Replies

In my post, I stated very clearly that I wasn't saying that one drug leads to another. And that wasn't my point, anyway.

But you did clarify things with your emphasis on the "risky" aspect of one's personality. I wonder what this individual would do if marijuana were legal -- go straight to hard drugs? Seriously, I think yours is an interesting theory, and I'm just trying to flesh it out.

There are people who like to drink. Some of those like to drink alot. We (the public in general) don't consider alcohol to be a "gateway" drug. And my question is, why do some consider marijuana to be a "gateway" drug? Again, I'm not saying it is, just why would people think that when they don't think that about alcohol?

Your theory is that illegality (and the associated risk taking) plays a role. It could. And if it did, then wouldn't marijuana likely be a gateway drug for that group of "risk" takers? Just a thought.

Your theory is that illegality (and the associated risk taking) plays a role.

Which is hardly an argument for keeping marijuana illegal---rather the opposite, if anything.

There are people who like to drink. Some of those like to drink alot. We (the public in general) don't consider alcohol to be a "gateway" drug. And my question is, why do some consider marijuana to be a "gateway" drug? Again, I'm not saying it is, just why would people think that when they don't think that about alcohol?

The government's official position has been that marijuana is a "gateway drug" since Harry Anslinger first made the assertion in 1954. There isn't any evidence he had any clinical data to support the claim, but Congress was calling into question his previous claims that marijuana cause white women to seek sexual relations with blacks and entertainers, and that marijuana was responsible for "satanic music" (jazz and swing). The claim has been repeated enough times that people believe it, but there has never been any clinical evidence to support it, and much that refutes it, including the 1970 study by the Schafer Commission, who were hand picked by Richard Nixon to prove that marijuana was dangerous.

The jump from legal to illegal is perhaps the only real indication of a "gateway" effect. The simple reason it's marijuana that gets this distinction is that it is (by far) the mostly widely used and easiest of the illegal drugs to obtain.

One could compare the jump from illegal marijuana to legal marijuana to the natural jump from underage drinking to legal adult drinking. Who are the worst binge drinkers? Underage college students. Often you'll find such behavior stops when the student turns 21. The "Forbidden Fruit" phenomenom is very powerful, especially for young people.

Again, I'm not saying it is, just why would people think that when they don't think that about alcohol?

I think you would see similiar "trends" with alcohol or cigaretes were you to look. However, alcohol and tabacco don't carry the same social stigma nor the same risk associated with illegal drugs. If you think about it what was the first drug you eve saw, probably someone smoking a cigarette or drinking a beer

I guess my point was for a certain group of people, they were bound to use hard drugs with or without the presence of MJ because their personalities tended to lead them in that direction.

I suppose there could be something said for the fact that if a person tried MJ and found out they didn't die (or start listening to jazz and raping white women), then they might be more apt to try other more dangerous drugs. In this sense MJ is only a "gateway" because the propaganda about MJ didn't hold true, and the person think that what is said about harder more dangerous drugs is not true either. Give kids REAL honesty and many of the gateway correlations in this sense go away.