If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(News.com.au)   Seventy-three percent of all people arrested for crimes in Australia test positive for marijuana. Wait a minute -- isn't NORML telling us that pot is harmless and doesn't lead to crime?   (news.com.au) divider line 349
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

6367 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Sep 2007 at 11:40 PM (6 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



349 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2007-09-30 07:45:17 PM
I'd bet about 99.9% had had a beer in the last week? Your point being?
 
2007-09-30 07:51:07 PM
correlation is not causation, subby.
 
2007-09-30 07:51:49 PM
FYI: GIS for "harmess" is totally NSFW

/DNRTFA
//DNFC
 
2007-09-30 07:53:34 PM
SilentStrider: correlation is not causation, subby.

It blows my friggin' mind that this is the one logical rule that everyone seems to be aware of, yet everyone equates correlation to causation.

Anyway I came to say what SilentStrider said.
 
2007-09-30 07:53:53 PM
TylerEaves: I'd bet about 99.9% had had a beer in the last week? Your point being?

Beer ain't illegal, genius.
 
2007-09-30 07:54:25 PM
Subby, I just finished my Intro To Research Methods For Idiots 101 text book if you want it.

/No, you can't have causation. Not yours.
 
2007-09-30 07:54:55 PM
FTFA:
"It's that really high level of drinking and offending that's the problem," said Sgt Mitchell.

"People when they get drunk do dumb things. They get into cars and drive. We know they shot someone because they looked at their girlfriend.

"Cannabis users, by and large, are fairly mellow."



QFT
 
2007-09-30 07:54:56 PM
And that means nothing.
I don't smoke pot anymore. Nothing against it, just not my thing.
I never, ever would have conceived of committing a crime on that stuff. I would have felt horribly guilty.
These people would have committed a crime on pot or not.
 
2007-09-30 07:58:15 PM
Aaaaaaaand what percentage of criminals watch TV? I'm convinced TV causes crime.

Moreover, I bet 100% defecate. We need to ban pooping.
 
2007-09-30 07:59:05 PM
What's the betting 73% of the arrests are for possession of marijuana?
 
2007-09-30 08:00:25 PM
CMFC0405: Subby, I just finished my Intro To Research Methods For Idiots 101 text book if you want it.

/No, you can't have causation. Not yours.


The headline worked, though. Subby got his greenlight.
 
2007-09-30 08:00:44 PM
Norad: Beer ain't illegal, genius.

Correlation ain't causation, genius.
 
2007-09-30 08:01:04 PM
Water.
It kills.
 
2007-09-30 08:03:19 PM
I am a police officer. I have had to fight many drunk people. I have had to fight many sober people. I have had to fight many people under the influence of various drugs. I have never had to fight someone solely under the influence of marijuana.

Thus, from a purely selfish perspective, I wish marijuana was legal.
 
2007-09-30 08:05:16 PM
Maybe you should drive: I am a police officer. I have had to fight many drunk people. I have had to fight many sober people. I have had to fight many people under the influence of various drugs. I have never had to fight someone solely under the influence of marijuana.

Thus, from a purely selfish perspective, I wish marijuana was legal.


I've seen a lot of cops say the same thing. Too bad the law & order politicians won't listen.
 
2007-09-30 08:06:03 PM
doyner: Moreover, I bet 100% defecate. We need to ban pooping.

that idea is just full of shiat.
 
2007-09-30 08:07:07 PM
Maybe you should drive: I am a police officer. I have had to fight many drunk people. I have had to fight many sober people. I have had to fight many people under the influence of various drugs. I have never had to fight someone solely under the influence of marijuana.

Thus, from a purely selfish perspective, I wish marijuana was legal.


Very interesting. May I ask you, do you feel any guilt with arresting people with possession of marijuana?
I know it's your job and I respect that. But you're a human being before a police officer.
 
2007-09-30 08:09:02 PM
Maybe you should drive profile: I'm a canine officer

Oh hell, hit the soft spot.
 
2007-09-30 08:11:52 PM
Tomatoes cause cancer, you know.
 
2007-09-30 08:12:32 PM
Bucky Katt: I've seen a lot of cops say the same thing. Too bad the law & order politicians won't listen.

