6 ms·

"Defying projections, crime has dropped since the law went into effect January 1, and the flow of new tax revenue, more than $2 million a month, is on par with

"Defying projections, crime has dropped since the law went into effect January 1, and the flow of new tax revenue, more than $2 million a month, is on par with the state’s haul from alcohol taxes. Is this what the pot-friendly future of America looks like?" It sounds like all rainbows and unicorns right? Well, not exactly. . . "Marijuana is by far the No. 1 cause of student expulsions from Colorado public schools" - http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/more-younger-students-bringing-marijuana-to-schools-around-colorado-investigators-claim http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/more-younger... "Colo. kids getting into parents' pot-laced goodies" - http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/04/02/marijuana-pot-edibles-colorado/7154651/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/04/02/marijua... "Colorado News: Pot problems in Colorado schools increase with legalization" - http://www.summitdaily.com/news/marijuana/8877953-113/marijuana-schools-colorado-kids http://www.summitdaily.com/news/marijuana/8877953-113/mariju... "Harmless pot? New marijuana study shows brain damage in those 18-25" - http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865601141/Harmless-pot-New-marijuana-study-shows-brain-damage-in-those-18-25.html http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865601141/Harmless-pot-Ne... Yeah the tax benefits are great for the state, but there's going to be a lot of unintended consequences. Not sure I'd want my kids getting exposed to this at a young age. EDIT: I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Downvotes for a one article and nobody presenting any fear of their kids being involved with pot at an early age. I will simply leave with you a family friends comment to me who's been a drug counsellor for 25 years, "In my 25 years of practice, all of my patients who came to me seeking help with their addictions, they all had one thing in common - they all started with marijuana."

