Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's still a big if. The actual report employees baffling methodology, comparing states to neighboring states in an attempt to figure out the impact of legalization within a given state. That's ridiculous on its face. E.g., Oregon, Washington, and Colorado all have major cities with lots of traffic and lots of people moving in. States like Utah, Nebraska, Wyoming, and Idaho are not huge growth states and don't have large cities (though SLC is at least in the ballpark).
Where's the obvious analysis? Compare before and after legalization and see if there's a statistically significant uptick. That's the obvious thing to do, and I find it rather telling that instead of doing the obvious thing that will give a valid answer, they opted to do this weird state to state comparison and then tried to back out the increase from that.
Excellent points.
Odd/flawed methodology leads to odd/flawed conclusions.
Doesn't matter how it seems to you. If it is against the law then that's what you have to deal with. The law is not interested in how you feel about it.
That's why The Lady is blindfolded.
Stoners should just go live in a place where it is legal.
Unjust laws should be handled via Jury Nullification.
Heard this on my local news last night.
They pointed out one very glaring omission from this study: nothing in this report indicated how many of those accidents involved someone who was actually under the influence of marijuana.
Claiming that legalization is the cause is completely spurious without evidence that any of these drivers were impaired.
It could just as easily be due to increased volume due to population growth over the same period, poor road conditions, more people texting while driving, etc.
To attribute the rise in accidents to a particular cause and then not offer evidence to prove the cause renders any such study meaningless.
Direct evidence flies in the face of the agenda of this "study" and those who are pushing it. And yes, it's all about pushing an agenda to keep pot illegal, no matter what kind of pretzel contortions the OP and like minded individuals go through to convince us otherwise. And funnier still, it's an argument being pushed by the so called proponents of "smaller government." And I'm certain they are not astute enough or honest enough to see or admit to their own hypocrisy.
Anyone else notice the OP left out the bits where they show a bunch of studies saying no proven link exists..
funny how posters do that? They cherry pick the bits they like and ignore the bits they don't
That, and while I disagree with the premise of the OP, IF he believes that legalization of Marijuana has led to more crashes, based on the statistics, then I wonder what conclusion he would make about the legalization of Guns and US Statistics on gun-violence vs that of the rest of the world.
As long as we're pointing out flaws, and calling out cherry picking.... Just saying.
The fact that poisons like cigarettes and alcohol are legal while a healing herb like pot isn't says a lot about this society.
Actually, the majority of the country is in favor of legalization. The problem is we now have an extremely regressive regime in power. Sessions is a throwback to the 50s regarding views of marijuana and to the 80s regarding views of mandatory sentencing.
You would think with all the real violent and destructive crime and white collar corruption and fraud, that Sessions would be busy enough without resorting to ancient views of marijuana and punishment.
You can't talk to stoners. They have all the answers.
Fact is, using marijuana is stupid, and people will drive while stoned. Whereas police can test for blood alcohol level, it is a little more difficult to determine who drive while stoned - or even what "stoned" is.
Heard this on my local news last night.
They pointed out one very glaring omission from this study: nothing in this report indicated how many of those accidents involved someone who was actually under the influence of marijuana.
Claiming that legalization is the cause is completely spurious without evidence that any of these drivers were impaired.
It could just as easily be due to increased volume due to population growth over the same period, poor road conditions, more people texting while driving, etc.
To attribute the rise in accidents to a particular cause and then not offer evidence to prove the cause renders any such study meaningless.
I heard it on tne news too yesterday, TigerLily
I then looked up what they were talking about.
Your post and what you heard sounds similiar to what I heard.
The insurance institute has information of crash rates in legized pot.
But the guy was honest in saying of tbe sorts they are keeping other information that coukd be a factor also.
I think it is good to look at it if there is a corrulation.
It is a fact that legalized states have an increase.
I lso think its a good discussion to have(without being mean to each other)
We all share the roads and i dont think any off us want to see someone cause an accident and hurt anyone due to being impaired.
And as is quite common, they rely on correlation, not causation. Correlation can be highly misleading.
Yes it can. I remember years ago when the government studies pointed out that most heroin users had smoked pot, they determined (stupidly) that pot smoking let to heroin use. Then a study was done that showed most pot smokers had chewed gum first. So using the same "logic" it showed that chewing gun led to smoking pot. You can make studies say whatever you want.
Like the car race between an American car and a Russian car. The American car finished miles ahead.....In the Russian news they said that the Russian car finished second, while the American one finished next to last. (this was an old joke from the 60s, but it points out twisting stuff to suit yourself)
Yes it can. I remember years ago when the government studies pointed out that most heroin users had smoked pot, they determined (stupidly) that pot smoking let to heroin use. Then a study was done that showed most pot smokers had chewed gum first. So using the same "logic" it showed that chewing gun led to smoking pot. You can make studies say whatever you want.
Like the car race between an American car and a Russian car. The American car finished miles ahead.....In the Russian news they said that the Russian car finished second, while the American one finished next to last. (this was an old joke from the 60s, but it points out twisting stuff to suit yourself)
We should ban air. Air is a gateway drug to crime. Proof? Every single criminal who has ever existed breathed air. They are all junkies, every single one, hooked on that sweet sweet oxygen.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