In their defense, being "soft on crime" is the surest way to lose an election. Even if the crime is possession of a plant that tends to mellow people out and discourage them from committing violent acts.
 
2007-09-30 08:13:07 PM
Bucky Katt: I've seen a lot of cops say the same thing. Too bad the law & order politicians won't listen.


Oh they listen - but they don't want to give up the 'anti-drug' money. Property seizure laws, DARE funding, and the various war on drugs toys that the Fed give to state and local police outfits make up a rather substantial sum of money. There is no WAY any politican worth his $2000 suit is gonna give up that money. The DARE people would eat them for lunch, the local police unions would want to know what they're going to do for funding and the slavering idiotic voter base actually believe the Anslinger propaganda about 'teh debbil weed' and think cannabis is as equally dangerous as radioactive waste.

I'm for legalization as well, but of JUST cannabis. Anyone suggesting legalizing cocaine needs a slap upside the head followed by mandatory sterilization to prevent stupidity like that from infecting the next generation.
 
2007-09-30 08:14:51 PM
Maybe you should drive: In their defense, being "soft on crime" is the surest way to lose an election. Even if the crime is possession of a plant that tends to mellow people out and discourage them from committing violent acts.

And God knows, we can't be electing politicans on the basis of objective facts.

Anslinger did this country a huge disservice. Enough to make me want to drive to his grave and piss on his headstone. That aside, it'll take at least another decade of anti-propaganda efforts to undo the damage he caused.
 
2007-09-30 08:17:03 PM
Weaver95

You never fail to impress me. When I first saw your posts, I thought you were a Koolaid drinker. I was wrong. We still don't agree a lot, Yet, I respect where you're coming from.
 
2007-09-30 08:17:16 PM
Weaver95: I'm for legalization as well, but of JUST cannabis. Anyone suggesting legalizing cocaine needs a slap upside the head followed by mandatory sterilization to prevent stupidity like that from infecting the next generation.

What's your attitude about legalizing that subset of psychedelics which are non-addictive and relatively non-toxic in an acute sense? I'm thinking in particular of LSD and Psilocybin.
 
2007-09-30 08:18:07 PM
Bucky Katt: The headline worked, though. Subby got his greenlight.

Yup. For some reason "Here's an interesting and possible controversial story. I can see both sides of it; what do you guys think?" is a remarkably ineffective approach.

/ you people are like my own personal Skinner Box
// don't ever change
 
2007-09-30 08:21:34 PM
Wait, where's my favorite "correlation is not equal to causation" picture?

img502.imageshack.us

Haha, ah, there we go. Clearly the demise of pirates causes global warming.
 
2007-09-30 08:23:28 PM
Weaver95: Oh they listen - but they don't want to give up the 'anti-drug' money.

Agreed. Of course they could tax the stuff. The money coming in from that should be sufficient.

I'm for legalization as well, but of JUST cannabis. Anyone suggesting legalizing cocaine needs a slap upside the head followed by mandatory sterilization to prevent stupidity like that from infecting the next generation.

You and I would get along well methinks.
 
2007-09-30 08:25:02 PM
True, correlation does not equal causation.

But everybody poops. Or drinks water. Nearly everybody watches TV. So those knee jerk analogies are full of fail.

But if only 20% smoke weed (hypothetically), yet 80% arrested "for crimes" test positive, then there is a basis for investigating the possibility of one variable independently (causation) influencing the other.

Of course, if the "crimes" that these Australians are arrested for involve drugs, the extraneous variable to skew the results is evident.

Also, hyper criminalization of harmless behavior engenders a disrespect for law that can lead to more crime among those who disrespect the drug laws.

There are plenty of theories, but in the end the disparity in cannabis use between the general population and the criminal element is fourfold, too high to not consider a causative influence.
 
2007-09-30 08:25:24 PM
Broken9754: You and I would get along well methinks.

Meth is bad. Meth and tattoos is worse.
 
2007-09-30 08:26:08 PM
phaedrusiszen: Very interesting. May I ask you, do you feel any guilt with arresting people with possession of marijuana?
I know it's your job and I respect that. But you're a human being before a police officer.


