05-25-2005, 07:19 PM
|
#41
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Kalispell, Montana
|
I haven't said ANYTHING about the law you guys were discussing. In fact, what I have said in response to one of Ag's posts might lead one to believe that I wouldn't support such a law. So why is everyone jumping on me for defending it? This thread has a pattern of people attributing what they want me to be saying to me as if I've said it.
I responded to 'Roos marijuana hysteria thingy. To me, it seemed as if he was saying people are insane (my choice of word, don't mean it literally) because marijuana is no big deal. My response is that I think people who need it and justify it's use by saying it's not as bad as alcohol or cigarettes are immature.
Can I be any more clear?
__________________
I am in love with Montana. For other states I have admiration, respect, recognition, even some affection, but with Montana it is love." - John Steinbeck
|
|
|
05-25-2005, 07:31 PM
|
#42
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver
|
I was going to start a thread about this a little while ago.
I think the new legislation that essentially forces people, including family, to spy on each other is borderline evil.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
|
|
|
05-25-2005, 08:20 PM
|
#43
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Clinching Party
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Displaced Flames fan@May 25 2005, 07:19 PM
I haven't said ANYTHING about the law you guys were discussing. In fact, what I have said in response to one of Ag's posts might lead one to believe that I wouldn't support such a law. So why is everyone jumping on me for defending it? This thread has a pattern of people attributing what they want me to be saying to me as if I've said it.
I responded to 'Roos marijuana hysteria thingy. To me, it seemed as if he was saying people are insane (my choice of word, don't mean it literally) because marijuana is no big deal. My response is that I think people who need it and justify it's use by saying it's not as bad as alcohol or cigarettes are immature.
Can I be any more clear?
|
People aren't insane for being "anti-marijuana". Prosecuting the smoking/selling/not-snitching-on-it as though it's on par with armed robbery and sexual assault is insane. It is a hysterical reaction.
What is immature about comparing pot to legal drugs like booze, smokes or caffeine? What is immature about bringing up inconsistencies and hypocrisy in the legal system?
|
|
|
05-25-2005, 08:26 PM
|
#44
|
#1 Goaltender
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Five-hole+May 26 2005, 12:41 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Five-hole @ May 26 2005, 12:41 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Quote:
Originally posted by Displaced Flames fan@May 25 2005, 04:59 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-Agamemnon
|
Quote:
@May 25 2005, 11:43 PM
Don't have a problem w/ the word, have a problem w/ the hypocracy of drinking beer, while deriding weed.# I condone your word useage
|
Why? Are they exactly the same?
Sell me on that one. Be careful though.
|
Well that's kind of an unfair demand, isn't it? What sort of evidence are you looking for?
Why don't you sell us on why they're different enough to warrant passing a bill such as this one? You do seem to be defending its illegality, after all.[/b][/quote]
Agreed.
I'll abandon 'care', and say that they are, more or less, the same. In fact, having taken liberal amounts of each on their own, and together, I can tell you that if I were make a decision on which 'drug' should be legal, marijuana would beat liquor, hands down.
It is safer to drive under the influence of marijuana. Driving under the influence of anything (sleeping pills, drowsy medication) is stupid and wrong, because you could kill someone. That said, liquor currently kills 10's of 1000's per year on the road. Marijuana? I doubt there are statistics... I also doubt they're anywhere near that high, else-wise we'd have had MADD all over it. They're not.
Having plenty of experience with both, I have no idea why weed is seen as 'worse' in anyway than liquor.
Like Five-Hole said, maybe you should describe how they're different, and that will contextualize things a bit better for us.
If you haven't done marijuana in the past decade, you may not be the best judge on how it's worse, better, or the same as liquor. Me, on the other hand... I was the guy who went to jail in Half-Baked
|
|
|
05-25-2005, 08:51 PM
|
#45
|
Retired
|
double post.
|
|
|
05-25-2005, 08:52 PM
|
#46
|
Retired
|
Quote:
Originally posted by RougeUnderoos+May 26 2005, 02:20 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (RougeUnderoos @ May 26 2005, 02:20 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Displaced Flames fan@May 25 2005, 07:19 PM
I haven't said ANYTHING about the law you guys were discussing. In fact, what I have said in response to one of Ag's posts might lead one to believe that I wouldn't support such a law. So why is everyone jumping on me for defending it? This thread has a pattern of people attributing what they want me to be saying to me as if I've said it.
