3point14
Pi
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2005
- Messages
- 23,085
This quote always comes to mind when this topic comes up.
https://qz.com/645990/nixon-advisor...iminalize-black-people-and-the-anti-war-left/
“You want to know what this was really all about?” he asked with the bluntness of a man who, after public disgrace and a stretch in federal prison, had little left to protect. “The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”
https://qz.com/645990/nixon-advisor...iminalize-black-people-and-the-anti-war-left/
“You want to know what this was really all about?” he asked with the bluntness of a man who, after public disgrace and a stretch in federal prison, had little left to protect. “The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”
EHocking
Penultimate Amazing
Not every thread is about Trump.
arthwollipot
Limerick Purist
I'm pretty sure that's been demonstrated to be not true. The whole idea of a "gateway drug" is extremely flawed.
Personal anecdote, so make of it what you will. I used marijuana heavily for a decade. At no point was I even remotely tempted to try anything else. I tried LSD once but that was the extent of my experimentation. Not only did I have no desire to chase any dragon, the pot was at the time so easily available to me despite being illegal that the idea of expending extra effort to acquire a substance that was worse for me and would probably entail a higher penalty if I was caught was one that I actively eschewed. Being stoned made me happy - I had no desire for anything else.
I can say with certainty that if pot was as easily accessible to me now as it was in the 90s, I wouldn't have an alcohol problem. But I would have a pot problem. To me, that's less worse.
But who wants to drive a car when they're high?
I swear, the laziness of the stoner is the biggest safety net when compared to the recklessness of the drunk.
Drunk, I thought I could drive to Vegas to keep partying for the night. High, I thought the couch may not be mine, but it's in a nice field, so it will do.
Drunk, my car was an extension of my emotions and I could warp through traffic like an F1 driver. High, there was probably a yard nearby we could crash in if we just asked the folks nicely, let's slow down and look.
I was pulled over while speeding at least three times while drunk. I had a cop flash his lights at me once while I was high because I was doing 20mph below the speed limit on the highway.
Neither were safe, but if I were to bet on how I was going to die during those years I would have put more money on drunk driving than high driving, even though I had easier access to pot most of that time.
I am in disagreement with your chart. Notably a drug used in execution is only moderately lethal. I cannot think of anyone I have seen who has died of caffeine, but I can think of someone who has died from cannabis.
There is also differences in addictiveness, there are people (like myself) who go from regular caffeine use (mostly green tea) to no caffeine use with no issue, whilst others find it difficult to not end the day with a spliff. Addiction varies with individuals. The harms also differ. Few RTA resulted from caffeine but there may be deaths from people driving whilst intoxicated from cannabis.
Depending on the socio-political system the government should be in the business of minimising harm and cost. In a socialist system such as most of the developed world is, people who develop health harms, or become dependant, or cause accidents are a general cost and the government has a responsibility to society to minimise those harms/costs.
(To reveal conflicts of interest to my knowledge I have got drunk once*, and may have taken cannabis cookies once, I have never taken nicotine and only had morphine as a pre med - which was pretty amazing! I do take regular caffeine.)
*in my defence I did not realise that fruit punch contained alcohol.
3point14
Pi
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2005
- Messages
- 23,085
How? The lethal dose of cannabis is thought to be all but unreachable:
https://www.who.int/medicines/access/controlled-substances/Section3-thc-Toxicology.pdf?ua=1
"The toxicity of 9-THC is very low compared to most other recreational and pharmaceutical drugs. Following oral administration, the median lethal dose (LD50) was 800 mg/kg in rats [3], up to 3000 mg/kg in dogs and up to 9000 mg/kg in monkeys [4]. It has been calculated that a lethal dose in a 70 kg human would be approximately 4 g [5] and thatsuch a dose could not be realistically achieved in a human following oral consumption, smoking or vaporising the substance, as9-THC has a large margin of safety [6]. "
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
Have you got any evidence to support this theory? It isn't even established that useage rates would go up - let alone that irresponsibility (like DUI) would increase.
He did say, "likely", which implies speculation not certainty. I think its a reasonable conjecture. We will likely see in a few years.
arthwollipot
Limerick Purist
As far as I am aware, where it has been legalised, usage has not gone up significantly. People who did not use marijuana prior to legalisation are not picking it up in droves now that it is legal. But I don't have a source for that impression and it's very early anyway to know for sure.
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
"Possibly" might imply speculation but "likely" implies a better than even chance. You can't use that word without evidence.
EHocking
Penultimate Amazing
Whereas lethal overdose of caffeine is well documented.
And apparently on the increase.
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
Alcohol is Dunning-Kruger in a bottle: it makes you dumber and clumsier while at the same time making you feel much more confident about yourself.
One of the primary risks of alcohol is how your behavior changes when you are drunk. You'll take stupid risks that you wouldn't if you were sober. You lose your inhibitions.
One of the primary risks of alcohol is how your behavior changes when you are drunk. You'll take stupid risks that you wouldn't if you were sober. You lose your inhibitions.
arthwollipot
Limerick Purist
Whereas marijuana makes you paranoid and lazy and less likely to take risks.
Lukraak_Sisser
Philosopher
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2009
- Messages
- 6,029
I had a look at the causes of traffic accidents in The Netherlands, given the legality of marijuana here. In 2017 about 6% of the registered accidents were due to alcohol, less than 1% was due to drugs.
This is presented as in line with earlier years.
So it seems not to be much of an issue, even after several decades of legal marijuana use. (mobile phones on the other hand...)
So, I left Seattle to for a Job in Denver and had to get tested. I even asked what would happen if I was positive for pot. Nobody could answer that question. The job was for a firm that occasionally did work for the feds, so I guess its possible they wouldn't have hired me.
One of my favorite self coined sayings, "There's never been a pot fueled riot."
Last edited:
CORed
Penultimate Amazing
Based on personal experience, both as a driver and as a passenger of a driver high on marijuana, I think marijuana is a non-issue for driving. I would not say the same for alochol. Also, marijuana combined with alcohol is probably worse than alcohol alone.
CORed
Penultimate Amazing
In my opinion, criminalization is worse than the disease even for really bad stuff like methamphetamine or heroin.
In terms of driving high, it think its plausible that folks will be less afraid of being caught by police if they are high if its legal. It is then possible that some fraction of them will be less inhibited in driving while slightly high. I wouldn't bet one way or another, but I won't be surprised if legalization does increase the instances of driving high.