Oh, c’mon Bricker, you know better than that! Coincidence is not causation, you could replace “weed” with “Sesame Street” in that study and likely get very similar results.
That’s hardly a fair criticism, given that the study itself includes the word “causal”, right there in the bolded section.
Although it seems that at best that study would be a valid argument against legalized marijuana FOR MINORS, which isn’t something even most hardcore liberatrians seem to want.
And correllation is not coincidence.
This suggests alcohol and tobacco have more causal relationship than marijuana:
Your study says
but this implies that cannabis use leads to alcohol dependence, where the exact opposite is just as likely to be true. Cite:
And this cite states:
While the rates for marijuana are higher (85x and 17x, respectively), there still is a correlation between alcohol use and harder drugs–in fact, 90% of children who use marijuana smoked or drank first.
It certainly can be. But that evades the larger issues, which is that we live in a drug-soaked culture. Speed kills and alcohol positively massacres. Its anybody’s guess as to how many prescription junkies we got walking around.
When white guys in suits get the money, that’s a socially acceptable drug. Otherwise, its a scourge, etc.
Well, if any given drug is legalized you can be sure that the money will start flowing to white men in suits in short order. Not that I think that has anything to do with whether or not any given drug should be legalized, but I think you have your cause and effect backwards. We libertarian types tend to be quite, well, libertarian when it comes to drug laws.
Are you serious?
Why would you assume I was referring solely to the alleged “gateway drug” affect, or that alcohol isn’t a gateway drug? Alcohol is the most destructive addictive drug in the history of the human race, far and away. Drunk driving accidents alone will kill more people this year than have died as a direct result of marijuana use in, in all likelihood, the entire history of the United States.
So let me ask some more straightforward question;s
-
Is your position that marijuana should be illegal, and alcohol should not be illegal, based solely on the “Gateway drug” allegation?
-
If I could provide you with studies showing alcohol is in fact a gateway drug, would you advocate it be made as illegal as you want marijuana to be?
-
Do you consider, in your position, the fact that alcohol is more destructive in other ways (e.g. its massive effect on traffic fatalities) than marijuana?
-
Do you use alcohol?
99% of people that drink milk go on to try alcohol at one point or another in ther lives. I certainly fit into that particulat factoid.
Thus, obviously, we agree that milk and alcohol should be considered illegal and their comsumption penalized by – at the very least – lenghty incarceration alongside rapists and murderers.
And here I thought we’d never agree on anything!
BTW, ever try any Panama Red? Sure as heck gets rid of my Fury.
- The study says CAUSAL. That’s why I offered it as a cite to show causation.
- Show me a peer-reviewed study that shows a causal link between Sesame Street and hard drugs, then.
John, I don’t have time to go into this at lenght for the moment, but IMHO, you’re being really, really naive in you rresponse to 'luc – who has it exactly right.
The day they legalize pot is the day many a respectable white man in suits looses the lerger part of his income.
Nota Bene: I’m rather ambivalent as to how to handle hard drugs – I’ve seen what they can do, alcohol included of course – but pot? I can think of a bunch of people I know, on-line and off, that could only benefit from its consumption.
Can you – or anyone else – point out how marijuana is anything but benign as compared to alcohol? Pardon my saying so, but I think that’s an impossible task. My own uptight sister and her two elder kids for starters.
Anyway, for the sake of the point I’m trying to make, agree with my above statement for a sec – which if you do your research, I believe you’ll have to – and tell me who do you think stands to make the most profit by keeping it that way (illegal)?
The study says CAUSAL. You are offering a correlation.
Nope. Never heard of it. Uh-uh. Nosiree, Bob.
It’s unclear to me what your point is.
…and no, its not because I’m high – drugs laws here are draconian, even if this country is likely one (or THE one) biggest drug-running money laundering havens as long as you know the “right” people. Think “Midnight Express.” I’m simply too old to chance it or bother.
John, I don’t have time to go into this at lenght for the moment, but IMHO, you’re being really, really naive in you rresponse to 'luc – who has it exactly right.
The day they legalize pot is the day many a respectable white man in suits looses the lerger part of his income.
Nota Bene: I’m rather ambivalent as to how to handle hard drugs – I’ve seen what they can do, alcohol included of course – but pot? I can think of a bunch of people I know, on-line and off, that could only benefit from its consumption. My own uptight sister and her two elder kids for starters.
Can you – or anyone else – point out how marijuana is anything but benign as compared to alcohol? Pardon my saying so, but I think that’s an impossible task.
Anyway, for the sake of the point I’m trying to make, agree with my above statement for a sec – which if you do your research, I believe you’ll have to – and tell me who do you think stands to make the most profit by keeping it that way (illegal)?
How is that relevant to the decision?
Seeing as how his post was in reponse to yours where you said:
… I think he’s showing that yes, there are indeed such studies, and that a case can be made for both alcohol and tobacco as “gateway drugs.”
Looking at the three of them, I find alcohol to be the most dangerous in the short-term, as drunk driving is fatal and you can actually kill yourself by drinking enough. Tobacco has nasty long-term health effects and is highly addictive. Marijuana, on the other hand, is primarily a gateway drug to watching too much television and eating half a bag of chips.
Might I suggest you read what I was answering to? IOW, try reading the thread prior to knocking a tooth or two prior to posting.
Answer: its a racket with little to no foundation, plain and simple. Think Prohibition and Al Capone. Just not as flashy.
:::::grumble, glumble. Would someone feed the hamsters, please. Had to hit the reply button five times prior to being able to counter:::::
Sure as heck makes nigh near impossible to carry on an online debate.
See what I mean? This post was written prior to my last one and after trying to get it through numerous time I finally got a response that said something to the effect: " Your post is a duplicate of one posted within the past five minutes" :rolleyes:
Prior post, thankfully saved in Word:
The study is bullshit, period. Yes, I know, not a great rebuttal, but as the late, hardly lamented, Albedaran use to say: " My post is my cite." Then again (regrettably?) I like facts to back my opinion – and experience – as well:
Marijuana Myths, Marijuana Facts
Give it a read. You might be surprised at how little you know about what you are so quick and cocksure to harshly condemn.
Hell, perhaps if you do (read it) you might not only allow for gay marriage, but for said couples to get a buzz on prior to watching a movie, listening to some tunes, or (gaaaps!) making love.
</end hijack>… but pardon me if I don’t try to respond anymore tonight. This sucks.
Brainiac4, thank you, yes, that was the most significant part of my post.
Not sure what’s confusing Bricker so much 2night.
Bad batch or lack of munchies. 
:::hitting “reply” once…doesn’t work, shrug, doesn’t work:::
Nite all.
I’d rather debate Bricker’s dress sense.
I mean, white belt and shoes? Puh-leeze, darling, the seventies weren’t current even when we were in them.