It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Pot-Positive Traffic Fatalities Up 100% in Colorado?

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 30 2014 @ 04:00 PM
Reports are claiming pot is causing problems in Colorado.

More traffic deaths.

More "positive" test results when arrested.


Not sure where the "up 100%" is coming from.

More study required.

The data coming out of Colorado is exhibit A on why voters should reject legalization efforts. Even the Democratic governor of Colorado, John Hickenlooper, said that legalizing marijuana in Colorado was “reckless.” As I have written at Heritage, pot-positive traffic fatalities have gone up 100 percent since voters legalized pot in Colorado. This is true despite the fact that overall traffic fatalities in Colorado have gone down since 2007.

A report by a federal grant-funded agency in Colorado found seven specific negative side effects that pot legalization has caused in Colorado:

1) the majority of DUI drug arrests involve marijuana;

2) youth consumption of marijuana has increased;

3) drug-related suspensions/expulsions increased 32 percent over a 5-year period and a majority was for marijuana;

4) an increase in college users;

5) almost 50 percent of Denver arrestees tested positive for marijuana;

6) marijuana-related emergency room visits increased 57 percent from 2011-2013; and

7) marijuana-related hospitalizations has increased 82 percent since 2008.

Pot-Positive Traffic Fatalities Up 100% in Colorado

edit on Nov-30-2014 by xuenchen because:

posted on Nov, 30 2014 @ 04:07 PM
That's why we're building self driving cars

+5 more 
posted on Nov, 30 2014 @ 04:10 PM
They're just a bunch of lightweights in Colorado or they got the really good stuff.

I'd like to see past studies for their comparison, but it sounds like propaganda BS to me.

+4 more 
posted on Nov, 30 2014 @ 04:13 PM
Your link is bad.
This is the main problem with these stats.

A report by a federal grant-funded agency

Anyone with half a brain knows the government will not find anything that will show positive for pot then let it out to the public. Also most of these come from before it was even legal.

posted on Nov, 30 2014 @ 04:13 PM
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

This is what I'm thinking. They can't handle it, or they're "seasoned" and can't handle the really good stuff that's around there.

And they're making a breath test for it, it reads the stuff that creates the effects in the breath:

Breath Test In The Works

+3 more 
posted on Nov, 30 2014 @ 04:14 PM
One thing to remember that the media will almost always leave out:

Marijuana metabolites stay in your system for a month, sometimes longer. However, marijuana itself, the effects only last a few hours.

Thus, it is totally possible to test positive for weed even if you aren't high, and haven't smoked it in a while. Testing positive for marijuana does not mean that you are under the influence, only that you have smoked it sometime within the last few weeks.

posted on Nov, 30 2014 @ 04:15 PM
a reply to: xuenchen

5) almost 50 percent of Denver arrestees tested positive for marijuana;

Well all that means is that those people used marijuana within the last 30 days it doesn't mean they were under the influence of it at the time.

I kind of remember something about bagels and poppy seeds testing positive for drugs at some point one could make an argument that bagels were tied to whatever the test was needed for.

I still say this is a big win since overall fatalities are down.IMO less people are drinking and many have switched to smoking seems like a win.

posted on Nov, 30 2014 @ 04:17 PM
Good points so far.

The "Studies" could easily be scientific propaganda.

posted on Nov, 30 2014 @ 04:18 PM
I call BS. Most of those items were things they probably never even checked for in the past. So now they're starting to check, and of course their number is 100%.

Every single item in the article can be refuted, any how. The only thing that needs to be said though, is that pot stays in your fat cells for days, some times weeks at a time, and certainly does not effect you for more than a few hours.

posted on Nov, 30 2014 @ 04:22 PM
What does "up 100%" mean? If they had 2 last year and 4 this year then it would be up

I would also think they didn't test in the past and now they will.... I been saying for a long time now that the pot users are going to get the raw deal with it being legal now. Since THC stays in a person's system for months then by test they can ALWAYS be DUI, so EVERY accident, EVERY ticket can end up as a DUI for a pot smoker.

edit on 30-11-2014 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 30 2014 @ 04:23 PM
a reply to: xuenchen


Just because a traffic fatality victim has THC in their system from using marijuana does not necessarily mean that they were driving under the influence of said herb.


