And yet with government enforcement, people would be far more concerned about bringing alcohol home from a speakeasy than from a liquor store. Kids get a lot of their alcohol from home. Less availability.
For the most part kids do not get their alcohol from home. The likelihood of getting caught, and the consequences are too high. An occasional undetectable nip from the liquor cabinet?? I can't deny that would happen But implying they just casually walk to the fridge and grab a six pack to take with them or grab a bottle of rum from the liquor cabinet when they go out to share amongst friends? Sneaking mom and pop's alcohol is unsustainable, and if they are to actually be using it with any frequency other than a sample here and there it would have to come from outside sources.
Are there parents who actually let the kids imbibe from the home stash? yes, but this is an extreme minority, and they likely are piss poor parents to begin with and probably should not be rearing a child.
CaptainCourtesy said:
And pass 8 bars and 12 liquor stores on the way. Or go to your friend's house where the liquor cabinet is unlocked...or your own house. You don't have to call anyone or go anywhere.
It was 3 am when I wrote that, I could have only got alcohol from any of the supposed bars and or liquor stores if I robbed them, if I was underage the time is moot without a great deal of conniving and fabrication in order to attain it. As far as marijuana in correlation to passing liquor stores or going to a friends house to raid the liquor cabinet, why bother when it comes to you at school, or work.
So, if this is the case, then your argument doesn't seem pertinent. Others have said, in this thread, that the feeling of alcohol is far worse, in many ways, than the feeling of marijuana. You are contradicting yourself.
How am I contradicting myself over what others have said??
Alcohol in excess is going to feel far worse, that does not change the fact that a huge amount of its appeal is as a social lubricant, and its decrease in inhibitions, it is a drug that facilitates people to let loose, as such is highly appealing to people. Marijuana is more of a reclusive drug, a more tranquil relaxed demeanor, and not a social lubricator that will appeal to the desire to "let loose". Marijuana and Alcohol are apples and oranges on their effects, and their appeal to individuals, and will continue to be apples and oranges in their usage patterns. Look at the Dutch, Alcohol is still by far the drug of choice, despite the acceptance of marijuana.
CaptainCourtesy said:
Sorry, the numbers I posted refute those that you did. And mine were from an American study, yours were from an European study of Americans. Mine would get the nod from a validity standpoint.
My figures were post without seeing the data you supplied, their intent was not to refute your numbers or your data, it was to show that despite its availability, and lax stance on marijuana in Holland, marijuana consumption was still significantly lower than alcohol consumption, as well as significantly lower than corresponding US marijuana consumption.
But if you disqualify a European study of Americans, I will go ahead and compare the portion of the European study of Europeans against your American study of Americans. I assume it is acceptable for Europeans to study themselves? I hope so it will be damn hard to dig up a US study of Dutch usage trends.
The European study reports 28% of Dutch teens as having smoked Marijuana, your report cites 46% of U.S 12th graders as having smoked marijuana. So Dutch teen marijuana usage is ~40% LOWER than U.S
SENIOR usage (a subset of teen usage that is by far the highest percentage contributor to the whole) despite its availability, and lax social barriers towards it.
Unfortunately I have to make an assumption on the alcohol data, it appears that "alcohol usage in the past month" is inferred in the European study:
Thirty-seven percent of European teens had smoked cigarettes in the past month as compared with only 26% of Americans. Sixty-one percent of European teens had consumed alcohol [in the past month]
So if we accept what is likely inferred, Europe study, 61% used Alcohol in the past month, U.S. study, 48.6% of
seniors with decreasing rates for younger teens used in the past month.
Even if we disregard the inferred "within the past month" and use your senior "tried at least once" rate of 78% and take the Dutch finding of 61% to imply the same we find that Dutch are 218% more likely to use alcohol than marijuana, while Americans are 170% more likely.
So despite their lax social stance to marijuana (to the point of making it trite and boring), and the tolerance and availability, Dutch teens are significantly less likely to use marijuana than US teens, and alcohol is by far still the drug of choice.