smokeyj 13y ago
> Not sure I'd want my kids getting exposed to this at a young age. Is that a problem for legalization or parenting?
- doktrin 13y ago
  It's both, of course. Legalization means easier availability, even for something as relatively ubiquitous as marijuana.
  - Fishkins 13y ago
    That may be true, but I'm not convinced it is. There's some evidence to the contrary [0]. The explanation I've heard is, if what you're selling is always illegal, you won't discriminate much about whom you sell to since you'll get in trouble if you're caught no matter what. On the other hand, if you can make a bunch of money legally selling something to adults, you won't be as eager to take extra risk just to get a few more sales. [0] - http://www.cbsnews.com/news/teens-pot-easier-to-buy-than-beer/ http://www.cbsnews.com/news/teens-pot-easier-to-buy-than-bee...
    - potalc 13y ago
      I agree, when I was younger, it was much easier for me to buy cannabis than alcohol. Alcohol required knowing someone older than 21, cannabis required knowing a dealer, which was much easier.
    - doktrin 13y ago
      That's a valid data point. Without moving the goal posts, I'd like to re-phrase the logic : The crux of this argument is that the supply chain for illicit marijuana will be disrupted by legalization. In other words, legalizing will cause current (illegal) suppliers to go out of business and/or stop doing business with street / kid / high school dealers - thus reducing availability for underage kids. My issue with this logic is that I can't see why the demand for a product (marijuana) won't continue to drive supply once it's legalized. There will always be a way for a local high school dealer to find weed. Supply chains could easily re-route to accommodate demand in high schools. What I do find to be a compelling argument, however, is the notion that demand could decrease post-legalization. This seems rational to me. The alcohol comparison feels awkward, primarily due to the difficulty in trafficking in alcohol at the small scale. It's bulkier and decidedly more awkward to manage. Therefore, it's not exactly apples to apples. At one point, I also considered the fact that legalizing could decrease profit margins. However, low level dealers really don't have much of a profit margin to begin with. However, you have solid data and I'm primarily speculating :)
      - Fishkins 13y ago
- ds9 13y ago
  I think it's a problem of adjusting to something new. Looking at alcohol for comparison, societies have evolved cultural norms for dealing with it. In W. Europe for example, wine is part of meals; in UK a pint at the pub is a routine social occasion. In the US, with the heritage of puritans, "reformers" and a younger culture, there is more of an "all or nothing" mentality, the prohibition experiment, and youth drinking to get drunk. As cannabis legalization spreads, norms will develop to govern what's acceptable in households, coffeeshops, etc.
  - doktrin 13y ago
    > in UK a pint at the pub is a routine social occasion. This minimizes both the alcohol consumption and alcohol consumption to excess in the UK. For instance, Britain ranks 17th in the world in terms of total alcohol consumption - just below Russia. [1] More importantly, binge drinking rates in Britain and Ireland are the highest in Europe : > "A Europe-wide study found that although the British are not the EU's most regular drinkers – only consuming alcohol an average of four times a week – they drink the most at one sitting." [2] When combined, this data paints a slightly different picture than a nation of tempered well-acquainted drinkers who just hang out with a pint or two. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_alcohol_consumption http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_alcohol_co... [2] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7616405/Britain-is-the-binge-drinking-capital-of-Europe.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7616405/Britain...
    - judk 13y ago
      Britain is not the only euro nation with youth acess to alcohol, so something else is going on.
  - rhizome 13y ago
    I think it's a problem of adjusting to something new. This sounds like "parenting," to me. You don't want your kids getting acclimated to something that is outside of your experience. Natural in some ways, but in this case I think it's overblown.
zavulon 13y ago
> Not sure I'd want my kids getting exposed to this at a young age. I don't have time to dig up a study on this, but pretty sure it was done - % of teenagers who tried pot in Amsterdam is much lower than in the States or other places in Western Europe, due to lack of "coolness" factor.
atom-morgan 13y ago
A lot of the consequences you're referring to seem to be issues related to parenting and a lack of education (both for parents and their kids). A large majority of this ignorance exists because of its criminalized history and the blatant propaganda that's a result of the War on Drugs.
ericbarch 13y ago
"Harmless pot? New marijuana study shows brain damage in those 18-25" Although this could certainly be the case, I do have an issue with the article. The conclusion of the research seems to be this quote: "Breiter and his colleagues found that among all 20 casual marijuana smokers in their study — even the seven who smoked just one joint per week — the nucleus accumbens and amygdala showed changes in density, volume, and shape. The scientists also discovered that the more pot the young people smoked, the greater the abnormalities." It is never actually stated that these changes in density, volume, and shape cause brain damage. Seems to be a bit of a sensationalist headline in my mind.
ritchiea 13y ago
Even with pot being illegal a lot of my friends started smoking in their early teens. You can't solve that with regulation (and I'm not a hacker libertarian, I think some issues should be addressed with regulation).
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
gdubs 13y ago
Maybe they shouldn't resort to expulsion for something kids have been doing for half a century anyway. I'm not saying they should allow it blindly, but I feel like getting kicked out of school is gonna do more damage than the weed.
- stephengillie 13y ago
  Under-tolerance is an ages-old issue for principal administrators. Kids often get kicked out of educational institutions for wearing or generating imagery of banned items.
mullingitover 13y ago
> "Harmless pot? New marijuana study shows brain damage in those 18-25" I downvoted you for endorsing this stain on the reputation of science journalism. Tiny sample size, writer exaggerates findings to craft a clickbait article title, it's awful. We deserve something better than tabloid reporting in our science articles.
- gdubs 13y ago
  I also disagreed with the parent comment, but meta point: I'm not sure down voting is fair in this situation. Parent seems genuine and earnest in their comment. It seems like it'd be enough to simply reply with the counter point...
  - mullingitover 13y ago
    I haven't seen an etiquette guide for HN anywhere, but if we can't downvote the promotion of bad science journalism, what can we downvote?
    - nilkn 13y ago
      Hateful, bigoted posts, of course.
    - anigbrowl 13y ago
      It isn't promotion of bad science journalism. It's a crap story, but there are 3 other links in there too. I'm strongly pro-legalization and think the concerns are overblowon, but a lot of people are using the 'bad science' complaint to silence a point of view they dislike.
      - mullingitover 13y ago
        It's true, I do find the old 'think of the children' appeal to emotion, and the trotting out of the 'gateway drug' myth to be distasteful. However, I'm not silencing anyone's point of view--I don't have admin rights on HN, just the ability to rate comments.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
jonasvp 13y ago
> "In my 25 years of practice, all of my patients who came to me seeking help with their addictions, they all had one thing in common - they all started with marijuana." This might well be true though I doubt it. I strongly suspect almost all of them started with alcohol. Be that as it may, that's really not the probability we're interested in. It's not "percentage of addicts who tried Cannabis" but "percentage of Cannabis users who go on to become addicts". Given the wide usage, the first number is meaningless, the second likely very low. Your friend's quote might as well be: "they had one thing in common: they all had a driver's license".