I responded to 'Roos marijuana hysteria thingy. To me, it seemed as if he was saying people are insane (my choice of word, don't mean it literally) because marijuana is no big deal. My response is that I think people who need it and justify it's use by saying it's not as bad as alcohol or cigarettes are immature.
Can I be any more clear?
|
People aren't insane for being "anti-marijuana". Prosecuting the smoking/selling/not-snitching-on-it as though it's on par with armed robbery and sexual assault is insane. It is a hysterical reaction.
What is immature about comparing pot to legal drugs like booze, smokes or caffeine? What is immature about bringing up inconsistencies and hypocrisy in the legal system? [/b][/quote]
Rogue, you fail to see the point here, its the Drug dealers who are the ones being affected by this law.
If this was users, you might have a point - but its not.
The people peddling this smut to society are the ones being punished, and I'm not sheding a tear for them getting loads of Jail time (although the more I read up on this bill, it does look to be too extreme).
|
|
|
05-25-2005, 09:03 PM
|
#47
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Clinching Party
|
Quote:
Originally posted by CaramonLS+May 25 2005, 08:52 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (CaramonLS @ May 25 2005, 08:52 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Quote:
Originally posted by RougeUnderoos@May 26 2005, 02:20 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-Displaced Flames fan
|
Quote:
@May 25 2005, 07:19 PM
I haven't said ANYTHING about the law you guys were discussing.# In fact, what I have said in response to one of Ag's posts might lead one to believe that I wouldn't support such a law.# So why is everyone jumping on me for defending it?# This thread has a pattern of people attributing what they want me to be saying to me as if I've said it.
I responded to 'Roos marijuana hysteria thingy.# To me, it seemed as if he was saying people are insane (my choice of word, don't mean it literally) because marijuana is no big deal.# My response is that I think people who need it and justify it's use by saying it's not as bad as alcohol or cigarettes are immature.
Can I be any more clear?
|
People aren't insane for being "anti-marijuana". Prosecuting the smoking/selling/not-snitching-on-it as though it's on par with armed robbery and sexual assault is insane. It is a hysterical reaction.
What is immature about comparing pot to legal drugs like booze, smokes or caffeine? What is immature about bringing up inconsistencies and hypocrisy in the legal system?
|
Rogue, you fail to see the point here, its the Drug dealers who are the ones being affected by this law.
If this was users, you might have a point - but its not.
The people peddling this smut to society are the ones being punished, and I'm not sheding a tear for them getting loads of Jail time (although the more I read up on this bill, it does look to be too extreme). [/b][/quote]
Nope. I don't fail to see the point. I'm defending the "drug dealer" in this equation.
|
|
|
05-25-2005, 09:06 PM
|
#48
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Kalispell, Montana
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Agamemnon@May 26 2005, 02:26 AM
Agreed.
I'll abandon 'care', and say that they are, more or less, the same. In fact, having taken liberal amounts of each on their own, and together, I can tell you that if I were make a decision on which 'drug' should be legal, marijuana would beat liquor, hands down.
It is safer to drive under the influence of marijuana. Driving under the influence of anything (sleeping pills, drowsy medication) is stupid and wrong, because you could kill someone. That said, liquor currently kills 10's of 1000's per year on the road. Marijuana? I doubt there are statistics... I also doubt they're anywhere near that high, else-wise we'd have had MADD all over it. They're not.
Having plenty of experience with both, I have no idea why weed is seen as 'worse' in anyway than liquor.
Like Five-Hole said, maybe you should describe how they're different, and that will contextualize things a bit better for us.
If you haven't done marijuana in the past decade, you may not be the best judge on how it's worse, better, or the same as liquor. Me, on the other hand... I was the guy who went to jail in Half-Baked
|
I urge you to read my posts in the thread again.
I'm not going to repeat myself.
__________________
I am in love with Montana. For other states I have admiration, respect, recognition, even some affection, but with Montana it is love." - John Steinbeck
|
|
|
05-25-2005, 11:48 PM
|
#49
|
Powerplay Quarterback
|
If Caffine, Alcohal, Marjiuana and Tobacco were compared for their addictability I'd have to say that Mj is my pick for the least. A guy who passed a 17yo a joint shouldn't deserve a sentence of 5 years. That's simply ######ed. If it was hard drugs I might agree, but gimme a break.