Nevertheless, this impairment does not appear to play a significant role in on-road traffic accidents. A 2002 review of seven separate studies involving 7,934 drivers reported, “Crash culpability studies have failed to demonstrate that drivers with cannabinoids in the blood are significantly more likely than drug-free drivers to be culpable in road crashes.” This result is likely because subject under the influence of marijuana are aware of their impairment and compensate for it accordingly, such as by slowing down and by focusing their attention when they know a response will be required. This reaction is just the opposite of that exhibited by drivers under the influence of alcohol, who tend to drive in a more risky manner proportional to their intoxication.


Either way, its definitely not a good idea to drive while you are under the influence of any mind altering substance.

posted on Nov, 30 2014 @ 04:23 PM
Here is the biggest thing I call BS for this article.

Charles Stimson, a former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Detainee Affairs, is a Senior Legal Fellow at The Heritage Foundation

The author works for a right wing think tank. That great think tank that brought us the Iraq war and the ACA.

(post by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Nov, 30 2014 @ 04:29 PM
So overall traffic accidents are down... But pot affected driver rise by 100%..
Could it not just be that more people are smoking it since it's now legal, hence you would expect to see a percentage rise of 'pot affected' in pretty much single 'event' anyway.

People using phone booths under the influence of pot has risen by 100%!
People in the park tripping over shoelaces has risen 100%! etc. etc.

What is more prudent I would think is knowing the actual statewide population usage increases first before they attribute anything to its cause/effect.

posted on Nov, 30 2014 @ 04:29 PM
don't believe the hype!!!!!!!

i live in colorado.....have since 2006.

the reason that the percentages are increasing is because in previous years there has been less focus on it....if in the past, if someone was drunk and caused an accident, they were tested for only alcohol......even though they probably had weed in their system too....since it stays for up to 30 days.

now with the passage of the pot dui...the police are now paid to and are enforcing the pot gain revenue...they now have incentive ...i.e. fund their jobs, their department, and they ask everyone if they have been smoking weed....when in the past they would have not asked unless they smelled it or thought you were wasted.

off course the numbers are gonna go up......for example, 1 case last year to 2 cases this year is an increase of the we need more funding....more police...and more enforcement on something that never was a problem before....of course you will find more increase in numbers.....people have been smoking weed and driving since the inception of the car......where are those numbers?

believe what you want, but marijuana is not a problem in colorado....alcohol is a much bigger social problem.

posted on Nov, 30 2014 @ 04:31 PM

originally posted by: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
I think what is needed is tests that can detect better not the presence of cannabis, but to detect if the person is actually under the influence.

Alcohol has very define measurements and leaves the body at a very define rate. I'm not sure if pot can be tested the same. In the end a person can get a DUI under .08 if they are impaired, so it is up to the cop mostly, and if there was an accident then a person with even a little alcohol in their system will get a DUI and blame. The key is you can drink today and be .00 in the morning. With THC you are positive forever if you smoke a few times a week.

edit on 30-11-2014 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 30 2014 @ 04:38 PM
100% of people who enjoy French Fries will eventually die.

Can I get a job at a think tank.

Pot stays in your system over a month. They have no idea when it was consumed.

posted on Nov, 30 2014 @ 04:42 PM
Not gonna bother battling this one out.

Just BS.

Anyone who knows why I say this...just Knows.

No Discussion necessary.


posted on Nov, 30 2014 @ 05:02 PM
Alcohol causes a ton of traffic fatalities: "Meh."
Marijuana may have been present in the vehicles of a few people who were involved in an accident: "Oh my God! Ban the Pot! Save our children!"

posted on Nov, 30 2014 @ 08:22 PM
Im simply plain tired of the whole issue...been using since 18 and no impairment yet.....just the muchies from time to time....I call propaganda too...........

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in