smokeyj 13y ago

> Not sure I'd want my kids getting exposed to this at a young age. Is that a problem for legalization or parenting?

doktrin 13y ago
It's both, of course. Legalization means easier availability, even for something as relatively ubiquitous as marijuana.
- Fishkins 13y ago
  That may be true, but I'm not convinced it is. There's some evidence to the contrary [0]. The explanation I've heard is, if what you're selling is always illegal, you won't discriminate much about whom you sell to since you'll get in trouble if you're caught no matter what. On the other hand, if you can make a bunch of money legally selling something to adults, you won't be as eager to take extra risk just to get a few more sales. [0] - http://www.cbsnews.com/news/teens-pot-easier-to-buy-than-beer/ http://www.cbsnews.com/news/teens-pot-easier-to-buy-than-bee...
  - potalc 13y ago
    I agree, when I was younger, it was much easier for me to buy cannabis than alcohol. Alcohol required knowing someone older than 21, cannabis required knowing a dealer, which was much easier.
  - doktrin 13y ago
    That's a valid data point. Without moving the goal posts, I'd like to re-phrase the logic : The crux of this argument is that the supply chain for illicit marijuana will be disrupted by legalization. In other words, legalizing will cause current (illegal) suppliers to go out of business and/or stop doing business with street / kid / high school dealers - thus reducing availability for underage kids. My issue with this logic is that I can't see why the demand for a product (marijuana) won't continue to drive supply once it's legalized. There will always be a way for a local high school dealer to find weed. Supply chains could easily re-route to accommodate demand in high schools. What I do find to be a compelling argument, however, is the notion that demand could decrease post-legalization. This seems rational to me. The alcohol comparison feels awkward, primarily due to the difficulty in trafficking in alcohol at the small scale. It's bulkier and decidedly more awkward to manage. Therefore, it's not exactly apples to apples. At one point, I also considered the fact that legalizing could decrease profit margins. However, low level dealers really don't have much of a profit margin to begin with. However, you have solid data and I'm primarily speculating :)
    - Fishkins 13y ago
ds9 13y ago
I think it's a problem of adjusting to something new. Looking at alcohol for comparison, societies have evolved cultural norms for dealing with it. In W. Europe for example, wine is part of meals; in UK a pint at the pub is a routine social occasion. In the US, with the heritage of puritans, "reformers" and a younger culture, there is more of an "all or nothing" mentality, the prohibition experiment, and youth drinking to get drunk. As cannabis legalization spreads, norms will develop to govern what's acceptable in households, coffeeshops, etc.
- doktrin 13y ago
  > in UK a pint at the pub is a routine social occasion. This minimizes both the alcohol consumption and alcohol consumption to excess in the UK. For instance, Britain ranks 17th in the world in terms of total alcohol consumption - just below Russia. [1] More importantly, binge drinking rates in Britain and Ireland are the highest in Europe : > "A Europe-wide study found that although the British are not the EU's most regular drinkers – only consuming alcohol an average of four times a week – they drink the most at one sitting." [2] When combined, this data paints a slightly different picture than a nation of tempered well-acquainted drinkers who just hang out with a pint or two. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_alcohol_consumption http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_alcohol_co... [2] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7616405/Britain-is-the-binge-drinking-capital-of-Europe.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7616405/Britain...
  - judk 13y ago
    Britain is not the only euro nation with youth acess to alcohol, so something else is going on.
- rhizome 13y ago
  I think it's a problem of adjusting to something new. This sounds like "parenting," to me. You don't want your kids getting acclimated to something that is outside of your experience. Natural in some ways, but in this case I think it's overblown.