That's simple. I don't arrest on it. Period. It's a misdemeanor, meaning it's a discretionary arrest. I just give the person the option of destroying it there at the scene or getting charged with possession. So far everyone has chosen the first option. Every cop I work with does the same thing.

If the person is selling, I have to make the arrest. I have no cognitive dissonance about that, as while I hate the fact that marijuana is illegal, I also hate what having a dealer of an illegal drug does to a neighborhood. I wouldn't mind if my neighbor smoked marijuana (in fact he does). But I don't want him drawing in customers. My preference, of course, would be to legalize it and concentrate on methamphetamine. But I wouldn't expect to win an election running on that platform. There are still too many voters who learned their lessons on marijuana in D.A.R.E. classes.
 
2007-09-30 08:28:41 PM

Wow, that article isn't exactly quality reporting, is it?

"test positive for" =/= "under the influence of"

WTF is "methylamphetamine"? do they mean methamphetamine? (Possibly a Brit/American spelling difference, but I doubt it)

Is a detainee the same as someone who has been arrested, or does that include what in the US would be considered "protective custody" which doesn't necessarily indicate that any crime has been committed?

She said Australian Governments needed to be tougher on illicit drugs.

"Then, and only then, will we begin to get the results similar to those countries that have been successful reducing illicit drug use," she said.

Which countries are those, hon? The US, whose model you seem to want to follow?

Perhaps she should look at the statistics for opiates and cocaine in the Netherlands...
 
2007-09-30 08:31:58 PM
Maybe you should drive:

You've helped remind me that many (most?) cops are good... which is sometimes hard to remember given the number of negative stories. Thank you.
 
2007-09-30 08:32:20 PM
Weaver95: And God knows, we can't be electing politicans on the basis of objective facts.

Anslinger did this country a huge disservice. Enough to make me want to drive to his grave and piss on his headstone. That aside, it'll take at least another decade of anti-propaganda efforts to undo the damage he caused.


Three years ago I thought you were an idiot. Today, I think you are among the most intelligent people on fark. I'll let you decide if that is a compliment or a put-down.
 
2007-09-30 08:33:14 PM
AndreMA: What's your attitude about legalizing that subset of psychedelics which are non-addictive and relatively non-toxic in an acute sense? I'm thinking in particular of LSD and Psilocybin.

Anything that rewrites your brain chemistry like those do is definately out. At worst, cannabis mellows you out. Take too much LSD and you are anything but 'mellow'.

I don't want to see cannabis legalized because I think it'd be great to spark up every weekend. I'm extremely interested in the industrical applications of the plant itself. The benefits to the textile industry alone make it worth the effort of legalization. Not to mention the fact that the plant can be bred for a number of other uses (biofuels, industrial lubricants, and even food crops) than just as an intoxicant.

The more you read up on cannbis, the more difficult to deny the fact that we're missing out on some tremendous opportunities. And when you consider that the criminalization of cannbis was based entirely on a lie to congress....well, i've never supported basing legislation on a lie. And in this case, the injustice has gone on long enough. We should legalize cannabis, release anyone convicted on cannabis possession charges and open the market up to anyone who wants to exploit it.
 
2007-09-30 08:35:47 PM
Maybe you should drive: That's simple. I don't arrest on it. Period. It's a misdemeanor, meaning it's a discretionary arrest. I just give the person the option of destroying it there at the scene or getting charged with possession. So far everyone has chosen the first option. Every cop I work with does the same thing.

I understand and respect where you're coming from.
Perhaps I'm jaded by Cops, the TV show. I see them bring people in for marijuana. Even just a roach in the ash-tray.
So I may have a divide between what happens in the real world and someone acting for TV.

If the person is selling, I have to make the arrest. I have no cognitive dissonance about that, as while I hate the fact that marijuana is illegal, I also hate what having a dealer of an illegal drug does to a neighborhood. I wouldn't mind if my neighbor smoked marijuana (in fact he does). But I don't want him drawing in customers.

I can understand that too. To relate, I wouldn't care if a neighbor was smoking pot, at all. I wouldn't dig a neighbor selling pot out of their place.

But I wouldn't expect to win an election running on that platform. There are still too many voters who learned their lessons on marijuana in D.A.R.E. classes.