________
weed vaporizers
Last edited by simonsays; 01-21-2011 at 12:11 AM.
|
|
|
05-25-2005, 11:56 PM
|
#50
|
CP's Resident DJ
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: In the Gin Bin
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Agamemnon+May 26 2005, 02:26 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Agamemnon @ May 26 2005, 02:26 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
It is safer to drive under the influence of marijuana. Driving under the influence of anything (sleeping pills, drowsy medication) is stupid and wrong, because you could kill someone. That said, liquor currently kills 10's of 1000's per year on the road. Marijuana? I doubt there are statistics... I also doubt they're anywhere near that high, else-wise we'd have had MADD all over it. They're not.[/b]
|
This is perhaps the single most irresponsible post I have seen on these boards. Do you have any idea how that statement appears to younger posters here?
In NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM is it safer to drive under the influence of marijuana. You contradict yourself with your second line. Driving under the influence of anything... is stupid and wrong. I would add to that "INCLUDING marijuana".
Your point about liquor versus mj is also so freakin' silly it is beyond belief that you actually posted it. How many of those deaths due to drunk driving ALSO involved the driver toking up? None? Riiiiight. And currently it is much easier to measure alcohol intoxication and there are clear laws (driving over 0.08) are geared directly towards that. MADD knows that, thus that is where they are focusing their attention. And MADD is Mothers Against Drunk Driving, not MATI (Mothers Against Toking Idiots.)
You .... are.... delusional.
Quote:
Originally posted by Agamemnon@May 26 2005, 02:26 AM
Having plenty of experience with both.....
|
Congratulations... loser.
Quote:
Originally posted by Agamemnon@May 26 2005, 02:26 AM
Like Five-Hole said, maybe you should describe how they're different, and that will contextualize things a bit better for us.
|
For arguements sake, lets say marijuana and alcohol are equal demons.
What about hash? Hash oil? Mushrooms? LSD? Cocaine? Morphine? Heroine? Crack? etc, etc, etc....
You don't usually go to the next drug without starting somewhere as "innocent" as marijuana. Don't be so foolish to think that it might not happen to you still, if it already hasn't. It happens easily enough. I know. I have been there, done it. Breaking out of the cycle was the hardest thing I ever did in my life. Getting started on mj was the root cause of a ton of future problems.
Wake up.
<!--QuoteBegin-Agamemnon@May 26 2005, 02:26 AM
If you haven't done marijuana in the past decade, you may not be the best judge on how it's worse, better, or the same as liquor. [/quote]
On the contrary you little condecending dipshinguard, those of us that have gone through the cycle are BETTER judges about this. I have seen more lives ruined by drugs (including your precious mj) than all other social issues combined (including alcohol abuse.) I have EXPERIENCED where you have not gone... yet. I do not wish that on you or anyone else.
You are only fooling yourself.
|
|
|
05-26-2005, 12:44 AM
|
#51
|
Retired
|
Quote:
Originally posted by simonsays@May 26 2005, 05:48 AM
If Caffine, Alcohal, Marjiuana and Tobacco were compared for their addictability I'd have to say that Mj is my pick for the least. A guy who passed a 17yo a joint shouldn't deserve a sentence of 5 years. That's simply ######ed. If it was hard drugs I might agree, but gimme a break.
|
Things affect people differently. I had a roomate who got himself addicted to pot, which effectively ruined his life for about 2 years.
|
|
|
05-26-2005, 10:04 AM
|
#52
|
#1 Goaltender
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Calgary
|
Lol, I didn't realize I was a role model for minors here. Apparently you take care to think of the young'uns when you post?
I stick by my comment; it is safer to drive under the influence of marijuana than liquor. Plain and simple truth, regardless of how irresponsible it is. If you'd bother to decipher my post, the very reason I put the second phrase in there was to verify that, indeed, no drugs are safe to drive under the influence of. That said, thousands and thousands of people do it every day. Oops... was I not supposed to say that w/ the kiddies around?
Quote:
Your point about liquor versus mj is also so freakin' silly it is beyond belief that you actually posted it. How many of those deaths due to drunk driving ALSO involved the driver toking up? None? Riiiiight.
|
Now we're getting somewhere. Please back up your claim. I can site drunk-driving stats till I'm blue in the face. Find me some weed-related accident stats, and you'll have a leg to stand on. Right now, you have none. You're also the only one here who said that no accident has ever been caused by marijuana, I don't know where you got that from. I know a poster on this board who totalled his car under the influence of marijuana. If he'd been drunk, he, and someone else, would probably be dead. I'm not making a value-call here, just looking at the physics of it.
