The Ownership vs Society

Colorado, wising up at least somewhat to the concept of individual liberty (as well as science), legalized possession of small amounts of marijuana. Not just for medical use either. Good call.

Unfortunately, there are city governments within Colorado that appear to be hostile to the concept. Jacob Sullum breaks down how they’re responding to it:

Greenwood Village, a Denver suburb that already has pre-emptively banned the marijuana stores that Colorado is supposed to start licensing and regulating next year, is on the verge of adopting an ordinance that severely restricts what people can do with marijuana they grow for their own use, as permitted by a provision of Amendment 64 that took effect in December. The ordinance, introduced by Greenwood Village City Council Member Leslie Schluter, prohibits possession of marijuana on city property, including public streets and sidewalks. The upshot is that residents of the town may grow up to six plants in their homes, as allowed by Amendment 64, but may not take any of that marijuana anywhere else. They may not share their marijuana with friends, which is also permitted by the amendment, unless it’s consumed in the same place where it’s grown. Finally, the town’s residents may not buy marijuana at a licensed store in another city and bring it home, since that would require possessing it on the streets of Greenwood Village. Even people passing through town after legally buying marijuana elsewhere apparently would be violating the ordinance.

So the state of Colorado says weed is legal. Greenwood Village, which is within the state of Colorado, says selling weed, even with a license, is illegal. A city council member in Greenwood Village wants to go further and make sharing weed, or having weed from a less reactionary town elsewhere in Colorado — where, reminder, it’d be legal to sell with a license — illegal. In effect, they want to mandate Bogartin’ your homegrown…which makes me wonder how the people who wish to grow their own are supposed to get seeds to start with*.

Note the assumption being made with these ordinances.  The city government is saying “these are OUR streets, citizen, NOT YOURS, and you will obey our writ on them no matter how it contradicts those damned hippies in Denver!” This, even though being “public” (that is, tax-funded & maintained) those streets have as their proper owners the collective population of the town, thus the inverse of what the city council members think.

If anyone is wondering why I say that using “public” and government-controlled as synonyms is inaccurate…there you go.

(* – Legally, that is. Not that I care whether they break any existing law against what is a victimless “crime”, just the logistics of it. If seeds weren’t legalized too then that’s a huge oversight that amounts to entrapment should anyone get caught w/ seeds when growing is legal & charged with possession)

Edit 012813 1:55 PM CST: the city council of Greenwood Village even banned transport of seeds. This is getting even dumber…


About b-psycho

Left-libertarian blogger & occasional musician.
This entry was posted in law. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to The Ownership vs Society

  1. ricketson says:

    There might be an interesting constitutional issue here. Dealing with “right of way” and regulation of commerce and all that.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s