• 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!

Legal pot and car crashes: Yes, there's a link

Well all you have to do is look at I-25 when a few snow flakes fall, and see all the Texans and Californians in the ditch, lol.

That could be because they are on summer tires, not knowing that summer tires and snow do not mix. While I would not be surprised if Colorado residents switch to snow tires
 
Excited to see more studies into this threat to the roads.

Tell me, is it legal to drive while stoned?

Have you any clue how many people are driving while on prescription narcotics???

If you're on some kind of anti-legal-marijuana crusade, you really need to get your fears into some kind of rational order of significance.
 
Tell me, is it legal to drive while stoned?

Have you any clue how many people are driving while on prescription narcotics???

If you're on some kind of anti-legal-marijuana crusade, you really need to get your fears into some kind of rational order of significance.

It's not fear, it's a rationale look at drug use. Legalizing weed isn't a magic bullet to solve the social, legal and criminal costs associated. While it might solve one set of problems, legalization has it's own costs that the pro-legalization crowd tends to downplay or ignore.
 
It's not fear, it's a rationale look at drug use. Legalizing weed isn't a magic bullet to solve the social, legal and criminal costs associated. While it might solve one set of problems, legalization has it's own costs that the pro-legalization crowd tends to downplay or ignore.

No one who's pro-legalization here is ignoring any 'costs'.

The only one ignorning anyting is you, ignoring that the 'link' between pot and car crashes is specious.
 
No one who's pro-legalization here is ignoring any 'costs'.

The only one ignorning anyting is you, ignoring that the 'link' between pot and car crashes is specious.

Uh huh. Maybe personal experience is biasing me. I mean, after all, pot heads are known far and wide for being responsible individuals who'd never toke up and drive...
 
Like how the HLDI is associated with the insurance companies that don't want to pay out, lol.

So first off, I'm sure they can find marijuana in someone's system who has been in a car wreck, but that doesn't mean it was a contributing factor to the crash as it can remain in one's system for far long than is active.

Secondly, CO has some terrible drivers, and it's not because of legal weed. It's because assholes from Texas and California are moving into this state in droves. Probably because we have legal weed, lol.

But Oregon has the best drivers (well until they hit a traffic circle, when they go all STUPID and Washingtonian), so how does that correlate??

But seriously... What this study truly reflects is the need for an accurate field sobriety test for pot. This should have been in place before pot was legalized for rec. use.
 
Uh huh. Maybe personal experience is biasing me. I mean, after all, pot heads are known far and wide for being responsible individuals who'd never toke up and drive...

There are those who are responsible marijuana users, and there are those who aren't.
 
Uh huh. Maybe personal experience is biasing me. I mean, after all, pot heads are known far and wide for being responsible individuals who'd never toke up and drive...

No, it's your intellectual dishonesty that's biasing you.
 
There are those who are responsible marijuana users, and there are those who aren't.

Yes, I'm aware that not all people that toke up are stupid, but as we know from alcohol, it's the stupid that cause the most problems. Also legalizing weed has it's own set of criminal problems as the states are finding out.
Colorado?s War on Black Market Weed
 
The old "You don't agree with my position so you're stupid" insult trope. How predictable.

No, your position and your promotion of the specious claim that 'they have evidence' are clear evidence of intellectual dishonesty.

To claim that that's an insult is yet more intellectual dishonesty. I mentioned nothing about stupidity.

Funny how that works.
 
No, your position and your promotion of the specious claim that 'they have evidence' are clear evidence of intellectual dishonesty.

To claim that that's an insult is yet more intellectual dishonesty. I mentioned nothing about stupidity.

Funny how that works.

They do show a link, one you disagree with. Instead of having a rational discussion on the merits you accuse me of "intellectual dishonesty" for not sharing your views.

I get it, you think pot legalization is a good thing and I disagree. Let's leave it at that, there is nothing productive in our discussion at this point.
 
Uh huh. Maybe personal experience is biasing me. I mean, after all, pot heads are known far and wide for being responsible individuals who'd never toke up and drive...


Like drunks?
 
They do show a link, one you disagree with. Instead of having a rational discussion on the merits you accuse me of "intellectual dishonesty" for not sharing your views.

I get it, you think pot legalization is a good thing and I disagree. Let's leave it at that, there is nothing productive in our discussion at this point.

Time is marching on, evolve or perish.
 
They do show a link, one you disagree with. Instead of having a rational discussion on the merits you accuse me of "intellectual dishonesty" for not sharing your views.

I get it, you think pot legalization is a good thing and I disagree. Let's leave it at that, there is nothing productive in our discussion at this point.

No, they fall victim to 'correlation does not imply causation' and did not factor in several potential variables quite conspicuously, as has already been pointed out. Rational discussion on the merits has already occurred, and the flaws in the study pointed out.

If you were being intellectually honesty, you would've known that. The link is specious and remains undemonstrated.
 
No, they fall victim to 'correlation does not imply causation' and did not factor in several potential variables quite conspicuously, as has already been pointed out. Rational discussion on the merits has already occurred, and the flaws in the study pointed out.

If you were being intellectually honesty, you would've known that. The link is specious and remains undemonstrated.

I see the whole "We're not going to agree" on this was too much for you.
You have an opinion, one I do not share. I do not think your position is one of "intellectual dishonesty" but you cannot show me the same courtesy. Thus I have nothing further to discuss with you.
 
I see the whole "We're not going to agree" on this was too much for you.
You have an opinion, one I do not share. I do not think your position is one of "intellectual dishonesty" but you cannot show me the same courtesy. Thus I have nothing further to discuss with you.

The difference is my opinion is backed up by objective reality.
 
Newp. Dispassionate observation. You just cant' seem to grasp the reality of the failed nature of the study you're trumpeting.

Eh. Not my problem.

It's so failed you've gone to great length and insults to disparage it.
 
It's so failed you've gone to great length and insults to disparage it.

No, I didn't. It was easily debunked and dismissed. No great lengths were needed whatsoever.

Yet more intellectual dishonesty, I see.
 
Yes, I'm aware that not all people that toke up are stupid, but as we know from alcohol, it's the stupid that cause the most problems. Also legalizing weed has it's own set of criminal problems as the states are finding out.
Colorado?s War on Black Market Weed

Colorado should have no problem funding more enforcement to help prevent the kind of thing that happened in this article. Even though the 99 plant limit is utterly ridiculous and unnecessarily large, this guy was caught with 845 plants. An illegal operation is an illegal operation and he should get the full brunt of the law. But it was only possible because there are still black markets that are easy to smuggle weed into (driving to Arkansas, etc). If he had to compete with legal weed in those states he sold in, it wouldn't have been worth the risk, and eventually legal businesses, able to invest openly in technology and infrastructure, would get costs low enough that illegal grows can't compete. I don't grasp how legalization is to blame for this mans actions, he still broke the very lenient Colorado home grow regulations. People like this will always exist and look to profit off regulation and prohibition. Think twice about what you're willing to enforce over the long term and if it's worth it before you put your foot down and fund your law enforcement appropriately.

What happened to the extremely violent and lucrative illegal alcohol trade once prohibition ended?
 
Back
Top Bottom