One arrest every 42 seconds for marijuana

[midjd]

i know it happens now on occasion that elementary aged kids get high....but if it becomes legal, that would end up being a regular thing.....and that scares me

So there are a lot of elementary-aged kids getting drunk now? I mean, legalizing alcohol sure put a lot more of it on the shelves. So that makes it more accessible to youngsters, right?

I have never seen a study that shows causation between early mj use and the use of harder drugs. The fact that something like 70% of the adult population admits to trying mj once, yet a very small percentage went on to become addicts (mj, alcohol, or anything else), would tend to imply the opposite.

[Sum Dum Gai]

Are you comparing recreational drug use to drugs perscribed by a doctor for the purpose of treatment?

Yes, for two reasons. One, read the warning labels on your prescriptions. Nearly every single one of them says don't operate machinery while taking the drug. Cars are machinery. Everybody that's taking their prescriptions and then driving to work is doing so impaired. It would be like slamming three or four shots every morning before getting behind the wheel. Nobody bats an eye as long as the pills came from a doctor though.

Second, just because you have a prescription to take one painkiller every 6-8 hours, doesn't mean you can take the things 4 at a time. However, if you do and cause an accident at work, when you get drug tested they won't report the opiate abuse because you have a prescription, even though you're taking way more than you were actually prescribed.

Impaired is impaired. If the worry is that impaired people will put the rest of us in danger, by driving or operating equipment at work for example, they shouldn't be allowed to do those things under the influence of prescription drugs which cause impairment either.

[Phoenix84]

Well, the question is how many people now would use pot if it was legal but are not using it now because it isn't legal, and what would the consequences of those additional users be for society. Maybe it will cause a higher occurance of drug addictions.

Just because there hasn't been a study yet may not make it true. Is there such a study? And we can't always keep comparing alchol to mj. They aren't the same, and legalizing it may invoke the law of unintended consequences.

[Deleted]

elements of a crime include

ACCESS.....if you legalize it, the access to the drug grows exponentially

And kids do get drunk....because they have access from parents, etc

If you dont think so, talk to school principals...

6th graders with drinking problems are becoming a "normal" thing to see

[Sum Dum Gai]

and yes....if 10% of users do go on to harder drugs BECAUSE of mj smoking....

Nobody goes on to harder drugs BECAUSE of marijuana. The only studies done show that users of harder drugs have smoked marijuana. Have and because aren't the same thing. Crack addicts have also used toilets, worn clothes, eaten spaghetti, and learned to count. Should we outlaw all those things too, because a small percentage of people who learn to count go on to smoke crack?

[Phoenix84]

"Yes, for two reasons. One, read the warning labels on your prescriptions. Nearly every single one of them says don't operate machinery while taking the drug. Cars are machinery. Everybody that's taking their prescriptions and then driving to work is doing so impaired. It would be like slamming three or four shots every morning before getting behind the wheel. Nobody bats an eye as long as the pills came from a doctor though."

The offical line is "don't drive or operate heavy machinery until you know how it affects you." A doctor isn't going to perscribe a drug to you that makes you a public menice behind the wheel or on the job, not without also signing something giving you medical leave.

I find your lack of concern for public safety distrubing.

"Second, just because you have a prescription to take one painkiller every 6-8 hours, doesn't mean you can take the things 4 at a time. However, if you do and cause an accident at work, when you get drug tested they won't report the opiate abuse because you have a prescription, even though you're taking way more than you were actually prescribed."

*shrugs* I don't follow you. So because some people can take perscription drugs in a way and in amounts not perscribed and cause accidents at work and can get away with it means it's ok to legalize pot int the workplace? I don't quite follow you.

[Phoenix84]

Nov 1, 2012 14:45:06 GMT -5 Sum Dum Gai said:

and yes....if 10% of users do go on to harder drugs BECAUSE of mj smoking....

Nobody goes on to harder drugs BECAUSE of marijuana. The only studies done show that users of harder drugs have smoked marijuana. Have and because aren't the same thing. Crack addicts have also used toilets, worn clothes, eaten spaghetti, and learned to count. Should we outlaw all those things too, because a small percentage of people who learn to count go on to smoke crack?

So how does that prove then that it doesn't? It just means the studies done in the past have been flawed. That doesn't mean a link doesn't exist. Just because we haven't found it yet doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Don't you think something like this should be thoroughly studied before it's legalized?

