• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is legalizing marijuana good for society?

That's not showing causation. If germany had decriminalized marijuana and then experienced either a rise or fall in use then we'd have something to discuss.
That's funny, you took the words right out of my keyboard!

Since Germany did not decriminalize marijuana, and they saw the same increase in use as the Netherlands during that period, then the increase of use in the Netherlands had almost nothing to do with their liberal marijuana laws. Otherwise Germany's rates would have remained more or less the same while the Netherlands' rates increased.

Once again, there is no known correlation between drug laws and the rate of drug use, in the Netherlands, Germany, or anywhere else in the world.
 
I know why they have little effect. My brother went thru more programs than you could shake a stick at, all to no avail.

I'm sorry to hear about that, but this doesn't affect anything. Addicts are less likely to get help if they face legal consequences for doing so


Just because the justice systme is misused, doesn't mean that drug abusers should go to jail.
 
Arrests and confiscations are ongoing. What is happening on the "regulation front?"
And yet, drug usage has increased since the War on Drugs started. Let's not forget how much it is costing us each year to put non-violent offenders behind bars:

But the actual financial cost of the drug war is much higher, with many drug-reform advocacy groups quoting the cost at $50 billion, which is equal to the combined budgets for all of our country's agriculture, energy, and veteran's programs.

And still, a close examination shows that the total annual costs of the drug war probably exceed $50 billion.

US CA: What Does The Drug War Cost?
 
"No hope, with out dope"---from the drunk at the end of the bar.
 
the same tired arguments, same script, and now it turns out same person, way to be consistent Dutch:

Your source (DEA) said:
Surveys reveal that lifetime prevalence of cannabis in Holland increased consistently and sharply. For the age group 18-20, the increase is from 15 percent in 1984 to 44 percent in 1996......


ME said:
Should we be concerned with the number of people who use marijuana at least once in their life, or should we be concerned with people who use it more frequently -enough for it to be detrimental?

The study your mined argument is citing states:
We examined Dutch lifetime prevalence data from various sources between 1970 and 1996 (MacCoun & Reuter, 1997). (Past-month or past-year prevalence estimates would be more informative but are scarce, especially prior to 1986.)

[edit- at least you went directly to the DEA for the propaganda this time around]

http://www.opposingviews.com/argumen...-has-increased

So in a relaxed atmosphere, more people try marijuana, go figure! I assume since 3x the amount of people who tried marijuana would translate into a threefold increase in the amount of use on a regular basis, and that after 30 years of relaxed policies, it would be sufficient time for this dramatic spike in regular users to manifest itself, and frequent use of MJ in Amsterdam would be sky high when compared to the rest of Europe, where marijuana remains illegal.

I will call upon the EMCDDA (European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction) and their data for my argument.

First:

Of those aged 15–64 who have ever used cannabis, only 30 % have done so during the last year (42). But, among those who have used the drug in the last year, on average 56 % have done so in the last month.

Estimating intensive and long-term patterns of use is an important public health issue. Daily or almost daily use (use on 20 days or more in the last 30 days) may be an indicator of intensive use. Data on this form of cannabis use in Europe was collected in 2007/08 as part of a 'field trial' coordinated by the EMCDDA in collaboration with national experts and the Reitox focal points of 13 countries.

Well the first thing that jumps out (especially since I bolded it) is that lifetime use is most certainly not a good reference point - as admitted in the MCCoun & Reuter study your expert is citing, and leaning on heavily for his rebuttal - and that there is a huge discrepancy between those that try it at least once and those that use it on an annual basis, yet alone a regular basis.

What we need to be concerned with is regular, and habitual use, especially when approaching this from a harm reduction standpoint.