Well, what can be done? There are a huge number of people that think this is retarded.
Even my above statement about not wanting a dealer near me, is just because it's illegal and will attract illegals in kind.
 
2007-09-30 08:37:23 PM
Maybe you should drive: Three years ago I thought you were an idiot. Today, I think you are among the most intelligent people on fark. I'll let you decide if that is a compliment or a put-down.

I made the mistake of actually reading Anslinger's congressional testimony. That convinced me to do some more research on the topic. Then I found LaGuardia's report on marijuana. After that, I couldn't justify supporting criminialization of cannabis.

So I joined NORML.

I'm afraid to actually form a local chapter tho. I'm afraid that if I get involved in political activism that I won't know when to stop.
 
2007-09-30 08:37:44 PM
AndreMA: You've helped remind me that many (most?) cops are good... which is sometimes hard to remember given the number of negative stories. Thank you.

I want second this. Perhaps I danced around it a bit before.
 
2007-09-30 08:39:21 PM
I can only judge from the behavior of other dancers at my club, but until they get fired for gaining weight, marijuana users get involved in NO fights or crime that I know of. I am inclined to say they are not a danger to others around them.

/No drugs for me
//Doesn't mean I don't let billionaire sheikhs snort coke off my taut belly through rolled-up thousand dollar bills
///Business is business
 
2007-09-30 08:41:11 PM
phaedrusiszen: Well, what can be done? There are a huge number of people that think this is retarded.
Even my above statement about not wanting a dealer near me, is just because it's illegal and will attract illegals in kind.


Just tell the truth. Counter DARE propaganda with calm, reasoned and above all TRUTHFUL answers. Be reasonable. Be professional. DRESS professional. Never back down, but be polite. Provoke the DARE fanatics by sticking to your guns. Understand that you aren't going to change people's minds overnight. And just keep at it.
 
2007-09-30 08:42:45 PM
Weaver95: I'm afraid to actually form a local chapter tho. I'm afraid that if I get involved in political activism that I won't know when to stop.

I don't blame you.
 
2007-09-30 08:44:50 PM
Maybe you should drive: Weaver95: I'm afraid to actually form a local chapter tho. I'm afraid that if I get involved in political activism that I won't know when to stop.

I don't blame you.


Every time I got up to give a speech during my speech class, I swear I could hear german marching band songs in the background while visions of torchlight parades flashed in front of me.

I've stayed away from public speaking ever since.
 
2007-09-30 08:47:53 PM
phaedrusiszen: Well, what can be done? There are a huge number of people that think this is retarded.

Education. Or, rather, reeducation.

Even my above statement about not wanting a dealer near me, is just because it's illegal and will attract illegals in kind.

I've seen way too many shootouts over marijuana sales to want it in my neighborhood. That doesn't mean the blame belongs with the plant, it means the blame belongs with the policy. But that distinction won't help when it's my neighborhood involved. Sad but true.
 
2007-09-30 08:49:07 PM
Weaver95: And when you consider that the criminalization of cannbis was based entirely on a lie to congress....well, i've never supported basing legislation on a lie.

Well, the criminalization of LSD in 1967 was based on lies as well -- the stated purpose was concern over long-term effects based on some flawed and misinterpreted science (I'm referring to the in vivo chromosome breakage scare, at levels much higher than anything anyone would take and similar to the results found with caffeine).

Studies in the last 1960's found no statistically significant increase in birth defects among women who (irresponsibly, for sure) used LSD during pregnancy, nor any increase in cancer in the long term for heavy users of either gender. The feared teratogenesis was nonexistent.

Additionally, many of the reports of negative effects in the late 1960s are now thought to have been due to various other chemicals with higher toxicity. As the raw materials(*) for the clandestine manufacture of LSD were dried up by law enforcement, those in the business of making psychdelics for recreational use turned to a variety of other chemicals... the alphabet soup of MDA/DOM/STP/etc... which actually fall into a separate chemical class altogether (phenethylamines vs. tryptamines)

I don't assert that LSD is as benign as marijuana, but alcohol is worse than either when used to excess, IMO.

(*) The LSD molecule is relatively complex, fragile and difficult to synthesize unless you start with a relatively close precursor such as ergotamine.