I'm not arguing that the studies done before are flawed. But just because no such data exists doesn't mean there isn't a link. You seem to assume because the previous studies are flawed, no link exists so it's ok. You say correlation does not equal causation, and this applies the other way too. Just because the previous studies showed no such link exist doesn't mean other, better studies won't. But even if a real study was done not influenced by politics, you likely wouldn't agree with it unless it agreed with your pre conceived notions.

Things like this are complicated and always have unintended consequences. I'm advocating for more thorough study and thinking about the consequences.

[midjd]

Just because there hasn't been a study yet may not make it true. Is there such a study? And we can't always keep comparing alchol to mj. They aren't the same, and legalizing it may invoke the law of unintended consequences.

Well those who are not in favor of legalization keep coming back to the "gateway drug" argument... based on a study that showed only correlation, not causation. So no, I don't think an argument that has almost no supporting evidence is a great reason to keep something illegal.

You're right, alcohol and mj aren't the same. But the prohibition of both have had very similar results.

It's also interesting to see why marijuana was made illegal in the first place... had almost nothing to do with the drug itself, but with the use of hemp (and the resulting competition with paper companies). A pretty easy way to gain market share is to outlaw the other guy's product, I guess

[Deleted]

We have a nursing home in my area that stopped drug testing, because they couldn't get people to work for them at all. I think many people in favor of not drug testing for THC hope that is the way things swing. Especially since it is LEGAL here with an RX...

[midjd]

A doctor isn't going to perscribe a drug to you that makes you a public menice behind the wheel or on the job, not without also signing something giving you medical leave.

I find your lack of concern for public safety distrubing.

DH just had surgery, he was prescribed painkillers. His doctor told him he "probably shouldn't" drive after he took the painkillers. That was it. (He ended up not even taking any - but it wasn't as though his doctor was forbidding him from operating machinery. He could very easily have taken a handful and then driven to work).

[Sum Dum Gai]

I find your lack of concern for public safety disturbing.

Right now employers are saying they can't fill jobs because a huge percentage of people can't pass the drug scree right? So, right now there are already a lot of people smoking pot. How many people were killed last year because they were hit by a driver that was smoking pot? I've never heard of one. How many crane operators dropped an I-beam on somebody because they were smoking pot on the job? If it happened it certainly wasn't in the news.

People have been smoking pot in reasonably large numbers for several decades. Either there's a media conspiracy keeping us from hearing about all the mayhem they're causing, or people are actually less impaired from smoking pot than they are from alcohol, because I hear about drunk driving accidents all the time.

Lack of concern for public safety, my ass. If that's really your concern we should outlaw booze. Drunks kill people every single day in this country. Outlaw that crap, and lock up anyone they find with so much as a single can of beer. Just like we do for pot. We'll all be safe in no time.

[Phoenix84]

"Well those who are not in favor of legalization keep coming back to the "gateway drug" argument... based on a study that showed only correlation, not causation. So no, I don't think an argument that has almost no supporting evidence is a great reason to keep something illegal."

You aren't following me. So there hasn't been a proven link between MJ and drug addiction. Ok, I get that. But how can you then extrapolate that to say for 100% sure that one doesn't exist? You said yourself the previous studies were falwed, so doesn't that mean instead of just saying "oh, a link doesn't exist, it's perfectly safe" we should be saying "ok, let's do a real scientific study."

[midjd]

Do doctors really ban people from driving/operating machinery when they prescribe painkillers? I know several people who have chronic pain issues and a refillable prescription for Oxy/Norcos... they are all allowed to drive. DH's former coworkers all had prescriptions and were not only allowed to drive, but allowed to operate multi-ton equipment at a steel mill. Maybe my area is different, though...

[Deleted]

Nov 1, 2012 14:53:34 GMT -5 Sum Dum Gai said:

I find your lack of concern for public safety disturbing.

Right now employers are saying they can't fill jobs because a huge percentage of people can't pass the drug scree right? So, right now there are already a lot of people smoking pot. How many people were killed last year because they were hit by a driver that was smoking pot? I've never heard of one. How many crane operators dropped an I-beam on somebody because they were smoking pot on the job? If it happened it certainly wasn't in the news.

