the new Colorado law say that the ordinance is a violation of the state constitution and will invite costly lawsuits.
How far do you think a city can legally go to keep out pot?

Embedded Link

Greenwood Village ordinance to test pot legalization law
An ordinance passed last month in Greenwood Village is poised to become a test case for how far cities can go to keep marijuana out of their communities following legalization.

Google+: View post on Google+

State of the Party State

It will be interesting to see if legalized pot actually reduces drinking rates — generally, among specific populations, and in both the short- and long-term.

Reshared post from +The Denver Post

Academics around the country are watching Colorado to answer a unique question: Once pot is legal, cheaper and easier for people to obtain, will they drink less? The answer could be important for any future legalization efforts.
Will you change your drinking habits now that marijuana is legal in Colorado? http://dpo.st/UiJECV

Embedded Link

Do alcohol and marijuana mix? Colorado is about to find out
In the debate over what marijuana legalization means for Colorado, the best drug-policy brains in the nation say there is one question getting short shrift: If people can more easily toke, does that m…

Google+: View post on Google+

The legalities of off-duty pot usage

Colorado has had legal medical marijuana usage for a while, and just passed a law legalizing (as far as the state is concerned) the use of recreational marijuana. We also have a law that prohibits someone from being fired from a job for doing something that's legal while not on the job, as long as their on-hours performance is not impacted.

So for companies that forbid marijuana usage under their corporate policies, has pot suddenly become okay? That's what a court is going to have to decide.

The argument, by the way, that it's still illegal under federal law does not (to my mind) hold much water. This is protection under state law we're talking about, not under federal law. The only exceptions there might be for companies that operate across state lines, but even there they are required to abide by state law for employment policies (e.g., when a final check has to be cut at time of termination), so abiding by state law legality would seem to be natural.

This is another case where one would expect the more libertarian / states-rights Republicans to be leading the charge to defend such usage from federal interference …

Embedded Link

Colorado appeals court case debates question of off-duty marijuana use
A case pending before the Colorado Court of Appeals could have a big impact on whether employers will be able to fire workers who smoke marijuana off duty.

Google+: View post on Google+

Family goes to (comes from) pot

Well, not really, but I was amused to discover, after the recent flurry of discussion about the legalization of marijuana and hemp cultivation in Colorado that Margie's 4th great-grandfather (John Williams (1789-1852) was a farmer and hemp manufacturer in Woodford Co., Kentucky.

Google+: View post on Google+

The State/Federal Divide on Marijuana

This is a conflict that is only growing bigger as states — my own included — move forward with medical marijuana laws (now 18) and recreational marijuana laws (2). But it's not just a matter of arguing jurisdictions and the concept of federalism and the pros-and-cons of marijuana usage …

'Consider the case of Chris Williams, the subject of this Op-Doc video, who opened a marijuana grow house in Montana after the state legalized medical cannabis. Mr. Williams was eventually arrested by federal agents despite Montana’s medical marijuana law, and he may spend the rest of his life behind bars. While Jerry Sandusky got a 30-year minimum sentence for raping young boys, Mr. Williams is looking at a mandatory minimum of more than 80 years for marijuana charges and for possessing firearms during a drug-trafficking offense.

This outcome is sad, of course — Mr. Williams will not be free to raise his teenage son — but it is also morally repugnant. Even if you think that the benefits of legalized medical marijuana do not outweigh the costs — a crucial debate, but one we can table for the moment — a coherent system of justice must explain why one defendant is punished more harshly than the next. It must explain why a farmer who grows marijuana in compliance with state law should be punished much more harshly than some pedophiles and killers. If we cannot explain this disparity, we should fight to change it.'

Reshared post from +Zachary Cook

A law abiding citizen now faces the rest of his life in federal prison because of the government's insane prohibition on marijuana.
#medicalmarijuana #legalizeit

Embedded Link

‘The Fight Over Medical Marijuana’
An Op-Doc profiles Chris Williams, a medical marijuana grower in Montana who now faces life in prison. The filmmaker explores how Mr. Williams is a casualty of conflicting national and state drug law…

Google+: View post on Google+

And in local Colorado electoral news

Besides voting overall for Obama, here’s what else went on last night in Colorado (of interest to me, at least):

1. It appears Mike Coffman has clearly beat Joe Miklosi to return to Washington in CO-6. A shame, but on the bright side Coffman has been a proponent of defense budget cuts, which may come in handy in, oh, a few weeks.

Coffman seems to have won in each of the counties in the contest, though it was very close in Adams and Arapahoe. Not surprisingly, Douglas Co. was his biggest supporter (that county went to Romney 65%).

