Buzzy

Active Member
How about we talk about how many motor vehicle accidents alcohol, mobile devices ("distracted driving"), and sleep deprivation are responsible for? Right, because "the truth is seldom pleasant,we live in a world of denial about many things." We wouldn't have made it past page five if those had been the topic.
I agree that distracted driving has become more and more common; I see people texting or whatever they're doing with their phones, while behind the wheel. That's damn dangerous and I read about accidents caused by distracted drivers in our local newspaper. I have zero doubt alcohol has caused more tragedy with vehicles than marijuana. @girlfisher's post somewhere back in this thread said "Car crashes involving marijuana went up 300% between 2010 and 2013". That's very alarming to me.

Said it before - its legal. I don't care anymore. Just hope folks will use care and caution. And one more thing I agree with - "we wouldn't have made it past page five if..........." You have to admit, this thread is illuminating. I bet old pot in the back seat JohnS didn't anticipate the response.
 
B

bennysbuddy

How about we talk about how many motor vehicle accidents alcohol, mobile devices ("distracted driving"), and sleep deprivation are responsible for? Right, because "the truth is seldom pleasant,we live in a world of denial about many things." We wouldn't have made it past page five if those had been the topic.
Start a thread & we shall know
 

tkww

Member
I agree that distracted driving has become more and more common; I see people texting or whatever they're doing with their phones, while behind the wheel. That's damn dangerous and I read about accidents caused by distracted drivers in our local newspaper. I have zero doubt alcohol has caused more tragedy with vehicles than marijuana. @girlfisher's post somewhere back in this thread said "Car crashes involving marijuana went up 300% between 2010 and 2013". That's very alarming to me.

And what I'm pointing out is, where is that data coming from? Where's the database where every state manditorily reports the causes of car crashes? Because I really want some context. Not because I think driving under the influence of anything is ok. But because we are socially conditioned to accept risk form X but not from Z. And social conditioning is not a good basis for policy.

I'd like to see the data on FDA-sanctioned, given-by-your-doctor opiode-induced car crashes. (Just FYI, it's up ZZZ% since 20YY). Let's not forget: the same government that says jack-diddle about sugars, meat consumption, pesticides/fungicides, or any number of other things that are correlative to health problems/death is telling you that marijuana is as dangerous as heroin. And yes, it's legally classified as more dangerous than cocaine. Take a moment with that.

Again, I love websites that just throw numbers out there. "Employers will spend ______ on "drug abuse." And that applies to marijuana? Go on, give me a pie chart of just which drugs are employers are spending money dealing with the abuse of. Meanwhile, here's some _____ from your doctor.

If I told you lightning strikes or lotto winnings were up 50% from last year, would you suddenly start freaking out at every thunderstorm or start playing the lotto? Granted those are extreme examples, but the point remains: without context, a lot of things sound like something they're not.

Again, it's not an argument for more impaired driving. But if we're truly concerned about reducing public health risks, the conversation has to be had in context.

Said it before - its legal. I don't care anymore. Just hope folks will use care and caution. And one more thing I agree with - "we wouldn't have made it past page five if..........." You have to admit, this thread is illuminating. I bet old pot in the back seat JohnS didn't anticipate the response.

I appreciate what you're saying, but personally, this thread isn't illuminating. It's depressing, IMO. These are literally the same arguments that have been going on for decades and decades. We're just having them in out in the open now. The reason we're seeing legalization en masse is because a huge chunks of the population have decided the arguments don't add up to the consequences of prohibition.
 

b_illymac

Soap Lake Posse
WFF Moderator
And what I'm pointing out is, where is that data coming from? Where's the database where every state manditorily reports the causes of car crashes? Because I really want some context. Not because I think driving under the influence of anything is ok. But because we are socially conditioned to accept risk form X but not from Z. And social conditioning is not a good basis for policy.

I'd like to see the data on FDA-sanctioned, given-by-your-doctor opiode-induced car crashes. (Just FYI, it's up ZZZ% since 20YY). Let's not forget: the same government that says jack-diddle about sugars, meat consumption, pesticides/fungicides, or any number of other things that are correlative to health problems/death is telling you that marijuana is as dangerous as heroin. And yes, it's legally classified as more dangerous than cocaine. Take a moment with that.

Again, I love websites that just throw numbers out there. "Employers will spend ______ on "drug abuse." And that applies to marijuana? Go on, give me a pie chart of just which drugs are employers are spending money dealing with the abuse of. Meanwhile, here's some _____ from your doctor.

If I told you lightning strikes or lotto winnings were up 50% from last year, would you suddenly start freaking out at every thunderstorm or start playing the lotto? Granted those are extreme examples, but the point remains: without context, a lot of things sound like something they're not.

Again, it's not an argument for more impaired driving. But if we're truly concerned about reducing public health risks, the conversation has to be had in context.



