AMENDMENT 44 IS TRICKY

Last week we all received the "little blue book" from the Legislative
Council for the state of Colorado. This allows us to thoroughly study
the ballot issues prior to going to the polls on Nov. 7.

In the process of reviewing all of the ballot issues, I learned some
about Amendment 44 -- Marijuana Possession. What I would like to know
is: Who is responsible for writing this proposed amendment?

Taking a look at the details, I learned the following from the text
out of the "Analysis of the 2006 Ballot Proposals":

Amendment 44 allows for adults 21 years of age or older to possess up
to one ounce of marijuana; this includes consumption or use, as long
as it does not occur in public.

It also would include transferring up to 1 ounce of marijuana to
another individual 15 years of age or older as long as there is no
compensation, although possession for those under 21 years of age
would remain illegal.

However, the following offenses would continue to be illegal under
state law if Amendment 44 passes:

OK, let me understand all of this. If the amendment passes:

It's OK to possess 1 ounce or less, but it's illegal to grow it or, I
assume, buy it.

It's OK to "transfer" up to one ounce of marijuana to kids 15 or
older, but it's still illegal for persons between the age of 15 and 21
to possess one ounce or less.

Now, maybe I'm being overly simplistic, but if one can't buy or grow
marijuana, how in the world are they suppose to obtain it, legally? Is
someone else going to give it to you? Maybe but at some point in the
chain, someone is going to have to grow it, import it or buy it. Right?

Secondly, it's OK to give less than an ounce to kids 15 or older, but
it's illegal for them to possess any amount of marijuana. OK, so the
second you give an ounce or less of the stuff to a kid 15 years or
older, that kid is breaking the law, and the person giving it to the
15-year-old will be contributing to the delinquency of a minor. Right?
But, the act of giving it to the 15-year-old is not illegal. Oh, let's
not forget that it's illegal to give a 15-year-old alcohol, right? If
you do this, you could be charged with contributing to the delinquency
of a minor. But, it would be OK to give that same person an ounce or
less of marijuana. Now, let's remember, that it will still be illegal
for that 15-year-old kid to posses (or I assume, use) that ounce or
less of marijuana.

Well, at this point in writing this letter to you, my head is
beginning to hurt trying to understand the entire logic of the
amendment we are to consider on Nov. 7.

At best this amendment is a quick way for the police and the courts
not to be bothered with a person over the age of 15 from possessing an
ounce or less of marijuana. At worst, it's an amendment that's
incomplete, not thought through and makes no sense whatsoever!

It is also incomprehensible for me to understand or condone the idea
that it's "OK" to give a 15-year-old marijuana.

Although I am not a proponent of legalizing marijuana (in any amount),
even if I was, I would not vote for such a poorly authored amendment
that has little thought in composing the wording or the
consequences.

Vote No on Amendment 44.

Chuck Cory is a resident of Carbondale. "Soapbox" runs weekly on the
Sunday opinion page.