People have been smoking pot in reasonably large numbers for several decades. Either there's a media conspiracy keeping us from hearing about all the mayhem they're causing, or people are actually less impaired from smoking pot than they are from alcohol, because I hear about drunk driving accidents all the time.

Lack of concern for public safety, my ass. If that's really your concern we should outlaw booze. Drunks kill people every single day in this country. Outlaw that crap, and lock up anyone they find with so much as a single can of beer. Just like we do for pot. We'll all be safe in no time.

dui and dwi doesnt necessarily mean alcohol

you know that...right?

[midjd]

You aren't following me. So there hasn't been a proven link between MJ and drug addiction. Ok, I get that. But how can you then extrapolate that to say for 100% sure that one doesn't exist? You said yourself the previous studies were falwed, so doesn't that mean instead of just saying "oh, a link doesn't exist, it's perfectly safe" we should be saying "ok, let's do a real scientific study."

I never said a link doesn't exist - I said a link has not been shown to exist.

[Phoenix84]

"People have been smoking pot in reasonably large numbers for several decades. Either there's a media conspiracy keeping us from hearing about all the mayhem they're causing, or people are actually less impaired from smoking pot than they are from alcohol, because I hear about drunk driving accidents all the time."

Or maybe we don't know what the full ramifications of pot use really are? Or what the consequences of legalizing it would be?

[NomoreDramaQ1015]

A doctor isn't going to perscribe a drug to you that makes you a public menice behind the wheel or on the job, not without also signing something giving you medical leave


Sure they can. They can't control if you take 4-6 pills at once instead of the 2 they prescribed you to take.

DH says that he is still amazed he did not harm anyone when he was driving around high on painkillers.

Just because they are safe if following proper dosage doesn't mean they are 100% safe.

Yet as everyone has said if you royally fuck up while high as a kite on painkillers all you have to do is bring in your Rx, they have no way to prove you took a handful of them right before you started working.

[Phoenix84]

Nov 1, 2012 14:57:50 GMT -5 midjd said:

You aren't following me. So there hasn't been a proven link between MJ and drug addiction. Ok, I get that. But how can you then extrapolate that to say for 100% sure that one doesn't exist? You said yourself the previous studies were falwed, so doesn't that mean instead of just saying "oh, a link doesn't exist, it's perfectly safe" we should be saying "ok, let's do a real scientific study."

I never said a link doesn't exist - I said a link has not been shown to exist.

Ok, and you want to legalize it when we don't know for sure?

[Phoenix84]

Nov 1, 2012 14:58:30 GMT -5 NomoreDramaQ1015 said:

A doctor isn't going to perscribe a drug to you that makes you a public menice behind the wheel or on the job, not without also signing something giving you medical leave


Sure they can. They can't control if you take 4-6 pills at once instead of the 2 they prescribed you to take.

DH says that he is still amazed he did not harm anyone when he was driving around high on painkillers.

Just because they are safe if following proper dosage doesn't mean they are 100% safe.

Yet as everyone has said if you royally fuck up while high as a kite on painkillers all you have to do is bring in your Rx, they have no way to prove you took a handful of them right before you started working.

And why is royally fucking up any better if it's legal or not? Shouldn't be focusing less on legality and who gets in trouble for what and how to avoid potentially damaging or deadly fuck ups in the first place?

[midjd]

Ok, and you want to legalize it when we don't know for sure?

Well, it was legal for about 150 years... I suppose we could look to the past for some idea of potential effects.

We could also look at the states in which it is currently legal. To my knowledge none of them have experienced huge upticks in drug use or violent crime.

I wonder what sort of alcohol studies were conducted when they decided to end Prohibition?

[NomoreDramaQ1015]

Another issue I have with pot is THC stays in your system for a long time. A lot of the harder drugs leave your system much faster.

DH had co-workers who snorted cocaine AT WORK in the breakroom. Every so often something would come up and they'd be called in for a drug test. All they had to do was wait 24 hours till their next hit and they'd come out clean because coke clears your system that fast.

Yet if I smoked pot three days ago I'm still going ot come up positive and get canned.

Illegal is illegal, but if you want to do drug testing make it so you have to take one on the spot without notice so nobody has a chance to sober up first. DH's co-workers shouldn't have been working high on coke any more than someone should be working after smoking a joint.