I appreciate what you're saying, but personally, this thread isn't illuminating. It's depressing, IMO. These are literally the same arguments that have been going on for decades and decades. We're just having them in out in the open now. The reason we're seeing legalization en masse is because a huge chunks of the population have decided the arguments don't add up to the consequences of prohibition.
Toxicology reports are pretty standard for car wrecks, impared driver arrests, impared worker situations etc. This info is easily plugged into pie charts and used for research. I'm sure you understand this but it simply appears you just don't want to believe the data or want to divert the attention to something you think is more important.
 

Old Man

A very Old Man
WFF Supporter
I just love these threads that go on and on. Pretty soon nobody seems to know or remember what it all is about. Shit you can put anything on here and somebody will tell you that you are wrong.

I was reading about drunk driving. Hell, I used to drive better when I was drunk than when I was sober. I just paid more attention to what I was doing.
 

Elliott5400

Active Member
Boy, we sure got a few loud ones on this forum.

I think some of you might need to take a chill with some t r o u t w h i s t l e
 

tkww

Member
Toxicology reports are pretty standard for car wrecks, impared driver arrests, impared worker situations etc. This info is easily plugged into pie charts and used for research.

Thank you, captain obvious.

I'm sure you understand this but it simply appears you just don't want to believe the data or want to divert the attention to something you think is more important.

I'm asking for a consolidated sorce of this data, that was gathered comprehensively and thoroughly so as not to present a cherry-picked, incomplete picture of what's going on. I'm pretty sure you understand, but you'd rather divert the attention to something you think is more important.
 

b_illymac

Soap Lake Posse
WFF Moderator
I'm asking for a consolidated sorce of this data, that was gathered comprehensively and thoroughly so as not to present a cherry-picked, incomplete picture of what's going on. I'm pretty sure you understand, but you'd rather divert the attention to something you think is more important.
"Marijuana is the illicit drug most frequently found in the blood of drivers who have been involved in vehicle crashes, including fatal ones. " And the source:
  1. Brady JE, Li G. Trends in Alcohol and Other Drugs Detected in Fatally Injured Drivers in the United States, 1999–2010. Am J Epidemiol. January 2014:kwt327. doi:10.1093/aje/kwt327
Google is pretty cool if you haven't tried it.
 

Nick Clayton

WFF Supporter
Considering how long THC can be detected in one's system it would definitely make sense that its the one most often found after fatal crashes.

Then again just because its detected in a test doesn't really prove that much. A fat guy like me can fail a test several months after smoking. I know this first hand. So in theory I could smoke heavily at home on my couch for months on end, sober up for a month, get in a fatal car crash and test positive. That would seem to skew the truth of the scenario just a bit. One might assume that marijuana use was at fault for the crash when the reality there is much different.

Perhaps things have changed and I'm totally wrong, but I always understood that testing doesn't prove someone IS high, but rather that they HAD been high at some point in the past, the timeline of which is affected by many factors.
 

Salmo_g

WFF Supporter
"Marijuana is the illicit drug most frequently found in the blood of drivers who have been involved in vehicle crashes, including fatal ones. " And the source:
  1. Brady JE, Li G. Trends in Alcohol and Other Drugs Detected in Fatally Injured Drivers in the United States, 1999–2010. Am J Epidemiol. January 2014:kwt327. doi:10.1093/aje/kwt327
Google is pretty cool if you haven't tried it.

Billy,

I think the point is that even this source amounts to cherry picking. That is, of course marijuana is the illicit drug most frequently detected in drivers' blood in crashes simply because marijuana is the most commonly used illicit drug. Remove the adjective "illicit," and then the drug most frequently detected is alcohol far more likely than not.

Something that I think is lost in translation in this thread is that "words matter." What I mean is, how something is said or written can affect the meaning as much or more than what is said or written. Careless and uninformed use of language has become so common I'm sometimes amazed that people actually think they understand one another.

Also the point that Nick makes about THC being detectable long after the effect of the drug has worn off undermines many of the claims made about pot's deleterious effects. BTW, I'm not championing nor advocating using any drug and then driving. I'm just being an asshole advocating that people listen and look at what they say and write so as to know that what they say and write actually conveys their intended meaning.
 

Sir Angler II

The Salmon Slayer
Four! I don't care if adults smoke, chew, vaporize, eat or whatever. Their choice. I do care if folks partake and drive (under the influence). I also see pot as a potential (read: potential) gateway to other drug use. Someone up the line mentioned DARE; is there anything like that in schools now? (Maybe we should ask the school teacher that started this thread?) It really is the kids I do have concerns about.

Peace.
Yes. I am in middle school and I do see pot use, sadly. Of course, my district sucks, so...
 

Support WFF | Remove the Ads

Support WFF by upgrading your account. Site supporters benefits include no ads and access to some additional features, few now, more in the works. Info

Latest posts

Top