Quote:
MADD knows that, thus that is where they are focusing their attention. And MADD is Mothers Against Drunk Driving, not MATI (Mothers Against Toking Idiots.)
|
Right. There's a reason why MADD focuses on drunk-driving; because that's the problem. In fact, that's a great point you made, there is no MATI. There's probably a reason for that.... no?
Quote:
Congratulations... loser.
|
Your debating skills are legend. Thanks for contributing. I could call you a useless little hack, whose emotions are bigger than his brain, but that wouldn't be polite.
Quote:
You don't usually go to the next drug without starting somewhere as "innocent" as marijuana. Don't be so foolish to think that it might not happen to you still, if it already hasn't. It happens easily enough. I know. I have been there, done it. Breaking out of the cycle was the hardest thing I ever did in my life. Getting started on mj was the root cause of a ton of future problems.
|
Sure, marijuana is a gateway drug. Because it's illegal, you're forced to buy it from a private dealer. While at the dealer's, he says 'i've got this, try it, i've got that, give it a whirl'. You're much more likely to indulge in 'hard' drugs if you're conveniently offered them. If weed was sold at the Mac's, I doubt the guy at the counter would say 'if you want better stuff, meet me out back'. You'd buy your weed and leave, w/ no contact w/ the harder stuff. That's why it's a gateway drug.
Quote:
On the contrary you little condecending dipshinguard, those of us that have gone through the cycle are BETTER judges about this. I have seen more lives ruined by drugs (including your precious mj) than all other social issues combined (including alcohol abuse.) I have EXPERIENCED where you have not gone... yet. I do not wish that on you or anyone else.
|
Sooo... marijuana ruins more lives than all other social issues combined including alcohol abuse. This is a totally baseless claim.
And, more name-calling. I've found the bigger the coward in real life, the bigger the man online. That's not you though, I'm sure.... You've got a huge axe to grind. We're here for (semi) intelligent discussion on a topic, not to have you drop your value judgements on us. If I respected you, I'd listen... but you've given me no reason to.
Quote:
You are only fooling yourself
|
We've got a full courtroom here, judge, jury, and executioner all rolled into one.
Your say on the matter is hardly final, though I doubt you realize that. Your emotional attachment to this argument makes you very, very offensive. Maybe it's the topic, or maybe it's you, but either way, it's totally unwarranted. Go offend someone else, I'm too busy to care.
|
|
|
05-26-2005, 10:08 AM
|
#53
|
#1 Goaltender
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally posted by CaramonLS+May 26 2005, 06:44 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (CaramonLS @ May 26 2005, 06:44 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-simonsays@May 26 2005, 05:48 AM
If Caffine, Alcohal, Marjiuana and Tobacco were compared for their addictability I'd have to say that Mj is my pick for the least. A guy who passed a 17yo a joint shouldn't deserve a sentence of 5 years. That's simply ######ed. If it was hard drugs I might agree, but gimme a break.
|
Things affect people differently. I had a roomate who got himself addicted to pot, which effectively ruined his life for about 2 years.[/b][/quote]
Sure. And I've got an uncle whose been addicted to alcohol for 15 years, now there's a ruined life.
No one here is saying that marijuana is a victimless, innocent drug. It's a drug, plain and simple. Like other drugs (alcohol) it can be addictive, and potentially ruin your life. Fine, fair enough. Does that mean we should ban alcohol? Just because we know stories about people abusing pot means that it's somehow worse than people abusing alcohol or cigarettes?
I just fail to see why we let one mind-bending substance around, and yet ban an equivalent.
Someone show me stats that definitively places weed as a 'worse' drug than alcohol. If there aren't any, then what's the problem?
It should be noted that this is not an argument as to whether or not people should do it; they're already doing it by the millions and millions. It's whether or not people should be thrown in jail if they do it.
|
|
|
05-26-2005, 10:37 AM
|
#54
|
Retired
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Agamemnon+May 26 2005, 04:08 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Agamemnon @ May 26 2005, 04:08 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Quote:
Originally posted by CaramonLS@May 26 2005, 06:44 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-simonsays
|
Quote:
@May 26 2005, 05:48 AM
If Caffine, Alcohal, Marjiuana and Tobacco were compared for their addictability I'd have to say that Mj is my pick for the least. A guy who passed a 17yo a joint shouldn't deserve a sentence of 5 years. That's simply ######ed. If it was hard drugs I might agree, but gimme a break.
|
Things affect people differently. I had a roomate who got himself addicted to pot, which effectively ruined his life for about 2 years.
|
Sure. And I've got an uncle whose been addicted to alcohol for 15 years, now there's a ruined life.
