Legal marijuana reduces traffic fatalities

Aoxomoxoa said:
That is something that really baffles me about the US. You are mostly all proud of your rights yet something like company drug testing, which is total infringement of individual rights, appears to be rife.
Click to expand...

It's a privately-owned or corporately-owned business...why cant they decide who they want to work there? As long as they conform with discrimination laws?

They are held liable when an impaired (or non-impaired) employee harms someone, arent they?
 
Professor Baxter said:
Read the article. It's not a coincidence. Marijuana and alcohol are substitutes for one another. Legal marijuana will reduce alcohol consumption and the abuse of other more impairing drugs (e.g., pills) and therefore traffic fatalities and the other associated problems.
Click to expand...

Well, we have a couple of states that we might be able to start tracking that in now. We'll see. I'm not buying it at this point but am fine with it if it is.
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
Well apart from the police and armed services, I don't know of any companies or organisations that conduct drugs testing.
Click to expand...

Home Depot. Walmart. I've had to get at least one for a high tech job at a corp.

And in employment agreements, it often states that you must submit to one if asked (like if you have an accident of some kind on their property).
 
Lorca said:
It's a privately-owned or corporately-owned business...why cant they decide who they want to work there? As long as they conform with discrimination laws?

They are held liable when an impaired (or non-impaired) employee harms someone, arent they?
Click to expand...
Marijuana stays in your system 30 days unlike booze which is about 12 hrs
 
Professor Baxter said:
Just because it may play a role does not mean the expected result will change. Tell us why you think it would?
Click to expand...

I have no idea what you are trying to say here; I thought my post was pretty clear. The premise is moronic and Marijuana, as illustrated by the bolded part, does not play any role in reducing traffic fatalities as suggested by this moronic study.

The correlation coefficient of such studies is not statistically significant enough to suggest that marijuana use will lower traffic fatalities; it does however relate to these:

young adults treat alcohol and marijuana as substitutes


the fact that alcohol is more likely to be consumed outside the home

You see, sometimes relying on coefficients that might not actually relate to the actual cause causes such moronic conclusions when those studying desire a specific outcome.

It reminds me of a correlation analysis I did for a fast food company once. The conclusion of the dimwit VP at the time suggested that it appeared that hot dog sales directly correlated to taco sales. What he didn't realize is that the relationship was due to the fact that in malls, all the food occasions were typically located in a central area together; thus the correlation.

Carry on.
 
Truth Detector said:
I have no idea what you are trying to say here; I thought my post was pretty clear. The premise is moronic and Marijuana, as illustrated by the bolded part, does not play any role in reducing traffic fatalities as suggested by this moronic study.

The correlation coefficient of such studies is not statistically significant enough to suggest that marijuana use will lower traffic fatalities; it does however relate to these:

young adults treat alcohol and marijuana as substitutes


the fact that alcohol is more likely to be consumed outside the home

You see, sometimes relying on coefficients that might not actually relate to the actual cause causes such moronic conclusions when those studying desire a specific outcome.

It reminds me of a correlation analysis I did for a fast food company once. The conclusion of the dimwit VP at the time suggested that it appeared that hot dog sales directly correlated to taco sales. What he didn't realize is that the relationship was due to the fact that in malls, all the food occasions were typically located in a central area together; thus the correlation.

Carry on.
Click to expand...

WTF are you talking about? Research showed a 13% reduction in traffic fatalities after adopting medical marijuana laws. 13% is definitely significant. The article says that it could be because marijuana impairs drivers less than alcohol and other substitutes or because marijuana is not as often consumed outside the home. But that does not change the result and you have offered no argument to support that it would.
 
Truth dumbass is as square as he is tea bagger!
Stoners aren't winning any races or banging cars like boozers.
They are more likely to get ticketed for going to slow than speeding.
 
Professor Baxter said:
WTF are you talking about? Research showed a 13% reduction in traffic fatalities after adopting medical marijuana laws. 13% is definitely significant. The article says that it could be because marijuana impairs drivers less than alcohol and other substitutes or because marijuana is not as often consumed outside the home. But that does not change the result and you have offered no argument to support that it would.
Click to expand...

Maybe that's because people with life-threatening diseases drive less?
 
Lorca said:
Maybe that's because people with life-threatening diseases drive less?
Click to expand...

No, that does not explain it. Legal medical marijuana is not going to increase the number of people with life threatening diseases.