Again though apples to oranges, but unfortunately a large portion of the argument here has been based on comparing alcohol usage to marijuana usage.
CaptainCourtesy said:
78% alcohol vs. 46% marijuana. I win.
No you don't the burden is still upon you to illustrate that this is a result of drug policy, attitudes and availability as opposed to just over all trends in human drug preferences. The data we both supplied suggests the latter.
Some more info to mull over:
first off directly relates to the thesis of "would Alcohol consumption in teens decrease if it were made illegal:
Wickersham Commission Report on Alcohol Prohibition (1931)
Among the significant findings of this report were:
* Alcohol use declined during the first two or three years of Prohibition (a trend that had begun before Prohibition started) but rose every year thereafter. There was, in particular, an increase in the use of distilled liquors. There was also evidence of increased alcohol use and addiction among minors.
Major Studies of Drugs and Drug Policy - Titles and Summaries
The effects on teen usage rates of easing of marijuana controls:
British Crime Survey statistics showed that the proportion of 16- to 24-year-olds using cannabis slumped from 28% a decade ago to 21% now, with its declining popularity accelerating after the decision to downgrade the drug to class C was announced in January 2004.
Cannabis use down since legal change | Society | The Guardian
"Overall, the preponderance of the evidence which we have gathered and examined points to the conclusion that decriminalization has had virtually no effect either on the marijuana use or on related attitudes and beliefs about marijuana use among American young people. The data show no evidence of any increase, relative to the control states, in the proportion of the age group who ever tried marijuana. In fact, both groups of experimental states showed a small, cumulative net decline in annual prevalence after decriminalization."
- L. Johnson et al. 1981. Marijuana Decriminalization: The Impact on Youth 1975-1980. Monitoring the Future, Occasional Paper Series, paper 13, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan: Ann Arbor.
"Levels of use tended to be higher in the decriminalization states both before and after the changes in law. tates which moderated penalties after 1974 (essentially a group of decriminalization states) did indeed experience an increase in rates of marijuana use, among both adolescents (age 12-17) and adults (18 or older). However, the increase in marijuana use was even greater in other states and the largest proportionate increase occurred in those states with the most severe penalties."
- W. Saveland and D. Bray. 1980. American Trends in Cannabis Use Among States with Different Changing Legal Regimes. Bureau of Tobacco Control and Biometrics, Health and Welfare: Ottawa, as cited by E. Single in The Impact of Marijuana Decriminalization: an Update.
"There is no evidence to date that the CEN [decriminalization] system ... Has increased levels of regular cannabis use, or rates of experimentation among young adults. These results are broadly in accord with our earlier analysis of trends in cannabis use in Australia. ...They are also consistent with the results of similar analyses in the United States and the Netherlands."
- N. Donnelly et al. 1999. Effects of the Cannabis Expiation Notice Scheme on Levels and Patterns of Cannabis Use in South Australia: Evidence from the National Drug Strategy Household Surveys 1985-1995 (Report commissioned for the National Drug Strategy Committee). Australian Government Publishing Service: Canberra, Australia.
"It appears clear that there is no firm basis for concluding that the introduction of the Cannabis Expiation Notice System in South Australia in 1987 has had any detrimental effect in terms of leading to increased levels of cannabis use in the Southern Australian community. ... In the context of a society which is increasingly well informed about the risks associated with drug use in general, a move toward more lenient laws for small scale cannabis offenses, such as the CEN [decriminalization] system, will not lead to increased cannabis use."
- Drug and Alcohol Services Council of South Australia, Monitoring, Evaluation and Research Unit. 1991. The Effects of Cannabis Legalization in South Australia on Levels of Cannabis Use. DASC Press: Parkside, Australia.
What limited data we have suggests that in fact it will not increase usage amongst teens, unfortunately there have not been many studies or precedents to base any definitive conclusions upon. This is but one small part of a much broader picture as others have elaborated upon while we have had our lasers focused on one little portion of the whole.
