All that matters is the last study MARIJUANA AND ACTUAL DRIVING PERFORMANCE, sponsored by the US Dept. of Transportation.
There’s also this latest study (abstract only; read completely.)
lol, nice. Shoots that theory out of the water.
Always figured that my Xanax screwed me up more than pot ever did.
A slippery slope analogy: We, in Australia and NZ, have changed many uni masters degrees to not include a thesis component and to cater for a specific market, many MBAs have been made one year, paper only degrees. By changing masters degrees to suit public demand, we now have a dumbed down system, with many MBAs for example, not worth the paper they are printed on.
If we legalise pot, will society not become used to the idea of ‘drugs’ and become desensitised to cocaine for example, then want to legalise cocaine?
There has, however, been rather an upswing of alcohol-related problems in the Uk in recent years, possibly as a result of relaxed licensing laws. I’m not sure if that means anything in relation to marijuana though.
And good responses generally folks; (although I have been arguing somewhat doggedly, please don’t think I’m going to dogmatically defend any position here - my mind is very far from set on any aspect of this issue). Thanks for keeping this civil.
Most probably. You seem repelled by this. Unshackle yourself from the vestiges of the Puritan ethic. It is no more an accurate guide to what keeps society strong than other philosophies in practice. The pull and dangers of drugs, in general, have been greatly exaggerated. Only the spectacular and fringe failures are highlighted and made to represent the drug culture as a whole. This book makes for nice reading: Saying Yes. And the following book is a nice reference written by a certified substance-abuse medical review officer: Illegal Drugs.
That certainly is interesting; do you happen to know how extensive the study was? (In rough terms of how many people were tested).
A (less recent)study commisioned by the UK government did detect changes in driver behavious as a result of cannabis use, but did not (under the test conditions) discern any greater accident risk. Also interesting.
110 subjects and 816 controls.
I#ll also admit that when I read between the lines of the UK report, I can hear Richard E Grant, as Minister for Road Safety (or some such), saying “What do you mean it makes no difference? We can’t tell them that, we’re the Ministry of Fucking Transport! Can’t we just tell them it was inconclusive?”
I don’t think I have a puritan ethic, I do however, have an interest in personality types and youth’s interest in drugs.
As has been said before, if a large number of people can’t drink alcohol without drinking to excess, causing violent behaviour and driving accidents, will we not be adding a large number of people with drug problems to the mix.
Just out of interest, Gyan, how old are you?
Alcohol is a hard toxic drug. Cocaine, amphetamines and PCP (stimulants-at-large) might pose the risk of adding to these problems, not marijuana, psychedelics or opiates(I’m ignoring violence by those in the midst of opiate withdrawal. That’s largely a side-effect of the current policies).
I’m 24.
It wouldn’t be a very Great Debate if no one argued the opposing side!
I was intrigued by the study cited about driving. One of the standard anti-pot arguements I have seen bandied about was the “can’t test drivers for it” argument. But the study perhaps implies that if you do not have enough pot in your system to be obviously stoned, that you are not any more impaired than a typical driver. So the arresting officer could use standard field sobriety tests and if you passed, off you go.
But I just bought “Reefer Madness”, so I know that even a few puffs on a marijuana cigarette will make you CRAZEEEE! The Drug War. With us since 1936.
Are the majority of the pro-drug contingent in their twenties and thirties and if so why do those who are older than this, not agree with legalising drugs?
I contend that it has something to do with the development of EQ - which occurs naturally with experience and age. The majority of those with high EQ are not going to advocate use of dope, regardless of whether it is legalised or not. Legalising it will most certainly increase useage because of availability etc.
Like I said, even pot messes with your mind in ways that may be very subtle. Someone who does not have a background or personality that deals with stress well and then smokes dope, may become violent under stress. Aside from violence, certain personality types may have real coping issues if they smoke dope on a regular basis.