Looking at the table provided in the EMCDDA report on the state of the Cannabis issue in Europe we see something that immediately jumps out:

Highest prevalence countries (lifetime age 15-64):

Denmark (36.5 %),
France (30.6 %),
United Kingdom (30.1 %),
Italy (29.3 %)

[edit -for some stupid reason I had mistook Denmark for the Netherlands in my original post]

- nope no Netherlands here. [/edit]

This trend holds true as well when you look at it more narrowly for the 15-34 year group, and 15-24 year group. Unfortunately we do not have minors isolated so we cannot tell trends specifically among those who are not of legal age.

now lets look to see where Dutch use fares when analyzing the yearly and monthly usage trends.. Its probably a safe bet to assume they are at the top as well since legalization leads to such rampant use, I will use the 15-64 year old group again for consistency:

Highest prevalence countries (last year use 15-64):

Italy, Spain (11.2 %),
Czech Republic (9.3 %),
France (8.6 %)

Highest prevalence countries (last month use 15-64):

Spain (8.7 %),
Italy (5.8 %),
United Kingdom,
France, Czech Republic (4.8 %)

This is also fairly consistent when you consider 15-34, and 15-24 breakdowns as well, the only change is Italy gets replaced by the UK in the top 4.

What?? where did the Netherlands go?? Must be a glitch. I bet they just missed the cut for mention.. lets look more closely at the data this table is drawing on:

EMCDDA | Statistical bulletin 2008: Table GPS-7: Frequency of use of cannabis among all adults (aged 15 to 64 years) and young adults (aged 15 to 34 years) in nationwide surveys among the general population. Part (i) Frequency of use among all users

here we go last month usage for 15 different European countries, and we even have another important stat, habitual use (20 days+ /30).

Where do the Dutch end up, they were not in the top 4.. they must be close though, lax laws undoubtedly result in rampant usage.

last month usage (dutch 15-64): 3.3%

Netherlands comes in at 8th out of 15 European countries.. of which all have a much more punitive stance in comparison,

prevalence of daily or almost daily use (Netherlands 15-34): 1.6%

Netherlands comes in at 8th out of 15.. again!!!

So where does that leave us?? the Dutch had an increase in those who had at least tried it, and in fact by far leads the other European countries in those who have tried it; however the correlation expected between this and regular usage is NOT THERE.

So we have more people trying marijuana where it is (essentially) legal. absolutely no surprise, but the problematic, regular usage is significantly lower both as a percentage of those who tried it at least once in their lives, and in comparison with other European nations with stringent laws in place.

Seems to be an EXCELLENT trade off from a harm reduction standpoint, 30 years of pseudo-legality, and habitual usage rates are AVERAGE compared to the rest of the continent.

It seems the data suggests that just because you try it, does not mean that the "flavor" of intoxication" attained from marijuana appeals to everyone, and the percentage of those who have a propensity to use habitually is fairly constant despite legal status.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaking-news-blogs/59016-marijuana-legalization-hearing-tomorrow-california-14.html#post1058336582
 
Last edited:
I use to hate when the seeds would blow up, and ruin my J.:lol:
 
Feiten en cijfers | Trimbos

Cannabis usage (lifetime age 15-64) remained stable between 2001 - 2005. Age 12-18 the numbers actually went down between 1996 - 2003.

Even with over 1500 MJ selling shops, our average is still 4 times lower compared to France with its strict drug policy.
 
Wait something just caught my eye when revisiting this thread:

From Dutch's quote of his source (DEA) -

Surveys reveal that lifetime prevalence of cannabis in Holland increased consistently and sharply. For the age group 18-20, the increase is from 15 percent in 1984 to 44 percent in 1996......

Could we get a range any narrower than 18-20 year olds? This just reeks of cherry picked data sets.

15-17 year olds especially are CONSPICUOUSLY absent. Could it be that if they were included it could show that many waited until the age of majority to try it - thus leading to a data disparity which prompted the narrow cherry picked range of ages for the DEA "public info"?

Guess we won't know since the DEA decided the best way to paint their agenda driven picture was by omission and letting the reader fill in the gaps.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom