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.


What Colorado "looks like" after one year of "legal pot"

page: 6
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in


posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 09:45 PM

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71
1. The majority of DUI drug arrests involve marijuana and 25 to 40 percent were marijuana alone.

This is very non-specific, and it doesn't seem to offer any information on how legalization has CHANGED things. Is this before, or after, legalization? And if after, how does this compare to before? It's almost a completely useless statement.

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71
2. In 2012, 10.47 percent of Colorado youth ages 12 to 17 were considered current marijuana users compared to 7.55 percent nationally. Colorado ranked fourth in the nation, and was 39 percent higher than the national average.

Legalization only occurred in 2012, and the first shop only opened on 1st January 2014.
So these statistics seem to be being gathered from BEFORE legalization.

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71
3. Drug-related student suspensions/expulsions increased 32 percent from school years 2008-09 through 2012-13, the vast majority were for marijuana violations.

Again, check the dates of the law change, none of this is adding up. It looks to me as though wherever you got this information from is biased in the extreme and basically offering nothing but propaganda. And vast majority is what percentage? Compared to the previous period? Had the use of other more damaging drugs declined?

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71
4. In 2012, 26.81 percent of college age students were considered current marijuana users compared to 18.89 percent nationally, which ranks Colorado third in the nation and 42 percent above the national average.

Another meaningless statement, the number of cannabis users is not a problem if the use of cannabis is not a problem. This statement seems to be suggesting that cannabis=problem, making the assumption that the mere use of it is something sinister.

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71
5. In 2013, 48.4 percent of Denver adult arrestees tested positive for marijuana, which is a 16 percent increase from 2008.

This is a very cleverly worded statement, giving the impression they were arrested for drug offenses, when they could have been arrested for public urination. I would like to see what the violent crime statistics are in comparison, but then I don't think that would work with the clear biased agenda of whoever compiled this trash.

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71
6. From 2011 through 2013 there was a 57 percent increase in marijuana-related emergency room visits.

How many were there to begin with?
If there were only five in 2011, then there's absolutely nothing to worry about.
Notice they don't tell you how many there were, they use the convenient % to fool you into thinking it's something dramatic.

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71
7. Hospitalizations related to marijuana has increased 82 percent since 2008."

Over what period?
In comparison to the 12 months of 2008?
Or since 2008?
And again, how many were there to begin with?

All in all, nothing you have pasted in here is in any way valid without corroborating data.

If you tell me Cannabis related emergency room visits have increase 50% in 2014 compared to 2008, but only 10 people needed emergency treatment for it in 2008, that's only 15 instances. And in contrast, if the state is now making another $10 million in taxes, seeing a drop in violent crime, seeing fewer arrests for cannabis, seeing a drop in alcohol abuse, seeing a drop in domestic violence... then that is a win!

posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 09:56 PM

originally posted by: MarkJS
To put it another way... marijuana may not be a gateway drug physically, but is is gateway legislatively. It's a slippery slope, my friends.

A slippery slope to what?

You seem to have the same attitude our British government has, ignore any data, science or research into drugs or prostitution and the benefits of legislation, legalization and protections, and simply stick your fingers in your ears and whistle a puritan tune.

In the UK even the governments own drug advisory specialists have recommended legalizing cannabis (and others have recommended legalizing other things such as prostitution) but the government ignores all science and data and sticks with "but it's icky and we don't like it!!!!"

It's so bad here that the gov's chief medical officer was fired/forced to quit, for stating on record to the public that all the scientific data and the pro's and con's of cannabis PROVED CATEGORICALLY that the gov should reconsider its position. He was hounded out by puritan idiots who reject actual science completely because they have some kind of ridiculous moralistic notions about what is "right and wrong".

Lets be honest, this all pretty much goes back to religion and conservative ignorance. These are people who will actively reject science and reality because it challenges their traditionalist notions.

posted on Mar, 11 2015 @ 03:44 PM

originally posted by: darkbake

originally posted by: WeRpeons
Can anyone set-up shop or do you have to pay for a license to sell it? If they need a license, I wonder how they decide who will be awarded one? You probably need to have friends in high places to get one.

In Washington State, I know you need a license to set up a shop and they involve getting approval from the state and the county, which is a lot of paperwork - there is definitely some politics involved.

It's the same in colorado -- and the licence itself is $10k roughly.

<< 3  4  5   >>

log in