Since marijuana legalization, highway fatalities in Colorado are at near-historic lows

im not sure how other people talking about their experiences and me talking about mine are any different to have my post be removed.
is there a difference in talking about past experience vs present?
or do we just have a picky mod?

originally posted by: pimptriggs
im not sure how other people talking about their experiences and me talking about mine are any different to have my post be removed.
is there a difference in talking about past experience vs present?
or do we just have a picky mod?

The MODs work to there own rules and dont seem to follow the standard and accepted rules MODs should follow, having said that its there site and they do seem to do a good job most of the time. Not a lot more you can ask from a MOD

well i was more just curious as to what i can say on the topic without having my post removed again.
seems others are aloud to talk about the same thing lol.
a reply to: imod02

a reply to: pimptriggs
The MODs should send you a PM as to why your post was removed

nope, just a message saying i getting a warning and having my post removed, no reason as to why, but i wrote the mod and will see a reply to: imod02

a reply to: TorqueyThePig

I believe you are entirely correct. Marijuana seems to have little to do with traffic death rates either way. They have done some serious internal studies to address that very problem after they apparently had a real loser in charge of their State Police a couple years ago.

The Colorado State Patrol dramatically reduced enforcement of highway safety in 2011 and 2012. During those years, traffic-related deaths on state highways spiked.

Troopers issued fewer tickets, made fewer arrests and stopped fewer drivers, according to the patrol’s own data.

Cause through effect and it looks like an issue they are well aware of for both directions they can see it change. The bad leadership they had actually cost them $90,000 to pay the fool to politely retire. Poor performance always seems to get bonuses, but that is another story.

Patrol data shows that during 2011 and 2012, troopers also seriously reduced their contacts with drivers, even those not resulting in a ticket. When on special overtime patrols to find drunk drivers and enforce seat belt use, troopers cut their contacts with drivers by nearly two-thirds from 2011 to 2012.

“I don’t know exactly why,” Hernandez said of the decline in troopers’ contacts.

Some troopers may have stopped fewer people because they were looking for more telltale signs of a drunk driver, he said. For example, a trooper might focus on drivers turning wide instead of tightly around a corner, because drivers rarely do that unless they are intoxicated, he said.

Src

By how the news has been covering this, I don't think enforcement of what does exist on either side of the Colorado borders is lacking for cops. Other reports show they may be working some overtime to combat the interstate movement of their new legal product.

If traffic fatalities are down I wonder if given the choice people will opt for MJ over alcohol. Maybe weekend alcohol warriors are smoking instead.

People might be more focused on the social aspect of partying, not so much on what's ingested. Availability/legality could be a factor for them.

Some stores sell bud shake. It still packs a punch but it's more affordable. People spend lots of cash drinking and feel horrible afterward. If bud shake can get them where they want to be at a reasonable price with no hangover, it sounds like common sense to me.

It's possible alcoholics are consuming both, pass out quicker than they would with alcohol alone. It could give them couch lock, no desire to get behind the wheel.

I'm willing to bet food/restaurant deliveries are up. Going out/about can ruin a perfectly good high, smokers prefer to stay put have munchies delivered. The drinkers I know like going out for breakfast after partying all night.

Drinkers have too much confidence in their abilities, stoners know they're high and don't want to ruin it. They prefer listening to music/communing with nature than driving on the interstate. Totally different state of mind.

I smoked a lot of pot as a teenager. The first two years of getting my driver license I caused 12 car accidents. I haven't caused an accident since I quit smoking at the age of 20. One accident I was sued for $50k.

These threads are nothing more then pro pot propaganda. Weed addicts will say anything to push their agenda for legalization.

I have lived in Colorado for 30 years, since I was 16.
I have seen no change on the roads since legalization, the same jerks are still jerks.
Personally, while I am not a drinker, I have nothing against those who choose to drink.
We actually got it changed to legal here because of there being such support by non-users and a high percentage of users.
With the ability to now go to the store and buy legally, many stoners are drinking a lot less and thus driving drunk less.

I would rather have 100 stoned drivers on the road with me than 1 drunk bastard driving.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Well, as a non-partaker, to me this is good news. It WAS a concern to me, and I am glad that the results are good so far!

S&F

a reply to: wantsome

Hi there,

it may have been because you were under influence but it's only YOUR case. Don't think everyone is like you. I know a lot of ppl that drive stone and neither of them have caused or been in any accident. Maybe you don't have the abilities required or back then you were just not mature enough to drive.

The stoned drivers should have the same test than a drunk driver to determine if they are ok to drive. (minus the breath alcohol tester)

Peace out.

Alright, everyone together now:

CORRELATION DOES NOT IMPLY CAUSATION!

Give a statistician data, and it's amazing the number of absurd things you can use it to imply. As in, you can use the same methodology used here to suggest that increasing bald eagle populations are responsible for soaring cancer rates. You have to find an actual connection between two separate things (like highway fatalities and marijuana use), not just compare them side by side.

CORRELATION DOES IMPLY CAUSATION, when it's a cause you believe in. At least that is how most people think. This article does show evidence that the fear mongering of people that want pot banned goto argument does seem to be merely fear mongering. According to them, the roadways should be like a bumpercar ring in colorado, and it's not the case at all.

originally posted by: intrepid
I doubt that people that have recently smoked even want to drive. Food would be the #1 concern and nowadays everyone delivers.

Speaking of Deliveries

I Wonder...


Has anyone Know if the Pizzeria Food Chains Pizza Hut, Papa Johns, Etc.. Went Up in Business in a Record High !

of Deliveries! I got the Munchies!

Just Saying !

originally posted by: wantsome
I smoked a lot of pot as a teenager. The first two years of getting my driver license I caused 12 car accidents. I haven't caused an accident since I quit smoking at the age of 20. One accident I was sued for $50k.

These threads are nothing more then pro pot propaganda. Weed addicts will say anything to push their agenda for legalization.

12 accidents in two years?! Wow. And you attribute it to smoking marijuana? Dang, I guess some people shouldn't partake.

That's simply not the case with everyone though.

This sounds like something that has only to do with you, and your personal experience.

Just drive slow and take back roads.

originally posted by: wantsome
I smoked a lot of pot as a teenager. The first two years of getting my driver license I caused 12 car accidents. I haven't caused an accident since I quit smoking at the age of 20. One accident I was sued for $50k.

These threads are nothing more then pro pot propaganda. Weed addicts will say anything to push their agenda for legalization.

Yet i ride a motorcycle which takes much more attention to ride than a car is to drive.

Smoked for nearly 20 years (though gave up a few years ago) never crashed once and i would smoke all evening then ride home after, now ofc i wouldnt attempt it directly after smoking a J, but certainly i can say that nothing ever happened in all that time.

The difference between being stone and being drunk, is knowing the difference!!! When you are drunk you make poor decisions, where as pot, you know when and when not to do things.

I do recall reading something about a study a few years back where they determined that regular pot smokers had no significant impairment in motor skills. But people who only smoked occasionally were impaired somewhat. Don't ask me where I read that : )

In my experience it does make sense though. Last time I drove baked, I went probably 20 mph, and I don't think I looked at the road once, since I was too busy rambling to my (probably uninterested) passengers.

originally posted by: Vandelay Industries
I do recall reading something about a study a few years back where they determined that regular pot smokers had no significant impairment in motor skills. But people who only smoked occasionally were impaired somewhat. Don't ask me where I read that : )

In my experience it does make sense though. Last time I drove baked, I went probably 20 mph, and I don't think I looked at the road once, since I was too busy rambling to my (probably uninterested) passengers.

Makes perfect sense, once someone builds up a tolerance, quits, and then smokes again a few days later, they will probably get destroyed.

I think problem with legal MJ is that people get tempted to have a few beers too.

Thats a dangerous combo, they multiply each others effects massively.

You are allowed to have a beer or two, as long as your blood alcohol level isnt too high you can drive, and for most people this is not a problem, but throw a joint into the mix and your regular tolerance to either is thrown out of shape, so even though you may be 'safe in the eyes of the law to drive' (though not recommended) - you can easily become a danger without realizing it.