Posted on 12/02/2002 2:42:58 PM PST by Sparta
— WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Countering a basic principle of American anti-drug policies, an independent U.S. study concluded on Monday that marijuana use does not lead teenagers to experiment with hard drugs like heroin or cocaine.
The study by the private, nonprofit RAND Drug Policy Research Center rebutted the theory that marijuana acts as a so-called gateway drug to more harmful narcotics, a key argument against legalizing pot in the United States.
The researchers did not advocate easing restrictions in marijuana, but questioned the focus on this substance in drug control efforts.
Using data from the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse between 1982 and 1994, the study concluded teenagers who took hard drugs were predisposed to do so whether they tried marijuana first or not.
"Kids get their first opportunity to use marijuana years before they get their first exposure to hard drugs," said Andrew Morral, lead author of the RAND study.
"Marijuana is not a gateway drug. It's just the first thing kids often come across."
Morral said 50 percent of U.S. teenagers had access to marijuana by the age of 16, while the majority had no exposure to cocaine, heroin or hallucinogens until they were 20.
The study, published in the British journal Addiction, does not advocate legalizing or decriminalizing marijuana, which has been linked to side-effects including short-term memory loss.
But given limited resources, Morral said the U.S. government should reconsider the prominence of marijuana in its much-publicized "war on drugs."
"To a certain extent we are diverting resources away from hard drug problems," he said. "Spending money on marijuana control may not be having downstream consequences on the use of hard drugs."
Researchers say predisposition to drug use has been linked to genetic factors and one's environment, including family dynamics and the availability of drugs in the neighborhood.
At least decriminalization, and possibly legalization with regulation. As you noted earlier, people are prone to their vices, and people's reaction to drugs varies. I think one of the biggest problems I have with out current situation is that we have legalized alcohol, but criminalized marijuana, and objectively alcohol is potentially much more destructive, particularly for the people who seem to have that genetic pre-disposition to alcoholism.
The other problem I have with it is that it puts us into the position of essentially making it a function of law enforcement to try and eradicate a weed. By their own figures, last year Missouri law enforcement found and destroyed nearly 70 million marijuana plants. Of that total less than 11 thousand were described as "cultivated marijuana". And they'll do it again next year, and probably every year for the forseeable future.
Please. I make my living fixing engineers mistakes. My experience is that for every good engineer you deal with, you get several marginally competent yet overly arrogent specimens. Your repeated references to the profession leads me to conclude that you are an engineer, and I conclude that you believe yourself to be the one of the sample. Then again, so do all of the several.
So you favor alcohol prohibition then?
My experience is that for every good engineer you deal with, you get several marginally competent yet overly arrogent specimens. Your repeated references to the profession
Did these reference speak in terms of good and bad, or were they more specific?
leads me to conclude that you are an engineer, and I conclude that you believe yourself to be the one of the sample. Then again, so do all of the several.
Attributions of effects to causes should not be made so lightly. The little I have said on this thread cannot even put you in the vicinity of what I am professionally. If we met in person and I told you, you would smile at your own hypothesis.
As for the original remark, it was specific, and you have read something else into it altogether.
Good chance of that, hence the high rate of recidivism.
Now, if it were legal to rob 7-11's, I wouldn't be arrested and exposed to these criminals. Voila!
Cute sarcasm, but stealing and violent robbery violate others. Smoking a joint doesn't. That is the red herring reply of a WoD champion who can't refute a point. A logical leap off a cliff.
Have I given you too much or too little credit? I see in your last several posts that you seem to be losing ground.
I am curious. You said It is my understanding that we cannot be fighting a war on things, whether they be drugs or guns, but on behaviors. In this case, it is drug abuse.
So would you say smoking a joint while watching football on Sunday at home is "abuse"? Should such a person be in jail? How about an alcohoic living on a grate downtown. Is that substance abuse? Should he be in jail?
Current legal status notwithstanding, what is the moral distinction between alcohol and MJ use and abuse?
BTW, There must be a lot of money in that.
Not bad for a dumb redneck.
Draftsman?
All of my work has been in the Denver metro (you know, MileHi) area.
I've done some pipe fitting, I like my laptop a lot better. {:0)
Guess I proved I'm not one of them.
Really the mechanical engineer on our staff is a great guy and I have learned plenty from him. He gave me my jaded opinion of engineers, he is the one out of several. And he treats me as a collegue. Not bad for a publik skool guy. But, hey, I have been at this for 25 years and I do catch engineers frquently.
I agree. And you can tell who does by their attitude to toolbag guys.
I guess my point is that whatever line of work, it seems to me if you line up 10 guys you may get one or two really prfessional ones. The rest are there for the paycheck. That is really sobering when you are looking for a new doctor...
Man those guys will rip you off. Their stuff has been stepped on so many times it is worthless.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.