zavulon 13y ago

> Not sure I'd want my kids getting exposed to this at a young age. I don't have time to dig up a study on this, but pretty sure it was done - % of teenagers who tried pot in Amsterdam is much lower than in the States or other places in Western Europe, due to lack of "coolness" factor.

atom-morgan 13y ago

A lot of the consequences you're referring to seem to be issues related to parenting and a lack of education (both for parents and their kids). A large majority of this ignorance exists because of its criminalized history and the blatant propaganda that's a result of the War on Drugs.

ericbarch 13y ago

"Harmless pot? New marijuana study shows brain damage in those 18-25" Although this could certainly be the case, I do have an issue with the article. The conclusion of the research seems to be this quote: "Breiter and his colleagues found that among all 20 casual marijuana smokers in their study — even the seven who smoked just one joint per week — the nucleus accumbens and amygdala showed changes in density, volume, and shape. The scientists also discovered that the more pot the young people smoked, the greater the abnormalities." It is never actually stated that these changes in density, volume, and shape cause brain damage. Seems to be a bit of a sensationalist headline in my mind.

ritchiea 13y ago

Even with pot being illegal a lot of my friends started smoking in their early teens. You can't solve that with regulation (and I'm not a hacker libertarian, I think some issues should be addressed with regulation).

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

gdubs 13y ago

Maybe they shouldn't resort to expulsion for something kids have been doing for half a century anyway. I'm not saying they should allow it blindly, but I feel like getting kicked out of school is gonna do more damage than the weed.

stephengillie 13y ago
Under-tolerance is an ages-old issue for principal administrators. Kids often get kicked out of educational institutions for wearing or generating imagery of banned items.

mullingitover 13y ago

> "Harmless pot? New marijuana study shows brain damage in those 18-25" I downvoted you for endorsing this stain on the reputation of science journalism. Tiny sample size, writer exaggerates findings to craft a clickbait article title, it's awful. We deserve something better than tabloid reporting in our science articles.

gdubs 13y ago
I also disagreed with the parent comment, but meta point: I'm not sure down voting is fair in this situation. Parent seems genuine and earnest in their comment. It seems like it'd be enough to simply reply with the counter point...
- mullingitover 13y ago
  I haven't seen an etiquette guide for HN anywhere, but if we can't downvote the promotion of bad science journalism, what can we downvote?
  - nilkn 13y ago
    Hateful, bigoted posts, of course.
  - anigbrowl 13y ago
    It isn't promotion of bad science journalism. It's a crap story, but there are 3 other links in there too. I'm strongly pro-legalization and think the concerns are overblowon, but a lot of people are using the 'bad science' complaint to silence a point of view they dislike.
    - mullingitover 13y ago
      It's true, I do find the old 'think of the children' appeal to emotion, and the trotting out of the 'gateway drug' myth to be distasteful. However, I'm not silencing anyone's point of view--I don't have admin rights on HN, just the ability to rate comments.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

jonasvp 13y ago

> "In my 25 years of practice, all of my patients who came to me seeking help with their addictions, they all had one thing in common - they all started with marijuana." This might well be true though I doubt it. I strongly suspect almost all of them started with alcohol. Be that as it may, that's really not the probability we're interested in. It's not "percentage of addicts who tried Cannabis" but "percentage of Cannabis users who go on to become addicts". Given the wide usage, the first number is meaningless, the second likely very low. Your friend's quote might as well be: "they had one thing in common: they all had a driver's license".