No one here is saying that marijuana is a victimless, innocent drug. It's a drug, plain and simple. Like other drugs (alcohol) it can be addictive, and potentially ruin your life. Fine, fair enough. Does that mean we should ban alcohol? Just because we know stories about people abusing pot means that it's somehow worse than people abusing alcohol or cigarettes?
I just fail to see why we let one mind-bending substance around, and yet ban an equivalent.
Someone show me stats that definitively places weed as a 'worse' drug than alcohol. If there aren't any, then what's the problem?
It should be noted that this is not an argument as to whether or not people should do it; they're already doing it by the millions and millions. It's whether or not people should be thrown in jail if they do it. [/b][/quote]
I didn't say it was victimless and there was no need to Hijack that response. He suggest some stuff about addictiveness to try to justify his points about pot being safer.
|
|
|
05-26-2005, 10:41 AM
|
#55
|
Norm!
|
some interesting stats
drug fact sheet
- An ongoing study of a large shock trauma unit found that 19 percent of crash victims under age 18 tested positive for marijuana.9
- An estimated 38,000 high school seniors in the U.S. reported in 2001 that they crashed while driving under the influence of marijuana and 46,000 reported that they crashed while impaired by alcohol.10
another facts sheet
another sheet
So I'm not buying the fact that smoking dope and driving is any less dangerous or stupid then drinking and driving.
Now if you don't mind I just came back into this topic to get my hat
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
|
|
|
05-26-2005, 10:43 AM
|
#56
|
#1 Goaltender
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally posted by CaramonLS+May 26 2005, 04:37 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (CaramonLS @ May 26 2005, 04:37 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Quote:
Originally posted by Agamemnon@May 26 2005, 04:08 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by CaramonLS@May 26 2005, 06:44 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-simonsays
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
@May 26 2005, 05:48 AM
If Caffine, Alcohal, Marjiuana and Tobacco were compared for their addictability I'd have to say that Mj is my pick for the least. A guy who passed a 17yo a joint shouldn't# deserve a sentence of 5 years. That's simply ######ed. If it was hard drugs I might agree, but gimme a break.
|
Things affect people differently. I had a roomate who got himself addicted to pot, which effectively ruined his life for about 2 years.
|
Sure. And I've got an uncle whose been addicted to alcohol for 15 years, now there's a ruined life.
No one here is saying that marijuana is a victimless, innocent drug. It's a drug, plain and simple. Like other drugs (alcohol) it can be addictive, and potentially ruin your life. Fine, fair enough. Does that mean we should ban alcohol? Just because we know stories about people abusing pot means that it's somehow worse than people abusing alcohol or cigarettes?
I just fail to see why we let one mind-bending substance around, and yet ban an equivalent.
Someone show me stats that definitively places weed as a 'worse' drug than alcohol. If there aren't any, then what's the problem?
It should be noted that this is not an argument as to whether or not people should do it; they're already doing it by the millions and millions. It's whether or not people should be thrown in jail if they do it.
|
I didn't say it was victimless and there was no need to Hijack that response. He suggest some stuff about addictiveness to try to justify his points about pot being safer.[/b][/quote]
Well, my 'hijacking' of your response was meant to further fuel discussion, not to say you're wrong, no harm intended.
Quote:
He suggest some stuff about addictiveness to try to justify his points about pot being safer.
|
Right... and I think your post implies that marijuana is an addictive substance. You're right, of course. I'm trying to make sure that the fact that alcohol, and the others, are also declared addictive substances.
I guess what we need here are stats as to how addictive certain drugs are. I'd be interested to know the results. I'll see what I can find.
|
|
|
05-26-2005, 10:47 AM
|
#57
|
#1 Goaltender
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Calgary
|
It looks like we'll be engaging in another 'who's stats are correct' war.
I found a few things that run counter to Captain Crunch's stats... so I have no idea what the truth must be.
