UCSC sociologist says making pot legal does not boost use

Santa Cruz (CA) Sentinel ^ | May 4, 2004 | ANNA GOSLINE

[The Other Harry]

May 4, 2004

UCSC sociologist says making pot legal does not boost use

By ANNA GOSLINE
Sentinel Correspondent

SANTA CRUZ — A leading critic of U.S. drug policy contends there is no link between the decriminalization of marijuana and increased drug use.

In research published in the May issue of the American Journal of Public Health, Craig Reinarman, a UC Santa Cruz sociologist, said he found there was no difference between drug-use rates in Amsterdam, where marijuana is freely bought at licensed coffee shops, and San Francisco, where pot-smokers still can get busted.

"Drug policy doesn’t appear to have much relevance," Reinarman said in an interview Monday. "There is not a lot of evidence to suggest that criminalization has a deterrent effect."

In the late 1990s, Reinarman conducted random door-to-door surveys of 265 adults from San Francisco who had used marijuana 25 times or more. The research team, including two scientists from the Center for Drug Research in the Netherlands, then compared the data with identical survey information gathered from 216 adults in Amsterdam.

The results showed no difference between the cities for key factors such as age of first use, and age and duration of maximum use. Dutch marijuana users also were less likely to use other illicit drugs such as cocaine, crack, amphetamines or opiates such as heroin.

"It seems to us that the burden of proof is now on those that support criminalization to prove that it actually reduces drug use," said Reinarman, who won a lifetime achievement award from the Drug Policy Foundation in 1999.

Paul Armentano, a senior policy analyst at the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, said he isn’t surprised by Reinarman’s results.

"The results (from similar studies) have been remarkably consistent, whether the study comes from university researchers or the government," he said. "Marijuana use ebbs and flows regardless of marijuana penalties. That’s the case in this country and frankly, in countries all over the world. I’d like to think that if the drug policies were based on science, they would change."

But others on the front lines of the war on drugs, like Richard Westphal, commander of the Santa Cruz County Narcotics Enforcement Team, remain opposed to decriminalization.

"There would be increased usage and more people will try it," he said, arguing against decriminalization. Westphal believes criminal punishment does prevent people from using the drug excessively.

Rhonda Jones at Janus of Santa Cruz, a drug treatment center, agreed: "We believe that pot is a gateway drug. If a person smokes a lot of pot, they will likely try something stronger."

Jones also said addicts recovering from harder drugs such as cocaine or heroin will sometimes pick up marijuana, then slide back into their old habits.

Robert MacCoun, a sociologist at UC Berkeley, also has studied marijuana usage in the United States and the Netherlands. He said he saw a rise in marijuana use in the mid-1980s when legal marijuana sellers launched aggressive advertising campaigns. The Netherlands has since restricted these campaigns.

"We think that commercialization has the potential to significantly increase marijuana usage," he said, "but decriminalization poses very little risk.

"What we really need to understand is why countries like Sweden, who have restrictive drug policies similar to the U.S., also have low levels of drug use."

Contact Anna Gosline at agosline@santacruzsentinel.com.

[johnfrink]

As we speak Ashcroft is putting in an audit request for Professor Reinarman. Those who offer evidence that contradicts our sacred War on Drugs (TM) will be punished.

[Mr. Mojo]

A sociologist at UC Santa Cruz? lol.....Who are we going to hear from next, an ethnopharmacologist at Cal State Humboldt?

[Lunatic Fringe]

Comparing the drug use rate of Amsterdam to the drug use rate of San Francisco?

That's like comparing the death rate of Baghdad to that of South Central L.A. and saying, "See, it's not THAT bad!"

[philman_36]

We believe that pot is a gateway drug.
Some people believe that the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy and Santa Claus are real.
Just belieeeeeeve...

[Steely Tom]

UCSC sociologist says making pot legal does not boost use

Another of those strange, counterintuitive paradoxes that that the non-academic mind can simply not comprehend.

(steely)

[VisualizeSmallerGovernment]

So why legalize it, if the same people are going to use it anyway?

I'm sure a similar study would show that repealing all civil rights legislation passed since 1964 would not increase the amount of discrimination in the country. Only in that case, it would be true.

[Tacis]

What a great headline!

"UCSC sociologist says making pot legal does not boost use ..." BUT, IT WOULD DROP MY COSTS A WHOLE BUNCH!!

[John H K]

Do you think alcohol use among those under 21 years old has declined since the drinking age has risen from 18 to 21?

[The kings dead]

So why legalize it, if the same people are going to use it anyway?

So they won't be punished for acts that don't infringe on anybody else's liberties, and so we won't have to pay for that punishment.

[John H K]

Well, you save billions of dollars used to imprison/prosecute/chase pot users, and cops have more time to pursue other crimes if they aren't chasing pot users.

And, of course, you could always tax pot sales for a financial windfall.

[Protagoras]

So why legalize it, if the same people are going to use it anyway?

Because it never should have been criminalized in the first place. It's not governments business.

[Belisaurius]

Are we really spending 'billions of dollars' chasing pot users? I know we're spending 'billions of dollars' trying to criminalise tobacco, FWIW.

[VisualizeSmallerGovernment]

you could always tax pot sales for a financial windfall.

I used to think that as well, but since the number of pot smokers isn't going to increase when it's legalized, why bother?

And if the government has no business criminalizing pot, why would they have any business taxing it?

This line of reasoning is not associated with other banned substances. You don't hear people say "Let's legalize thalidomide and tax it heavily!"

[Blood of Tyrants]

Many of those here who claim to not trust the government and value freedom support the unconstitutional laws that allow the WOD.

[nmh]

LOL!

[MEGoody]

"he found there was no difference between drug-use rates in Amsterdam, where marijuana is freely bought at licensed coffee shops, and San Francisco, where pot-smokers still can get busted."

Oh, they CAN get busted in SF, but they hardly ever do. And if they do, it's barely a slap on the wrist. Not exactly a valid comparison.

[zook]

The study's implications are limited. He compared two cities in which pot use was already relatively high, then finds that use rates don't differ much after one city decriminalizes.

The study can say nothing about the effect of decriminalization in areas where pot use is currently relatively low. One could reason, for example, that the effect could be quite dramatic in small towns as decriminalization permits an influx of supply.

Researchers should refrain from talking past their data.

[motzman]

I used to think that as well, but since the number of pot smokers isn't going to increase when it's legalized, why bother?

Just the existing amount of smokers would be enough to generate billions.

And if the government has no business criminalizing pot, why would they have any business taxing it?

Most legal products are subject to taxation upon sale.

This line of reasoning is not associated with other banned substances. You don't hear people say "Let's legalize thalidomide and tax it heavily!"

Uhhh...OK Beavis...

[The Other Harry]

Are we really spending 'billions of dollars' chasing pot users? I know we're spending 'billions of dollars' trying to criminalise tobacco, FWIW.

I'll say this...

MJ is less harmful than booze.

The MJ that is available in Amsterdam is quite good. I would never have found the hotel room if one of us - which was not me -- had not stayed straight. Everything is a "gedracht", and they all look the same. I'd still be there.

Walking thru the red light district when you are ripped is an experience you will never forget. Surreal. There's no need to engage. Just looking is enough.