MARIJUANA USE A SAFER CHOICE THAN ALCOHOL

Colorado -- Amendment 44, the Alcohol-Marijuana Equalization
Initiative, was proposed for one simple reason: The laws currently on
the books force adults to choose alcohol instead of marijuana when
they seek to relax or socialize. Given alcohol is far more harmful
than marijuana, this makes no sense whatsoever.

Let's consider just a few of the facts.

Alcohol is deadly; marijuana is not. According to the U.S. Centers
for Disease Control, approximately 20,000 Americans die annually as
the direct result of alcohol consumption. The comparable number for
marijuana is zero.

In addition, as the Colorado on-campus deaths of students like
Samantha Spady and Gordy Bailey make clear, alcohol overdose deaths
are not just possible, but an all-too-frequent occurrence. Marijuana,
on the other hand, has never caused an overdose death.

Alcohol increases the likelihood of violent behavior; marijuana does
not. For example, the U.S. Department of Justice has reported the
following about crime in the United States: "Two-thirds of victims
who suffered violence by an intimate (a current or former spouse,
boyfriend, or girlfriend) reported that alcohol had been a factor.
Among spouse victims, three out of four incidents were reported to
have involved an offender who had been drinking."

Alcohol is especially problematic on college campuses. Drinking by
college students, ages 18 to 24, contributes to an estimated 1,400
student deaths, 500,000 injuries and 70,000 cases of sexual assaults
or date rapes each year, according to a 2002 study commissioned by
the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Task Force on
College Drinking.

While these numbers are staggering, some statistics are even more
powerful when conveyed as percentages. For example, researchers at
the Harvard School of Public Health College found that nearly three
quarters (72 percent) of all college female rape victims experienced
rape while intoxicated.

In order to correct this illogical system, and to give adults the
freedom to use marijuana if that is what they prefer, we have
proposed making the possession of up to one ounce of marijuana legal
for individuals 21 years of age and older. If you look at the
language of our proposed measure, you will see this is our only
intent. In fact, we specifically make it clear that possession of
marijuana by individuals under the age of 21 will remain illegal.

Yet the attorney general of this state, John Suthers, in The
Chieftain, has accused us of "recklessly" legalizing transfers of
marijuana to minors. He has even libelously said that we are
advocating such a change in law.

He knowingly ignored the fact that the drafters of the Blue Book
(state voter guide) in the state legislature were the ones who
claimed our initiative would legalize transfers to minors, with
language the Rocky Mountain News called "misleading" and "false." In
response, we sued the Legislative Council in court in order to
clarify that such transfers would remain illegal after passage of our
initiative due to the existence of a "contributing the delinquency of
a minor" statute.

This statute provides, in very clear language, that it is a felony to
aid a minor in breaking a state law. Since possession of marijuana by
a minor will still be illegal after passage of our initiative,
providing a minor with any amount of marijuana will be a felony.

The attorney general said in his column - and the Chieftain editorial
board strangely agreed - that a "creative defense attorney" would
somehow convince a judge that people voting for our initiative
intended to make transfers of marijuana to minors legal. This is absurd.

The attorney general should be far more concerned about the fact that
he is going around the state telling defense attorneys that the
contributing to the delinquency of a minor statute does not apply to
transfers of marijuana to minors. This means individuals committing
such an act will only be charged under current possession laws and
subject to a $100 fine, which your paper recognizes as "not a high
priority for law enforcement." If he doesn't think marijuana should
be transferred to minors, why on earth is he telling everyone it is
(and should remain) only a $100 fine right now and not a felony? Nice
work, Mr. Suthers.

Please don't let elected officials fool or scare you into keeping
marijuana illegal. Those who want to maintain our alcohol-based
society - and the violence and death frequently associated with it -
are the ones who are truly "reckless."

Vote YES on Amendment 44 and help make Colorado safer.