/sorry for the long tangent; it's a subject that interests me and I tend to bore people with it at the drop of a hit hat.
 
2007-09-30 08:49:33 PM
AndreMA: You've helped remind me that many (most?) cops are good... which is sometimes hard to remember given the number of negative stories. Thank you.

No, thank you.
 
2007-09-30 08:57:02 PM
Weaver95: Every time I got up to give a speech during my speech class, I swear I could hear german marching band songs in the background while visions of torchlight parades flashed in front of me.

I've stayed away from public speaking ever since.


As I German-American, I got a kick out of your reply...

But I do know what you mean. I went to a "Christian" college. I remember debating as a devil's advocate in a philosophy class that prostitution should be legal. That was not even my belief, I just thought some counter-points should be raised. I was bombarded with propaganda and branded a pervert. Only for debating policy.
 
2007-09-30 08:57:26 PM
Maybe you should drive: Education. Or, rather, reeducation.

You've got a federal program against it. The change has got to come from a federal level. To be frank, anti-marijuana stance of the feds was the first thing that made me question them. It lead me to to wonder how far the rabbit hole goes.
Seems now, the more I look, the deeper it goes.

I've seen way too many shootouts over marijuana sales to want it in my neighborhood. That doesn't mean the blame belongs with the plant, it means the blame belongs with the policy. But that distinction won't help when it's my neighborhood involved. Sad but true.

Yeah. Being illegal brings out the bad guys. It's like prohibition before. It's doomed to failure, but I don't understand why the government wants to latch onto it so much.
 
2007-09-30 09:00:06 PM
Maybe you should drive: But I do know what you mean. I went to a "Christian" college. I remember debating as a devil's advocate in a philosophy class that prostitution should be legal. That was not even my belief, I just thought some counter-points should be raised. I was bombarded with propaganda and branded a pervert. Only for debating policy.

That's it. You're farkied.
 
2007-09-30 09:04:23 PM
phaedrusiszen: Yeah. Being illegal brings out the bad guys. It's like prohibition before. It's doomed to failure, but I don't understand why the government wants to latch onto it so much.


The usual reasons - nobody in government wants to admit they made a mistake. It's just easier to lump cannabis in with meth, even if they aren't the same. Then there's the money side of it. DARE people want their funding. Drug war funds help keep police union rank and file employed. Plus politicans get to look tough on crime (while secretely toking up behind the scenes).

I think that if we want legalization, we're in it for the long haul. The Federal government is going to resist decriminalization with every fiber of their being. There's just too much money involved in keeping pot illegal.
 
2007-09-30 09:08:41 PM
What gets me about the whole cannabis issue is the hypocrisy. I'm fairly sure that most of the more vehement anti-drug crusaders have toked up at least ONCE in their lives. Probably more than once. And if they haven't then i'm sure they've seen OTHERS get high from time to time. So they know that cannabis isn't dangerous, having seen it or experienced it themselves first hand.

But they get up on that pulpit and stick to their script, despite knowing that (statistically speaking) most of their audience are sparking it up at least once a week all while cheering for more and more asinine war on drugs regulation.
 
2007-09-30 09:09:36 PM
phaedrusiszen: You've got a federal program against it. The change has got to come from a federal level.

I still believe that most people want to do the right thing. When the majority of Americans believe that marijuana should be legalized, it will be. I've seen a fairly drastic transition here in California just over the last seven years, since I've been a police officer. I think that the day will come when it is legal. I just don't know if that day will come in the next 50 years or so, so you and I may never see it. I'm convinced, though, that someday American high school kids will read about the prohibition against marijuana in their history books and have the same thoughts that we have today over alcohol prohibition.

Yeah. Being illegal brings out the bad guys. It's like prohibition before. It's doomed to failure, but I don't understand why the government wants to latch onto it so much.

Yeah, and I think most people today look at the years of prohibition as a mistake in policy rather than proof of the evil of alcohol. Having said that, if I had been around during that time period I would not have wanted a moonshiner living next door.

That's it. You're farkied.

Uh oh. Please don't bombard my pad with disgusting hookers like my classmates threatened to do.
 
Displayed 50 of 349 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report