2. In ballot initiative news:

Amendment 64 (Marijuana Legalization) pass pretty handily (55%). This got almost as much national media play last night as the actual presidential contest. How this plays out will be amusing to see.

Amendment 65 (Campaign Finance Reform) passed with high numbers (74%), even though (or perhaps because) it has no actual effects, but only acts as a guide to congressional and state legislators.

Amendment S (Civil Service Reform) also passed (56%), which is, to my mind, unfortunate (and I really have to wonder how many people actually understood what it was about).

It’s actually remarkable that all three ballot initiatives passed. That doesn’t happen often here.

3. State offices: Both my state representatives, House and Senate, will be GOP. Not surprising, but hope springs eternal. And the Dems hold the overall majority, it seems, in both chanbers.

4. In Centennial, our final “de-Brucing” went permanently in place, which means that in those years when income in certain taxes exceeds expenditure, the city doesn’t have to send refund checks out, but instead can use it to hold crazy parties for the city politicians. Or, y’know, something useful. Whichever, we get to vote the bums out, as we see fit.

Embedded Link

Colorado backs Obama for second term with 50% of vote – The Denver Post
Colorado voters picked President Barack Obama on Tuesday, the first time the state backed a Democratic presidential candidate for a second term in 76 years.

Google+: View post on Google+

Tweets from 2012-11-06

Doing Write: “You’ve taught me how to laugh again” Link #nanowrimo #
With all the office windows, I’ve been able to watch the sunrise perceptibly precess south morning after morning. Cool. Also, blinding. #
RT @davidfrum: Just got my sticker. George Washington’s first voters got half a gallon of rum each. How far we have fallen from the idea … #
RT @StephenAtHome: Make sure you get out there and VOTE today! Then enjoy your orange juice and cookie… wait! Did I just give blood by … #
No matter who wins or loses, thank God we can watch TV commercials again without dangerous blood pressure spikes. #
RT @FakeNNWMTips: Adjectives are so 2011. “It’s all about the adverbs and prepositions this year,” say Top Editors. #nanowrimo #
RT @DanHopp: NO ELECTION SPOILERS TONIGHT PLEASE I’m still on Debate 2 #
RT @x7o: Dungeons and Dragons has a more sophisticated alignment matrix than US politics. #
Confirmed both our mail-in ballots were received by Arapahoe County (Colorado). Whew! https://t.co/IfBotPiJ #
RT @pourmecoffee: There is no real news until polls close. Enjoy this colorful lizard. Link #
RT @ryanfeeley: Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to phish and he earns up to $10,000 a day from home. CLICK TO … #
RT @iowahawkblog: You know who likes exit polls? President Kerry. #
RT @tedfrank: Remember: 1) early unmodulated exit polls are garbage; 2) early VA returns will be heavily GOP, with blue counties reporti … #
RT @BorowitzReport: It’s still early on cable news, but words have opened up a big lead over information. #Election2012 #vote2012 #election #
RT @fivethirtynate: Molten variables hiss and roar. On my mind-forge, I hammer them into the greatsword Epistemology. Many are my foes t … #
RT @matociquala: Oh my god, I just realized… no matter what else happens tonight, Joe Lieberman will be unemployed. #gladtobealive #
RT @normative: Nate Silver Fizz: 13.14% syrup, 55.81% gin, 10.29% lemon juice, 8.71% egg white, 12.05% soda, shaken stochastically #e … #
MT @sixthformpoet: If writers took “write what you know” rule srsly, most new novels would be called Constantly Distracted By The Internet. #
RT @TheOnion: BREAKING: Romney Wins, Obama Reelected, Supernova Destroys Earth All Possibilities In A Random Universe Link #
RT @billbarol: JUST IN: A thing will either happen or not happen until it’s known which thing happens, or doesn’t! Stay close for dramat … #
RT @JohnFugelsang: 52% of Mississippi GOPs think POTUS is Muslim; proving our greatest threat is not foreign terrorists but domestic morons. #
RT @pourmecoffee: Still no battleground results. Here is my favorite picture of Ultraman fighting. Link #
CNN seems to be more conservative in calling states than NBC. That’s fine by me. Plus some nice smartboard use. #
Unfortunately, CNN doesn’t have local coverage. NBC better than ABC national; checking out CBS. #
Bill O’Reilly mourns the passage of “the white establishment” vs folks who “want stuff.” Classy! Link #
Sites I’m following: Link Link Link Link Link #
RT @mental_floss: The last time a Republican was elected president without a Nixon or Bush on the ticket was Hoover in 1928. #
RT @Annaluvsproduce: For those saying “if Obama wins I’m going to Australia” our PM is a single atheist woman & we have universal he … #
Watching local PBS coverage now. “Loving hands at home” job with sound probs, speaking stumbles, cameras cutting off interviewees. #
RT @muskrat_john: Okay, Hari Seldon, OKAY. I’ll follow your damn @fivethirtyeight blog now, already… #
Apparently when you make doltish assertions about “legitimate rape,” the body politic has a way to shut your whole thing down. #akinloses #
The heck with it. Off to Comedy Central’s Democalypse 2012. #
Confused by who’s called what for whom? Link #
Hrm. I need to see a few more folks besides MSNBC and Fox give Ohio to Obama for me to believe it. #
MT @denverpost: Denver Post projecting win for Am. 64, making Colorado first state in US to legalize marijuana #COvote Link #
Apparently everyone but AP and NYT have called Ohio and the election for Obama. So … guess that must be true. #
Of course, now comes the *real* contest: how close did Nate Silver call it? #
RT @thinkprogress: Obama wins. It’s better on Fox News. Link #
Ironically, after all the handwringing and analysis of Florida … it turned out not to be deciding factor. #

