Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Ken H
"Now, let's use your numbers from 1996-2004: there is still a positive correlation between more arrests and more mj use."

More arrests? Yes. A higher percentage? No.

With a public policy of marijuana arrests as the lowest priority (and the percentage of arrests did drop), there is a perception of a lower perceived risk. The number of users increased. The number of arrests increased, yes, but did not keep pace.

311 posted on 06/21/2006 2:40:05 PM PDT by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 309 | View Replies ]


To: robertpaulsen
let's use your numbers from 1996-2004: there is still a positive correlation between more arrests and more mj use.

More arrests? Yes. A higher percentage? No.

Well, here's a correlation between more arrests, more demand, AND an increase in the percentage of arrests: from 1991-2004, arrests for mj were up over 150%, past-month demand was up 40%.* (that's also a failure to control demand during ONDCP's watch)

And dont forget this correlation from 1979-1991: Arrests declined by 25%, past-month usage declined to a multi-year low*.

Remember the Nixon Drug War? From 1970-1979, demand for mj and arrests for mj show a positive correlation.

*See post #270 on this thread for source.

Rio Linda summary-- There is at least as good a statistical case for the proposition that more arrests lead to more mj demand, as there is for the proposition that more arrests lead to less mj demand. I gave several time periods where the former relationship holds.

312 posted on 06/21/2006 4:39:21 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 311 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson