More Pot, Less Crime: Medical Marijuana States See Drops in Assaults and Homicides

Timshel

New member
http://reason.com/blog/2014/03/27/more-pot-less-crime-medical-marijuana-st

A study published by the online journal PLOS One yesterday finds that adoption of medical marijuana laws is not associated with an increase in crime and may even result in fewer assaults and homicides. Robert G. Morris and three other University of Texas at Dallas criminologists looked at trends in homicide, rape, robbery, assault, burglary, larceny, and auto theft in the 11 states that legalized marijuana for medical use between 1990 and 2006. While crime fell nationwide during this period, it fell more sharply in the medical marijuana states, even after the researchers adjusted for various other differences between states. Morris and his colleagues suggest that the substitution of marijuana for alcohol could explain this result, although they caution that the extra reduction in crime might be due to a confounding variable they did not consider.


What seems clear is that these crime data do not support the notion that making marijuana more readily available drives up crime rates, whether because of marijuana's effect on behavior (including use of other drugs) or because of robberies associated with cash-heavy cannabusinesses:


The central finding gleaned from the present study was that MML [medical marijuana legislation] is not predictive of higher crime rates and may be related to reductions in rates of homicide and assault. Interestingly, robbery and burglary rates were unaffected by medicinal marijuana legislation, which runs counter to the claim that dispensaries and grow houses lead to an increase in victimization due to the opportunity structures linked to the amount of drugs and cash that are present....This is in line with prior research suggesting that medical marijuana dispensaries may actually reduce crime in the immediate vicinity.


How relevant is research on medical marijuana laws to the debate about broader forms of legalization? Highly relevant, if you take the view that medical marijuana is mostly a cover for recreational use, as prohibitionists tend to argue. In truth, the legal regimes governing the medical use of marijuana range from very strict (such as New Jersey's) to very loose (such as California's). But it is fair to say that a lot of people with doctor's recommendations in the looser states are recreational users in disguise. It therefore makes sense that legalizing medical marijuana would be accompanied by a decline in drinking, as Morris et al. suggest. Such a substitution effect may also explain why medical marijuana laws are associated with a decline in traffic fatalities.
 
Being stoned makes everything look different from that "new perspective".....I even thought Joan Baez could sing and Mogan David made excellent wine in those days
 
Makes sense to me. In my limited experience, I've seen literally thousands of people get violent under the influence of alcohol.

If I've seen even one stoned person get violent, I certainly do not recall it.
 
Being stoned makes everything look different from that "new perspective".....I even thought Joan Baez could sing and Mogan David made excellent wine in those days

The perspective of the researchers is based on considering factual evidence, which you have no experience with, not being high.
 
So it now appears the heart-wrenching tales of cancer-stricken patients needing medically prescribed marijuana to ease their suffering WERE indeed a dodge for recreational users.

That lie was predictable.

What's also predictable is that someone will inevitably do something stupid while high on improperly prescribed marijuana, it will be tracked back to the doctor, who will probably lose his medical license and be held civilly liable for damages in court.

And that will be the end of that.
 
So it now appears the heart-wrenching tales of cancer-stricken patients needing medically prescribed marijuana to ease their suffering WERE indeed a dodge for recreational users.

That lie was predictable.

What's also predictable is that someone will inevitably do something stupid while high on improperly prescribed marijuana, it will be tracked back to the doctor, who will probably lose his medical license and be held civilly liable for damages in court.

And that will be the end of that.
How did booze prohibition work for you, mr big gov republican
 
So it now appears the heart-wrenching tales of cancer-stricken patients needing medically prescribed marijuana to ease their suffering WERE indeed a dodge for recreational users.

That lie was predictable.

What's also predictable is that someone will inevitably do something stupid while high on improperly prescribed marijuana, it will be tracked back to the doctor, who will probably lose his medical license and be held civilly liable for damages in court.

And that will be the end of that.

Lol, yeah that's why there are no more prescription for Oxycotin. Seriously!
 
http://reason.com/blog/2014/03/27/more-pot-less-crime-medical-marijuana-st

A study published by the online journal PLOS One yesterday finds that adoption of medical marijuana laws is not associated with an increase in crime and may even result in fewer assaults and homicides. Robert G. Morris and three other University of Texas at Dallas criminologists looked at trends in homicide, rape, robbery, assault, burglary, larceny, and auto theft in the 11 states that legalized marijuana for medical use between 1990 and 2006. While crime fell nationwide during this period, it fell more sharply in the medical marijuana states, even after the researchers adjusted for various other differences between states. Morris and his colleagues suggest that the substitution of marijuana for alcohol could explain this result, although they caution that the extra reduction in crime might be due to a confounding variable they did not consider.


What seems clear is that these crime data do not support the notion that making marijuana more readily available drives up crime rates, whether because of marijuana's effect on behavior (including use of other drugs) or because of robberies associated with cash-heavy cannabusinesses:


The central finding gleaned from the present study was that MML [medical marijuana legislation] is not predictive of higher crime rates and may be related to reductions in rates of homicide and assault. Interestingly, robbery and burglary rates were unaffected by medicinal marijuana legislation, which runs counter to the claim that dispensaries and grow houses lead to an increase in victimization due to the opportunity structures linked to the amount of drugs and cash that are present....This is in line with prior research suggesting that medical marijuana dispensaries may actually reduce crime in the immediate vicinity.


How relevant is research on medical marijuana laws to the debate about broader forms of legalization? Highly relevant, if you take the view that medical marijuana is mostly a cover for recreational use, as prohibitionists tend to argue. In truth, the legal regimes governing the medical use of marijuana range from very strict (such as New Jersey's) to very loose (such as California's). But it is fair to say that a lot of people with doctor's recommendations in the looser states are recreational users in disguise. It therefore makes sense that legalizing medical marijuana would be accompanied by a decline in drinking, as Morris et al. suggest. Such a substitution effect may also explain why medical marijuana laws are associated with a decline in traffic fatalities.

wouldn't you have to look at the internals of this study before buying it as gospel....
 
So it now appears the heart-wrenching tales of cancer-stricken patients needing medically prescribed marijuana to ease their suffering WERE indeed a dodge for recreational users.

That lie was predictable.

What's also predictable is that someone will inevitably do something stupid while high on improperly prescribed marijuana, it will be tracked back to the doctor, who will probably lose his medical license and be held civilly liable for damages in court.

And that will be the end of that.

No. Where did you get that from?

It's not just cancer patients that benefit from medicinal use.
 
wouldn't you have to look at the internals of this study before buying it as gospel....

There have been several others backing this up. It was known by many libertarian leaning economists before the laws passed.

Do you have anything to counter it?
 
Back
Top