Going to Pot in Colorado

Well. This should be interesting.

Plus, hemp production.

I foresee some interesting butting heads with the Feds, and lots of role reversals over how federalism is supposed to work.

Reshared post from +The Denver Post

UPDATE: An amendment that would make it legal in Colorado for individuals to possess and for businesses to sell marijuana for recreational use has passed.

Embedded Link

Colorado measure legalizing marijuana passes – The Denver Post
An amendment that would make it legal in Colorado for individuals to possess and for businesses to sell marijuana for recreational use has passed.

Google+: View post on Google+

Cognitive Dissonance (Election 2012 Edition)

Okay, so I know Ron Paul is against the War on Drugs and all that, but it was still amusing to see a van drive through downtown Denver with signs in favor of our marijuana legalization ballot measure, the proponents of which say that marijuana can be controlled through similar laws as are used for alcohol.

So the van was festooned with stickers and signs that said:

RON PAUL 2012

and

YES ON 64
REGULATION WORKS!

… becuase … y’know … it’s funny because the guy’s for Ron Paul … and also for how government regulation works … and …

… well I thought it was pretty amusing.

Google+: View post on Google+

Colorado Ballot Propositions 2012: Amendment 65

So far we’ve had Civil Service reform (weakening) in Amendment S, and Marijuana Legalization in Amendment 64. Tonight, the last statewide initiative on the ballot: Amendment 65, the (kinda-sorta) Campaign Finance Reform initiative.

So here’s the problem:

A lot of people agree that excess money from individuals and organizations distorts the political process, giving undue influence on the electorate, and undue influence on beholden office-seekers. Even where corruption doesn’t actually occur, the very appearance of corruption is corrosive to the process.
The Supreme Court says that money = speech, and that corporations = people, so any sort of limits on campaign financing in statutory law are limited and (if challenged) dubious at best.

Amendment 65 tackles this problem. Sort of. It doesn’t actually do anything, but it’s meant to send a “message”:

It instructs the Colorado congressional delegation to propose and support a US constitutional amendment that would allow the feds and states to limit campaign contributions and spending.
It instructs the state legislature to pass any US constitutional amendment that gets proposed to that end.

Which is all very nice, but even a state constitutional amendment cannot actually compel an elected representative (federal or state) to vote a certain way. So this Amendment is largely a feel-good “sense of the people” kind of thing — a political statement by the populace to future state and federal representatives.

On the one hand, that seems fairly useless (the arguments against suggest that the effort would be better placed electing congressional representatives that support this proposal). On the other hand, it is a statement of the will of the people, to be flouted (should the opportunity arise) at some peril. On the gripping hand, yes, is this really something we need to be embedding in the state constitution — a non-binding “will of the people” of those who went to the polls in 2012?

(I’m not going to argue the merits of campaign finance and spending reform. I tend to believe in its need and disbelieve that any sort of system will ever be effective in restricting it save for a completely publicly funded campaign setup, which will introduce its own distortions and challenges.)

My net-net recommendation is in support of Amendment 65, to vote “Yes” on it. I’m not altogether happy with either what it will actually do, nor with cluttering up the state constitution with such things (really, if there’s a candidate for a legislative proposition, rather than constitutional one, this is it).

But I think the basic principle of trying to stem the tide of millionaires, billionaires, and shadowy consortia thereof flooding the airwaves and mailboxes with whatever lying crap they want to (on any particular side of any particular race) and having that be the most prominent emblem of “free speech” in our land seems a worthy philosophical effort. I will vote “Yes” on Amendment 65.