CRASH CULPABILITY STUDIES
“For each of 2,500 injured drivers presenting to a hospital, a blood sample was collected for later analysis.
There was a clear relationship between alcohol and culpability. … In contrast, there was no significant increase in culpability for cannabinoids alone. While a relatively large number of injured drivers tested positive for cannabinoids, culpability rates were no higher than those for the drug free group. This is consistent with other findings.”
REFERENCE:
Logan, M.C., Hunter, C.E., Lokan, R.J., White, J.M., & White, M.A. (2000). The Prevalence of Alcohol, Cannabinoids, Benzodiazepines and Stimulants Amongst Injured Drivers and Their Role in Driver Culpability: Part II: The Relationship Between Drug Prevalence and Drug Concentration, and Driver Culpability. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 32, 623-32.
“Blood samples from 894 patients presenting to two Emergency Departments for treatment of motor vehicle injur[ies] … were tested for alcohol and other drugs.
… Based on alcohol and drug testing of the full range of patients … alcohol is clearly the major drug associated with serious crashes and greater injury. Patients testing positive for illicit drugs (marijuana, opiates, and cocaine), in the absence of alcohol, were in crashes very similar to those of patients with neither alcohol nor drugs. When other relevant variables were considered, these drugs were not associated with more severe crashes or greater injury.”
REFERENCE: P. Waller et al. 1997. Crash characteristics and injuries of victims impaired by alcohol versus illicit drugs. Accident Analysis and Prevention 29: 817-827.
“Blood specimens were collected from a sample of 1,882 drivers from 7 states, during 14 months in the years 1990 and 1991. The sample comprised operators of passenger cars, trucks, and motorcycles who died within 4 hours of their crash.
… While cannabinoids were detected in 7 percent of the drivers, the psychoactive agent THC was found in only 4 percent. … The THC-only drivers had a responsibility rate below that of the drugfree drivers. … While the difference was not statistically significant, there was no indication that cannabis by itself was a cause of fatal crashes.”
REFERENCE: K. Terhune. 1992. The incidence and role of drugs in fatally injured drivers. Washington, DC: US Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Report No. DOT HS 808 065.
|
|
|
05-26-2005, 10:48 AM
|
#58
|
#1 Goaltender
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Calgary
|
And;
ON-ROAD PERFORMANCE STUDIES
“Marijuana's effects on actual driving performance were assessed in a series of three studies wherein dose-effect relationships were measured in actual driving situations that progressively approached reality.
… THC's effects on road-tracking after doses up to 300 µg/kg never exceeded alcohol's at bacs of 0.08%; and, were in no way unusual compared to many medicinal drugs. Yet, THC's effects differ qualitatively from many other drugs, especially alcohol. Evidence from the present and previous studies strongly suggests that alcohol encourages risky driving whereas THC encourages greater caution, at least in experiments. Another way THC seems to differ qualitatively from many other drugs is that the formers users seem better able to compensate for its adverse effects while driving under the influence.”
REFERENCE: H. Robbe. 1995. Marijuana’s effects on actual driving performance. In: C. Kloeden and A. McLean (Eds) Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety T-95. Adelaide: Australia: HHMRC Road Research Unit, University of Adelaide. Pp. 11-20.
“This report concerns the effects of marijuana smoking on actual driving performance. … This program of research has shown that marijuana, when taken alone, produces a moderate degree of driving impairment which is related to consumed THC dose. The impairment manifests itself mainly in the ability to maintain a lateral position on the road, but its magnitude is not exceptional in comparison with changes produced by many medicinal drugs and alcohol. Drivers under the influence of marijuana retain insight in their performance and will compensate when they can, for example, by slowing down or increasing effort. As a consequence, THC’s adverse effects on driving performance appear relatively small.”
REFERENCE: W. Hindrik and J. Robbe and J. O’Hanlon. 1993. Marijuana and actual driving performance. Washington, DC: US Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Report No. DOT HS 808 078.
|
|
|
05-26-2005, 10:51 AM
|
#59
|
#1 Goaltender
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Calgary
|
And, just to bombard with information;
DRIVING SIMULATOR STUDIES
“Overall, it is possible to conclude that cannabis has a measurable effect on psychomotor performance, particularly tracking ability. Its effect on higher cognitive functions, for example divided attention tasks associated with driving, appear not to be as critical. Drivers under the influence of cannabis seem aware that they are impaired, and attempt to compensate for this impairment by reducing the difficulty of the driving task, for example by driving more slowly.
