Westword, 23 May 2013 – Dear Stoner: I recently read some quote from Thomas Jefferson about smoking bowls on his patio. Did our Founding Fathers actually smoke the hemp they were growing? History Buff Dear Buff: The quote that is falsely attributed to T.J. – "Some of my finest hours have been spent on my back veranda, smoking hemp and observing as far as my eye can see" – actually can’t be sourced anywhere in any of his writings, all of which are extensively documented. Yes, Washington and pretty much every other Founding Father, including Andrew Jackson, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and Franklin Pierce, grew it. But that doesn’t mean they smoked it.

Albuquerque Journal, 22 May 2013 – DENVER – A frequent marijuana user who says Colorado’s pending pot DUI bill sets the legal limit too low is suing to block the bill, arguing it violates his constitutional rights. Brandon Baker, who said he uses marijuana for religious reasons, filed his lawsuit Tuesday in federal court in Denver.

Fort Collins Coloradoan, 23 May 2013 – It seems to me that the Coloradoan glorifies the brewers in town. Sure, we make some good beer here, but we sure push the booze, with billboards all over. Budweiser really is king. All that has taken many lives, so why all the negative about marijuana? I am not for marijuana billboards or sign spinners, just wondering why the booze is OK. Do you know anyone who has died from marijuana? How about our craft beer? Oh, that’s right, all the time.

Fort Collins Coloradoan, 23 May 2013 – It seems to me that the Coloradoan glorifies the brewers in town. Sure, we make some good beer here, but we sure push the booze, with billboards all over. Budweiser really is king. All that has taken many lives, so why all the negative about marijuana? I am not for marijuana billboards or sign spinners, just wondering why the booze is OK. Do you know anyone who has died from marijuana? How about our craft beer? Oh, that’s right, all the time.

Boulder Weekly, 23 May 2013 – Although I’m generally encouraged about the rules and regulations passed by the Colorado Legislature to regulate marijuana like alcohol this month, the rule that still bothers me allows a jury to infer that someone whose blood level shows five nanograms of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) per milliliter to be impaired or intoxicated. Nobody is arguing that there shouldn’t be some way to determine impairment. Nobody wants intoxicated drivers on the road. The rub is in this particular method. The law-and-order contingency says blood-level tests are necessary tools to help identify intoxicated drivers.

Denver Post, 21 May 2013 – Re: "Marijuana rule defies First Amendment," May 13 editorial. A proposed rule forcing pot magazines behind the counters is not only in violation of the First Amendment, but it is just plain stupid. If the under-21 crowd wants information on marijuana, they only need to check their smartphones. Print magazines are sooo last decade, dude.

DrugSense

Daily Camera, 17 May 2013 – Thanks for publishing Edward R. Arnold’s thoughtful letter: "Marijuana is safer than tobacco or alcohol" (May 12). I’d like to add that our annual tobacco vs. marijuana kill ratio is about 400,000 to zero. And our annual alcohol vs. marijuana kill ratio is about 75,000 to zero.

Westword, 16 May 2013 – Dear Stoner: With the recent passing of the five-nanogram driving limit for THC, I’m worried that even while sober, as a regular smoker I’ll technically be over the limit. Should I sell my car and resign myself to public transportation? Dear Sixteen: The new five-nanogram law is unscientific bullshit. And, yes, it could very easily lead to someone getting a pot DUI who doesn’t deserve it; there are some major problems with the measure that need to be addressed. But I don’t know what’s more dangerous: taking the Colfax bus daily or risking a DUI like you’ve been risking your whole stoner life when you’ve driven with any THC in your system.

Boulder Weekly, 16 May 2013 – Last week Colorado became the first U.S. state to adopt a set of rules that allows marijuana to be regulated like alcohol for adults. Legislators, task force members and all involved are to be congratulated for doing it in accordance with Amendment 64’s spirit and under its tight, six-month deadline. It was obvious during the session that some legislators wanted to derail the process and were openly hostile to instituting the amendment at all, and it took some last-minute arm-twisting and horse-trading to get it done. If a good bill is one that doesn’t completely satisfy anybody, then these could be considered successes.