The article sites several sources that indicate marijuana and alcohol are substitutes for many.
 
Professor Baxter said:
WTF are you talking about? Research showed a 13% reduction in traffic fatalities after adopting medical marijuana laws.
Click to expand...

Wrong; it showed a 13% reduction was UNcorrelated to the fact that they were smoking marijuana; but rather, for behavioral reasons associated with smoking marijuana. Ie. There are no marijuana bars so you are LESS likely to drive as a result.

The false premise is that fewer traffic fatalities was due to the legalization.

Professor Baxter said:
The article says that it could be because marijuana impairs drivers less than alcohol and other substitutes or because marijuana is not as often consumed outside the home.
Click to expand...

It was the latter; but it has NOTHING to do with driving under the influence which is the premise of this thread; but rather BEHAVIOR differences due to there not being marijuana bars.

Impairment is impairment and having done both, I can verify that I was not LESS impaired when I smoked marijuana than when I drank. But I did stay in the house as a result of it being something you don't buy at a bar.

Professor Baxter said:
But that does not change the result and you have offered no argument to support that it would.
Click to expand...

Once again you fail to distinguish between causal correlation and coincidence. But I am not surprised. You're really not too bright which is why you made the false premise in the first place.

Here’s a clue for the clueless; a better study would have been a controlled test with half the drivers under the influence of alcohol, and the other half under marijuana and then track the results and report them. Saying that there were fewer traffic fatalities due to legalized marijuana from coincidental data is moronic, not to mention false.
 
Truth Detector said:
Wrong; it showed a 13% reduction was UNcorrelated to the fact that they were smoking marijuana; but rather, for behavioral reasons associated with smoking marijuana. Ie. There are no marijuana bars so you are LESS likely to drive as a result.

The false premise is that fewer traffic fatalities was due to the legalization.



It was the latter; but it has NOTHING to do with driving under the influence which is the premise of this thread; but rather BEHAVIOR differences due to there not being marijuana bars.

Impairment is impairment and having done both, I can verify that I was not LESS impaired when I smoked marijuana than when I drank. But I did stay in the house as a result of it being something you don't buy at a bar.



Once again you fail to distinguish between causal correlation and coincidence. But I am not surprised. You're really not too bright which is why you made the false premise in the first place.

Here’s a clue for the clueless; a better study would have been a controlled test with half the drivers under the influence of alcohol, and the other half under marijuana and then track the results and report them. Saying that there were fewer traffic fatalities due to legalized marijuana from coincidental data is moronic, not to mention false.
Click to expand...

You are either quite confused or you are just employing a pathetic strawman argument. The correlation is between legalization of marijuana or medical marijuana and reduced traffic fatalities. The research supports this pretty conclusively and you have offered nothing to dispute it.

The premise of the thread is not about driving under the influence. Look at the title.

The fact that alcohol is more likely to be consumed outside the home is not the proven reason for the difference in fatalities. It's effects just can't be ruled out but it's not relevant to the premise, unless you can establish that legalization is going to drastically change usage habits. You have provided nothing on that. However, there is plenty of research to support that marijuana causes a less intense impairment and that the user is more aware of impairment. It more than likely is a major factor in the difference.
 
Professor Baxter said:
Read the article. It's not a coincidence. Marijuana and alcohol are substitutes for one another. Legal marijuana will reduce alcohol consumption and the abuse of other more impairing drugs (e.g., pills) and therefore traffic fatalities and the other associated problems.
Click to expand...
they can be substutes. Alcohol greatly diminshes motor skiils (so called "coordination") to the point people cannot even walk a straight line, and weave in traffic while driving.

weed is more subtle, the biggest problem I had when I used to smoke was forgetfullness, missing key directions, and such
 
annata said:
they can be substutes. Alcohol greatly diminshes motor skiils (so called "coordination") to the point people cannot even walk a straight line, and weave in traffic while driving.

weed is more subtle, the biggest problem I had when I used to smoke was forgetfullness, missing key directions, and such
Click to expand...

I can say I've never suffered a loss of motor skills when drinking in my years of doint so. Not that my experience is typical.
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
That is something that really baffles me about the US. You are mostly all proud of your rights yet something like company drug testing, which is total infringement of individual rights, appears to be rife.
Click to expand...

It doesn't infringe on your rights in the least......doesn't stop you from doing anything....just pick which one you need the most, the job or the other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top