4 ms·
Just the fact that it's illegal in Australia puts a huge asterisk on these results.
by loktarogar 6y ago
Just the fact that it's illegal in Australia puts a huge asterisk on these results.
- 2muchcoffeeman 6y agoI doubt that. I live in Sydney and all the people I know who smoke weed have jobs. I’m not sure how much they indulge but the illegality does not really pose a problem and I’ve never seen anyone deterred because of that. In certain areas you can smell it regularly. There was one street I used to walk down after work and the residents would be smoking weed everyday at the same time. Legal status is not stopping anyone.
- wpietri 6y agoThis study "followed 1792 Australian high school students aged 15 in 1992". I lived in Sydney 1992-4 and saw very little weed smoking. Legal status may not be stopping anybody now, but perhaps it was different then? Certainly here in California, legality makes a significant difference. Previously, my weed-smoking friends would have to have a connection to a drug dealer, and it was not what you'd call a convenient commercial experience. It's a different thing now that there are a variety of cheerful, brightly lit shops that anybody can just walk into. One obvious way that makes a difference to a study like this, which measures use of other illegal drugs, is that marijuana shops just sell marijuana, whereas I'm given to understand that drug dealers can connect their customers to a variety of stuff.
- loktarogar 6y agoLegal status is not stopping anyone from acquiring it, sure. The fact that it is illegal DOES stop people from deciding to try to acquire it or even try it. Like me, for example, when I was growing up. So that's instantly not including a segment of the population, and without knowing how big of a segment that is, the results are questionable.
- 2muchcoffeeman 6y agoThe people I know range from very casual users to more regular users. Varying range of jobs from professional to shift workers. I think you guys are really trying to poke holes in the study without having actually read it. If you’re covering 1792 users, that could be a decent cross section of society. Could also not be. But I can’t read the study.