[Sum Dum Gai]

Don't you think something like this should be thoroughly studied before it's legalized?

It has been studied. It's been constantly studied for the past several decades. There's a mountain of research out there on it. Some of the studies are obviously biased and faulty, on both sides of the issue by the way. However, there's also a lot of solid research on it. I haven't read every pot study ever done by any means, I doubt anyone has, but from what I have seen marijuana isn't that dangerous. Scientists have never really thought it was all that dangerous. It was originally outlawed to keep industrial hemp off the market. There was some public outrage over marijuana smoking in the early part of last century because south american immigrants smoked it, and we have a long history of not liking people of color and their practices. They were going to be the downfall of society and all that. Then there was the war on drugs, which was a misguided approach to a problem that was blown out of proportion to begin with. It has quite a bit in common with prohibition actually, in the sense that it's not really accomplishing anything except enriching criminal organizations, while failing to address the problem it was supposed to solve in any way. The only difference is that a large segment of the US population still believes the drug propaganda while we turned against the alcohol propaganda much quicker.

[Deleted]

from florida statutes related to dwi arrests

Chemical substances listed in 877.111 include nitrous oxide, acetone, and ether. Examples of controlled substances found in chapter 893 are traditional “street drugs” like cocaine and marijuana and a wide range of prescription medications like oxycodone, hydrocodone, morphine, and methamphetamine.

[NomoreDramaQ1015]

And why is royally fucking up any better if it's legal or not?

It's not but the argument against legalizing pot seems to keep coming back to "people will fuck up on the job".

People are already doing it with perfectly legal substances and like Dark said impaired is impaired. I don't understand why pot is somehow more worse and should be illegal than someone coming to work high as a kite on legal painkillers.

[InsertCoolName]

If it would help some people with OD-ing I'm all for it!!!! Just sayin!

[Phoenix84]

"Well, it was legal for about 150 years... I suppose we could look to the past for some idea of potential effects."

Society was very different back then.

"We could also look at the states in which it is currently legal. To my knowledge none of them have experienced huge upticks in drug use or violent crime."

We could, that would be a good thing to look at.

"I wonder what sort of alcohol studies were conducted when they decided to end Prohibition?"

again, MJ is not alcohol. For people who keep harping that correlation doesn't equal causation, you sure make a lot of leaps in logic, comparisons, and assumptions between alcohol and prescription drugs and pot.

[midjd]

"I wonder what sort of alcohol studies were conducted when they decided to end Prohibition?"

again, MJ is not alcohol. For people who keep harping that correlation doesn't equal causation, you sure make a lot of leaps in logic and comparisons between alcohol and prescription drugs.

They are not the same substances, but they are similar enough to make comparisons. They are all drugs that alter your state of mind and your perception.

What else would marijuana be comparable to, if these comparisons are invalid? It's a plant, should we compare it to geraniums instead? Wheat?

[Angel!]

Nov 1, 2012 14:35:42 GMT -5 @gdgyva said:

If you legalize it, a % of people that never used it before can and would become regular users....some people are stickler for following the laws of the country

and yes....if 10% of users do go on to harder drugs BECAUSE of mj smoking....that to me is enough to not legalize it, period.

This logic doesn't really follow IMO. These people have never used MJ before because they are sticklers for the law, but all of a sudden a huge percentage will decide to move on to harder, illegal drugs?

I also think making MJ legal will limit these people's ability to move on to harder drugs. If you aren't a previous drug user & start buying MJ OTC, then you have to go out of their way to find a crack dealer if you want to move on to hard stuff. Much more difficult than today where if your MJ guy doesn't sell coke you can pretty much guarantee he knows someone who does.

[Sum Dum Gai]

dui and dwi doesnt necessarily mean alcohol

you know that...right?

I do know that. I also know the police blotter, and most news stories, list the substance that the suspect was allegedly impaired by at the time of the accident. I've never seen one that listed marijuana. I've seen plenty that list alcohol. A few for coke, heroin, etc.

These things make the news all the time. Especially if the person killed was a child. Have you ever seen a news story about a kid being run over by somebody that was high on pot? We all know people are smoking it, even though it's illegal, so where's all the danger to the public? Why don't we see it in the news?

[midjd]

Probably a conspiracy of the liberal media.