Somehow I expected you to bring up this point. Just like everything else, most people become more conservative as they get older, which in effect means that unless there’s a spectacular argument, older people, in general, won’t jump over the fence. In today’s mainstream culture, drugs are taboo. What most people know about drugs are due to secondhand information and media dissemination. The primary segment of the population that has direct exposure to drugs are the 16-30 group. They’re mainly the ones, who’re reading about the menace that drugs purportedly are, and consuming these drugs, only to find out that the issue has lot more shades of grey. The only way you’ll get most of middle-aged and seniors to cross over, is if these segments start smoking up and then realize just how distorted the anti-drug message is. If they assume,a priori, that drugs are bad and hence not try them, that only constitutes a vicious cycle. Older people, in general, are also risk-averse. This may be due to “wisdom” or simply because they fear a big change in the system within which they’re already entrenched, and where they doubt their ability to adapt successfully. After all, most people aim to settle down, in most ways.
If you concur that The Economist(UK) better represents older commentators, here’s their argument for liberal drug policies.
Of course. So do movies, TV, food, books, and friends. Everything can and does affect you, both explicity and subtly. The key thing to realize is that it’s the person and not the device(drugs). A violent personality will gravitate towards whatever provides satisfaction. If drugs are absent, there are plenty other catalysts available. The drugs aren’t the cause.
I seriously recommend that you read both the Economist survey I linked to, and Saying Yes. Just give it a sincere read. You’re always welcome to disagree with both of them, but please don’t do it beforehand.
About all these studies.
As I said, there are hints in there that the bodies commisionning the studies weren’t entirely happy with the largely neutral results - as evidenced by the subsequent comments about what undetected phenomena might still be the case and how the test might not reflect reality.
In truth though, we should admit that if using marijuana adversely affects the behaviour or driving skills of a person, but in ways that aren’t detectable by any means, then actually, it hasn’t adversely affected them at all.
In other words, if it makes a difference, we should be able to design a test to objectively measure and assess that difference; if we can’t do that, we might as well concede that it doesn’t make a difference.
What kind of feedback do you get about your behaviour from your peers, friends and family? Do they detect a difference between when you have not smoked for a month or more and when you are regularly smoking dope or other substances.
What kind of differences do they detect? If there are differences, which ‘you’ do they like or get on with the best? Do they notice how well you cope with various life stresses?
Yes ofcourse TV, food, books, movies and friends influence people but they don’t have the same degree of personality change that occur with drug use.
I probably shouldn’t have played the age card (although I am not all that old myself!) but I wonder if you will feel the same way about drugs in 10/15 years time.
Yes, probably the majority of us get more conservative with age, but we also get wiser with more life experience, hence increased EQ.
Ah, the old “you’ll agree with me when you’re in my shoes” ploy.
As I mentioned upthread, many things can be abused. Tobacco, alcohol, cheeseburgers, gambling. The possibility that some people will abuse is not a good reason to make it unavailable to the rest of the population. A free society is not one where every risk is removed.
As for age… my uncle was famous in his MFA (Master of Fine Arts) program for growing Cheerful Charlie in the early 70’s to share with friends. He is astounded and saddened that dope is still illegal.
I don’t consume marijuana or amphetamines or cocaine or heroin, even occasionally. I prefer tryptamines and phenylethylamines, about once every few weeks.
Are you conjuring up some kind of “multiple personality” scenario? I don’t suffer such a situation. This is not even true of most drugs. I’ve to ask you what your drug experiences have been.
Are you saying that “drugs” influence people more than choice of friends or everyday mundane stimulation??? Probably it seems that way because not everyone consumes drugs, whereas almost everyone has some friends. So, changes before/after drugs are demarcated and attributed directly to drugs, whereas influences of friends are only objectively and comprehensively studied by psychologists and the like. Humans are social animals. We are all embedded within some community. They’ve a far greater cumulative effect than some indulgences with non-psychedelics.
This is only an assumed and not necessary truth, perpetuated by the social power structure of society. Older people are more jaded and less optimistic, and also in control. What they’ve experienced firsthand is the loss of idealism and innocence. That’s all there is to this acquired “wisdom”. Few people, relatively, within any age group, have a true grasp of the emergent dynamics of societies and communities.
As a former smoker, let me just say this:
Just say no to legalization!
I simply can not envision a United States where every Tom, Dick, & Harry can walk into Cosco and buy an ounce of kind bud. Building an army of potheads is not the direction I want America to go in.
Can you clarify this a little? Occasional smoker? Daily? Why did you quit? Why are you so opposed to legalization?
Do you think that availability of pot will automatically lead to widespread abuse?