In terms of road safety, it cannot be concluded that driving under the influence of cannabis is not a hazard, as the effects of various aspects of driver performance are unpredictable. However, in comparison with alcohol, the severe effects of alcohol on the higher cognitive processes of driving are likely to make this more of a hazard, particularly at higher blood alcohol levels.”
REFERENCE: B. Sexton et al. 2000. The influence of cannabis on driving: A report prepared for the UK Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Road Safety Division). Crowthorne, Berks: TRL Limited.
SUMMARIES
“At the present time, the evidence to suggest an involvement of cannabis in road crashes is scientifically unproven.
To date …, seven studies using culpability analysis have been reported, involving a total of 7,934 drivers. Alcohol was detected as the only drug in 1,785 drivers, and together with cannabis in 390 drivers. Cannabis was detected in 684 drivers, and in 294 of these it was the only drug detected.
… The results to date of crash culpability studies have failed to demonstrate that drivers with cannabinoids in the blood are significantly more likely than drug-free drivers to be culpable in road crashes. … [In] cases in which THC was the only drug present were analyzed, the culpability ratio was found to be not significantly different from the no-drug group.”
REFERENCE: G. Chesher and M. Longo. 2002. Cannabis and alcohol in motor vehicle accidents. In: F. Grotenhermen and E. Russo (Eds.) Cannabis and Cannabinoids: Pharmacology, Toxicology, and Therapeutic Potential. New York: Haworth Press. Pp. 313-323.
“Cannabis leads to a more cautious style of driving, [but] it has a negative impact on decision time and trajectory. [However,] this in itself does not mean that drivers under the influence of cannabis represent a traffic safety risk. … Cannabis alone, particularly in low doses, has little effect on the skills involved in automobile driving.”
REFERENCE: Canadian Senate Special Committee on Illegal Drugs. 2002. Cannabis: Summary Report: Our Position for a Canadian Public Policy. Ottawa. Chapter 8: Driving Under the Influence of Cannabis.
“This report has summarized available research on cannabis and driving.
… Evidence of impairment from the consumption of cannabis has been reported by studies using laboratory tests, driving simulators and on-road observation. ... Both simulation and road trials generally find that driving behavior shortly after consumption of larger doses of cannabis results in (i) a more cautious driving style; (ii) increased variability in lane position (and headway); and (iii) longer decision times. Whereas these results indicate a 'change' from normal conditions, they do not necessarily reflect 'impairment' in terms of performance effectiveness since few studies report increased accident risk.
REFERENCE: UK Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions (Road Safety Division). 2000. Cannabis and Driving: A Review of the Literature and Commentary. Crowthorne, Berks: TRL Limited.
“Overall, we conclude that the weight of the evidence indicates that:
1) There is no evidence that consumption of cannabis alone increases the risk of culpability for traffic crash fatalities or injuries for which hospitalization occurs, and may reduce those risks.
2) The evidence concerning the combined effect of cannabis and alcohol on the risk of traffic fatalities and injuries, relative to the risk of alcohol alone, is unclear.
3) It is not possible to exclude the possibility that the use of cannabis (with or without alcohol) leads to an increased risk of road traffic crashes causing less serious injuries and vehicle damage.”
REFERENCE: M. Bates and T. Blakely. 1999. “Role of cannabis in motor vehicle crashes.” Epidemiologic Reviews 21: 222-232.
“In conclusion, marijuana impairs driving behavior. However, this impairment is mitigated in that subjects under marijuana treatment appear to perceive that they are indeed impaired. Where they can compensate, they do, for example by not overtaking, by slowing down and by focusing their attention when they know a response will be required. … Effects on driving behavior are present up to an hour after smoking but do not continue for extended periods.
With respect to comparisons between alcohol and marijuana effects, these substances tend to differ in their effects. In contrast to the compensatory behavior exhibited by subjects under marijuana treatment, subjects who have received alcohol tend to drive in a more risky manner. Both substances impair performance; however, the more cautious behavior of subjects who have received marijuana decreases the impact of the drug on performance, whereas the opposite holds true for alcohol.”
REFERENCE: A. Smiley. 1999. Marijuana: On-Road and Driving-Simulator Studies. In: H. Kalant et al. (Eds) The Health Effects of Cannabis. Toronto: Center for Addiction and Mental Health. Pp. 173-191.
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:23 AM.
|
|