In response to Sheriff Spruell’s comments published recently in your newspaper, I would like to make the following observations. It seems our sheriff is concerned about the image our state projects to the country and the world. He doesn’t want Colorado to be the “Stoner State,” in his words. Since he considers himself to be a Constitutionalist, I would prefer the county’s chief law enforcement officer to focus more on protecting our constitutional rights than fretting about the state’s public image. I believe lifting the prohibition on marijuana would spotlight Colorado as a state that respects its citizen’s right to make intelligent decisions for themselves, without the government’s help. And given the potential revenue stream that would follow, I expect other states would rapidly follow suit (relieving any pressure on folk worried about Colorado’s sullied image).

I wonder what Mr. Spruell sees in the U.S. Constitution that compels him to want to control private citizens’ behavior around pot. Our constitution is widely revered for the maximum liberty it affords our people, even the liberty to make poor choices around things like alcohol, unhealthy foods, cigarettes and television. For me, being a “stoner” would be a poor choice. However, I do not want armed agents of the state (or county, town, etc.) enforcing that moral decision on my fellow citizens.

Sheriff Spruell offers only a “belief that the increase in criminal activity will be significant,” without providing any data or evidence to support such a claim. He then quotes liberally from a bulletin released by “healthy and Drug Free Colorado.” Most of the objections raised in that bulletin have to do with citizens being allowed more liberty than they currently enjoy. The very same liberties they now enjoy relative to alcohol, a drug Spruell rightly recognizes as “right up there with methamphetamine,” which he calls the “Devil’s Drug” (quotes are from radio interview conducted in April 2012 on KSJD, Cortez). Our sheriff appears to believe we are not able to make responsible decisions concerning marijuana, a relatively mild drug compared to alcohol and meth. Does our sheriff endorse a return to alcohol prohibition? That was a miserable failure in the past, and the war on drugs is no more successful. Illicit drugs are widely available to anyone who wants them badly enough. That is nothing new. Even the nation’s drug czar admits we cannot arrest our way out of our current drug problem.

The other objection raised in the bulletin (and Spruell’s stated concern) is the rise in criminal activity, and Organized Crime at that. Guess what? Drugs are already distributed by criminals and purchased by criminals, by definition. Decriminalizing pot would have the same effect as legalizing alcohol had at the end of prohibition: citizens would be free from the stigma of being criminals for engaging in common behaviors which harm themselves, primarily. The cultivation and distribution of the drug would no longer be in criminal hands, but would be controlled by legitimate business concerns. Crime would be REDUCED, and the price of pot would fall, leading to even less criminal activity to procure it among those inclined to theft. Additionally, the state of Colorado would collect tax revenues from its sale, much the same as tobacco and alcohol. The Colorado Center on Law and Policy estimates the new amendment would generate $24 million annually for the state’s public schools.

However my fellow citizens may feel personally about marijuana, several benefits would accrue to the people of the state if the drug was decriminalized:

Police could spend more time and money pursuing serious criminals and investigating violent crime;

Jail overcrowding — a very serious concern in Montezuma County — could be reduced;

The social stigma of being addicted to pot would lessen and people could more readily seek help;

Responsible, non-criminal users of pot would not have to live in fear of dire legal and financial consequences of getting caught using the drug;

Relations between police and citizens could become less tense and more cooperative;

Colorado farmers and ranchers are poised to tap into a $400 million a year domestic market for industrial hemp. Hemp is genetically similar to marijuana but is not psychoactive like marijuana. Currently all hemp must be imported as federal law prohibits its production. This could provide a major economic boost to our citizens. Hemp was cultivated in this country from colonial times until after WWII and has huge economic potential for our farmers.

The restoration of the people’s freedom to make their own choices around marijuana has the support of a growing number in the law enforcement and criminal justice communities. Bill Masters, 8-term sheriff of nearby San Miguel County, has published two books arguing persuasively for the repeal of prohibition of all drugs. The organization Law Enforcement Against Prohibition — www.leap.cc — has an informative website with a long list of partnering organizations.

Let’s help our law-enforcement officials address the serious problems they face by reducing the pressure on their limited resources; let’s stop imprisoning non-violent drug offenders with violent and dangerous criminals; let’s end this war on drugs — which is really a war on this nation’s citizens; and finally, let’s fully embrace the 4th, 9th and 10th amendments to our constitution. I don’t smoke marijuana, but that won’t stop me from voting yes on Amendment 64 to restore the rights of my fellow Coloradans.



Peter Brind’Amour is a resident of Mancos.