Pubdate: Sun, 01 Jan 2006
Source: Rocky Mountain News (Denver, CO)
Copyright: 2006, Denver Publishing Co.
Contact:  http://www.rockymountainnews.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/371
Cited: Safer Alternative for Enjoyable Recreation http://www.safercolorado.org
Cited: RAND Drug Policy Research Center http://www.rand.org/multi/dprc/
Bookmark: 
http://www.mapinc.org/topics/Safer+Alternative+for+Enjoyable+Recreation
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/pot.htm (Cannabis)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/decrim.htm (Decrim/Legalization)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/opinion.htm (Opinion)

MARIJUANA WARS SET TO CONTINUE

This Time, Above the Radar

Legalize possession of marijuana? Denverites said yes to that 
proposition last fall, but after surprisingly little debate. It was 
almost as if opponents didn't take the group Safer Alternative for 
Enjoyable Recreation and its misleading campaign seriously - and so 
ignored the measure.

Needless to say they won't make that mistake again.

Last week SAFER officials said they'll gather signatures to put a 
measure on next fall's ballot to legalize marijuana statewide because 
Denver is still issuing tickets for possession under state law. And 
while we don't exactly welcome the prospect, the initiative at least 
will provide a chance for voters to consider serious arguments for 
and against legalization in a context that actually makes some sense.

Legalizing marijuana in Denver amounted to little more than a 
gimmick. Police and prosecutors shouldn't be expected to pick and 
choose which state laws they enforce based upon local preferences. 
But legalizing marijuana statewide is another matter.

Sure, marijuana would remain a controlled substance under federal law 
and federal agents would still swoop in for major drug busts 
involving marijuana. But state laws remain the primary tools of 
criminal enforcement in this nation, meaning the overall number of 
marijuana arrests presumably would collapse.

Meanwhile, legalization would send a powerful message to Washington 
about public frustration with the national war on drugs.

If those observations sound like an endorsement of legalization, 
they're not. They are merely an acknowledgement that good arguments 
exist on both sides. We just hope voters get to hear them through 
what is likely to be a din of simplistic messages.

Such claims began last week, in fact, when one proponent of 
legalization declared "there has never been a recorded case of a 
death from ingesting marijuana." From an overdose? Perhaps not. But 
the idea that stoned motorists have never lost control of their 
vehicles partly as result of their condition - to cite just one 
example of marijuana-related deaths - insults voters' intelligence.

Nor do we follow the logic of those who cite the allegedly greater 
dangers of alcohol and tobacco as reason to legalize marijuana. Does 
anyone seriously believe that if tobacco had been outlawed many 
decades ago, before its risks were fully understood, that society 
would consider legalizing it today? Or that alcohol consumption would 
perceptibly decline if marijuana were legally available?

No doubt some opponents will also indulge in overkill - stating 
confidently, for example, that marijuana provides a "gateway" to more 
lethal substances. The Drug Policy Research Center of the Rand Corp. 
is not so sure. It makes a persuasive case that while marijuana users 
are indeed much more likely to progress to harder drugs, the 
explanation may be nothing more sinister than the natural tendency of 
people predisposed to like drugs of all kinds starting with the most 
easily obtained substance.

SAFER still must gather nearly 68,000 signatures, but it would be 
foolish to underestimate the group after its success in Denver. If 
it's determined, it will get the measure on the ballot - at which 
point a real debate can finally begin. 
- ---
MAP posted-by: Richard Lake