The Gazette, 07 Oct 2012 – Let’s face it: at present, anyone in Colorado who wants to smoke marijuana can get it. There are "medical marijuana" stores on every corner, and so-called caregivers to help one get it. As well, there are dealers everywhere. We do not need Proposition 64. It will not be a sales tax windfall as, unlike tobacco, it is cheap and easy to grow oneself. That said, why would anyone smoke pot? It is addictive and known to contribute to mental disorders, (including schizophrenia), learning disabilities, infertility (both male and female), birth defects, cancers (much more so than tobacco smoke), gynecomastia (male breast enlargement), and numerous brain diseases. THC is stored in human tissue; especially fat cells. The effects can stay with the user for indefinite periods, even if he or she stops using. Worse, he or she can pass genetic disorders to an unborn child, even if not smoking during pregnancy. Is it fair for a parent to do this?

DrugSense

The Daily Sentinel, 07 Oct 2012 – Local law enforcement used a ruse – flashing-light road signs and all – – in the recent arrest of three suspected drug traffickers on Interstate 70. For their troubles, officers got a 5-pound bag of marijuana.

Denver Post, 07 Oct 2012 – KEEPING MARIJUANA ILLEGAL Letter-writer Andy Rasmussen apparently supports legalization of marijuana, as he states, "I think if Kenneth R. Buck were to look at it, he would find that many more kids have been killed by drivers who were wearing neckties," and goes on to say that neckties, then, should be outlawed. That was probably meant to be clever and make a statement. I would like to point out, however, that even one death of a child due to a reckless driver high on marijuana is one too many. That is one reason that I oppose Amendment 64.

Boulder Weekly, 04 Oct 2012 – Many longtime cannabis activists in Colorado have come out against the language of Amendment 64, for good reason. A64 is being billed as "legalization," but it really is not. Steve Fox, a lobbyist for D.C.-based Marijuana Policy Project and the main author of A64, actually lobbied to have the word "legalization" taken out of the ballot title because "legalization would be truly misleading" to the voters. A64 is about regulation, control, more laws, and more police to enforce those laws. It is not true legalization (removal of criminal penalties). A64 does remove the criminal penalty for one ounce of cannabis. However, two ounces is already completely decriminalized in Colorado, punishable only by a ticket and $100 fine as a petty offense. So A64 sets a constitutional standard that is actually lower than what we have in statute.

DrugSense

Boulder Weekly, 04 Oct 2012 – There they go again. The folks opposed to Amendment 64, which would legalize marijuana and regulate it like alcohol, are claiming (once again) that marijuana should be kept illegal "in order to protect our kids."

Daily Camera, 05 Oct 2012 – Mexican drug cartels are no doubt thrilled with the Obama Administration’s crackdown on voter-approved medical marijuana dispensaries. So much for change and 2008 campaign promises to respect states’ rights. So much for jobs. The medical marijuana industry is one of the few job creators in the current down economy. If Obama succeeds in destroying the domestic medical marijuana industry, international drug cartels will move in to meet demand and reap the profits. This is basic economics. As long as there is a demand for marijuana, there will be a supply. Replacing domestic growers with organized crime groups that also sell cocaine, meth and heroin is not necessarily a good thing. Marijuana prohibition is a gateway drug policy.

The Rocky Mountain Collegian, 03 Oct 2012 – Colorado’s proposed Amendment 64 would give the state the most liberal marijuana laws anywhere in the world. Larimer County Sheriff Justin Smith, who said he believed his duties involved speaking out on issues of public safety and concern, announced his strong opposition to the amendment Wednesday.

DrugSense