Drugs Re: Add Denver to the List
posted by on November 7 at 8:57 AM
Dom’s too modest to say so, but Seattle’s I-75—which made marijuana possession the city’s lowest law-enforcement priority, making it possible for stoners to light up on their back steps without being plagued by pre-stoned paranoia—was Dom’s baby. Yesterday a law modeled on I-75 passed in Denver, as Dom has already noted this morning, just as laws modeled on I-75 have been passed in San Francisco, Missoula, and numerous other cities.
So congrats, once again, to Dom. And it’s nice to see voters in another big, liberal city reject Seattle City Attorney Tom Carr’s idiotic fear mongering.
Seattle City Attorney Thomas Carr, who says he is required to sit on the panel, says he hopes Denver doesn’t pass the initiative. “The panel is slanted toward proponents of the law,” Carr said. “It does not work all that well. We get yelled at a lot by people in the room. Telling police and prosecutors to look the other way on a crime is really bad policy.”Dominic Holden, a community representative on Seattle’s panel, says that citations and prosecutions for marijuana-related incidents declined by 50 percent a year after the initiative passed. “The law does not tell police to ignore state or federal law,” he said. “It simply tells them where on the schedule of priorities these arrests fall.”
Although the committee cannot agree on why the numbers of marijuana arrests and prosecutions are down in Seattle, city officials have sent a letter to Denver endorsing the law as safe, effective and inexpensive.
The Seattle group also found no evidence of an increase in marijuana use among young people, crime or adverse effects on public health.
Oh my goodness! Poor Tom Carr gets yelled at—by uppity Seattle citizens who don’t support tossing harmless, non-violent pot smokers in jail! The nerve of those Seattle citizens! First they pass I-75—which is now law—and then they wanna see Tom Carr obey the law. Man, it’s almost as if the citizens of Seattle think they pay Carr’s salary or something.
Tom Carr is an enormous douche. You wanna meet some folks who are really suffering, Tom? Talk to some of the hundreds of thousands of U.S. citizens that have been arrested, prosecuted, and imprisoned for marijuana possession. I’d bet they’d trade places with you in an instant. Gee, get yelled at in a meeting for subverting the law or go to prison for getting high….
Tom Carr hasn't had sex in fourteen years.
Is Tom Carr an elected official? And if not why does he still have the job?
Dom’s too modest to say so, but Seattle’s I-75—which made marijuana possession the city’s lowest law-enforcement priority, making it possible for stoners to light up on their back steps without being plagued by pre-stoned paranoia—was Dom’s baby.
Interesting how this lighting-up on the steps is slowly becoming a bit more tolerated for stoners, and less tolerated for cigarette smokers.
Well, JMR, a stoner takes one or two puffs and puts it away. He doesn't stand there puffing away. Because the point of pot smoke isn't the smoke, but the high. You only smoke enough to get high, then you get back to whatever it was you were doing, drinking, snacking on, etc.
But I don't see less tolerance for cigarette smokers puffing away on stoops. They're all over town -- and no one seems to be enforcing (thank God) the 25 foot rule.
But I don't see less tolerance for cigarette smokers puffing away on stoops.
Yes, Dan, I should have clarified that my comment was more general than Seattle stoops (some of the cities in California going after smoking in townhouses and condos, etc.)
May our law enforcement official continue to turn a blind eye to both stoop-based pot puffing and enjoying a ciggie outside the bar.
cigarette smokers whine about being persecuted whenever the subject of smoking in bars comes up. Golly if they were to light up in a bar why, they'd be asked to leave! Pot smokers seem to be asking for little more than to not go to jail. it doesn't make much sense to compare the two groups.
If it weren't for filling our jails with people who smoke MJ and crack, we wouldn't be number one in the world for most citizens per capita arrested.
And then we might have to ... educate kids ... fix critical bridges ... and build transit that makes sense.
Nah. Let's remain obsessed with imaginary drug crazies.
May our law enforcement official continue to turn a blind eye to both stoop-based pot puffing
Oops, I meant "lowest law enforcement priority eye". Whatever reduced percentage of marijuana arrests we have here is still too many arrests.
Want to be pissed off even more at Seattle anti-pot-tards? Watch these: http://youtube.com/profile_videos?user=princeofpot
There's not a more smug looking asshole then the fed based in Seattle.
Denver rocks. I'm glad it passed because our pot activist, who's had other initiatives (statewide losses and city victories) employs the dumbest ad campaigns. In one they claimed domestic violence would decrease because more people would get stoned instead of drunk.
@10. they may be "dumb" ads, but they get attention, and for that they're downright clever. drawing attention to the fact that marijuana is less harmful than alcohol, which is SAFER's theme, is brilliant in a city/state run by coors.
@ 10, those dumb ads were from his losing campaigns. I didn't see any ads this time so I don't know what tactic they used, but it probably wasn't that.
And Coors runs Golden, not Denver. We don't have any really huge employers here a la Boeing or MSFT in Seattle, so no one really "runs" us.
yes. "runs" was not the appropriate word, writing fast and not spending too much of my day on SLOG. but i will reemphasize that comparing it to alcohol is brilliant in a state that has coors, which has their corporate branding all around the city and state, including venues open to families with children, and a mayor who owns a microbrewery.
Ahh...at least in this one area the side is slowly turning in favor of those who aren't morons.
Does Dominic want to come here to Honolulu to get it on the ballot here? Please?
denver is class. love that city. one of the west's best!
I've lived in SF as well as Seattle, and I don't understand what laws like this do. Were cops sent out to police people's stoops before? I mean, I can imagine that, but it's not how it was in these two cities anyway. Does the law provide any real protection? Can I light up a spliff more securely on the street or in my home?
Comments Closed
In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).