Wouldn't you know it? States with legalized marijuana are experiencing 6% more car crashes. (IIHS insurance data)

He made up for his slave-owning by making sweet, sweet love to them!

I have to go with the letsrun consensus on this one. Seems pretty reasonable that anybody driving a car stoned would do much better than someone completely sober. I also believe the speed limit should be raised at least 50%. If you drive fast enough, you will miss anything that would have hit you.

The only thing that consistently affects the accuracy of proffered statistics is whether those that generate the data have a career or financial status that can be affected by the outcome.

The dirty 303 wrote:

Sand Dunes wrote:

That's not what I mean. I'm saying I want liberty, which means the liberty for people to do whatever drugs they want.

What about when that liberty infringes on my safety? I'm an EMT in Denver (and have been for 16 years), and there was/is definitely a noticeable increase in car accidents related to 420 use in some form or fashion after it was legalized.

You’re correct. Drinking and driving, doing drugs and driving, etc. is already illegal, but look at what happens? Looks like people can’t drive responsibly so they just need to ban motorized vehicles already. Think of all the lives that will be saved. Even just all the pedestrians killed each year. Vehicles infringe our safety, they need to go.

alrightythen wrote:

Sand Dunes wrote:

As Thomas Jefferson said, "I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery."

That's an odd comment coming from someone who owned slaves.

What's odd about it? He stated he'd rather not be a slave. I'm sure all slave owners felt the same way.

YMMV wrote:

Question for this wrote:

Why wouldn't they compare Washington, Colorado, etc... crash volume pre recreational pot vs post instead of throwing a completely different state into the mix? Like just look at data from 2016 vs 2017 within the same state or whenever it was legalized?

Seems bogus to me. Driving in a different state is a different experience. Drinking increases crashes, but no one is exclaiming to bring back prohibition....

This was my immediate reaction. Surely they have in-prohibition data.

Oh, and using Utah as a "neighboring state" for CO would definitely be rigging the data. Not to mention more rural states like ID v. WA or NV v. CA with larger urban areas.

Garbage in, garbage out.

As a person who works with number and stats for a living, I NEVER EVER trust numbers and stats. It is so incredibly easy to spin data in any direction you want it using "real data". And there is almost always an agenda if you're seeing stats in the news. Conservative, liberal, doesn't matter. Never trust stats until your own homework has been done....if that's even possible.

The poster is pointing out the obvious there. Why did they not compare Colorado stats pre and post legal pot on a per vehicle registration basis? I don't know what the numbers would say, but that is a massive red flag that they didn't.

This is just a guess.

They may have done the state to state comparison rather than pre to post comparison within the state due to increases in distracted driving incidents.

Regardless, 6 percent isn't that great of an increase and certainly isn't substantial enough to blame pot. But I am sure it is enough for the insurance companies to justify raising car insurance rates in states where pot smoking is decriminalized.

Alcohol mushes the brain wrote:

Humans won’t even be allowed to drive cars soon. Certainly stupid the way they did their research. How obvious is it to simply look at before and after I’m the SAME state, not neighboring states at the same time.

Who funded this supposed research?

I’m guessing it’s research series out by some nazi right wing think tank - which is likely a front for sex offenders club.

Sand Dunes wrote:

my mommy enslaved me wrote:

yeah idk how not being able to smoke pot is a form of slavery that's a real head scratcher

That's not what I mean. I'm saying I want liberty, which means the liberty for people to do whatever drugs they want.

I also believe in more legalization, but there is a distinction here. Your freedom extends to the point where it does not interfere with the choices or lives of others.

People who smoke pot or meth in their homes are not impacting me. That same person doing it and then getting out on the roads could have an impact (LITERALLY) on me and my freedoms.

The dirty 303 wrote:

Sand Dunes wrote:

That's not what I mean. I'm saying I want liberty, which means the liberty for people to do whatever drugs they want.

What about when that liberty infringes on my safety? I'm an EMT in Denver (and have been for 16 years), and there was/is definitely a noticeable increase in car accidents related to 420 use in some form or fashion after it was legalized.

Have you notice any impact to opiod overuse since legalization?

Luv2Run wrote:

Sand Dunes wrote:

That's not what I mean. I'm saying I want liberty, which means the liberty for people to do whatever drugs they want.

I also believe in more legalization, but there is a distinction here. Your freedom extends to the point where it does not interfere with the choices or lives of others.

People who smoke pot or meth in their homes are not impacting me. That same person doing it and then getting out on the roads could have an impact (LITERALLY) on me and my freedoms.

Exactly, as Thomas Jefferson said, "Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. . .No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him."

You would probably structure this research with a "Diff-in-diff" framework. So, you would look at a natural break (states like Colorado adopt the law ("treated group") vs. others that don't adopt the law ("non-treated group") at a certain point in time). Then, you analyze the differences between the groups. If Colorado and other adopters change significantly more than the comparable states change, then we might attribute the changes to the law. The big assumption that must be shown is comparable trends. You can't do this analysis if Colorado and others were already trending in a much different way than the "non-treated group." Another problem with this analysis is that you have to control for other factors (which, appears to be the case, but I don't know if they controlled for them correctly). Diff-in-diff attempts to get at causality in a "natural experiment" sort of way. I'm not surprised by the findings, and there should be plenty of data.

The dirty 303 wrote:

What about when that liberty infringes on my safety? I'm an EMT in Denver (and have been for 16 years), and there was/is definitely a noticeable increase in car accidents related to 420 use in some form or fashion after it was legalized.

Anecdotal and vague, not believable. Confirmation bias not ruled out, either.

That's why Canadians are starting to introduce a cannabis sobriety test:

https://youtu.be/SOoL1V6vCk4

Sand Dunes wrote:

As Thomas Jefferson said, "I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery."

Quoting a hypocrite. Seems like he preferred slavery just fine as long as the were named Sally.

Question for this wrote:

Why wouldn't they compare Washington, Colorado, etc... crash volume pre recreational pot vs post instead of throwing a completely different state into the mix? Like just look at data from 2016 vs 2017 within the same state or whenever it was legalized?

Seems bogus to me. Driving in a different state is a different experience. Drinking increases crashes, but no one is exclaiming to bring back prohibition....

They aren’t comparing the rate in CO to the rate in UT. They are comparing the rates of change in different states over the time period controlled for different insurance risk factors. It’s statistics that actuaries use to determine insurance rates. You’re probably high, so I am guessing math isn’t your strong suit. Yes car and home insurance rates have gone up since the dirty hippie invasion in Colorado.

Question for this wrote:

Why wouldn't they compare Washington, Colorado, etc... crash volume pre recreational pot vs post instead of throwing a completely different state into the mix? Like just look at data from 2016 vs 2017 within the same state or whenever it was legalized?

Seems bogus to me. Driving in a different state is a different experience. Drinking increases crashes, but no one is exclaiming to bring back prohibition....

A before-after/legalized-control design would be better. But either way, the study would need to firstly demonstrate that cannabis use has gone up post-prohibition (this is not necessarily true) and, if so, account for "cannabis tourism" (i.e. more drivers) and the effect of those additional drivers driving on unfamiliar roads. One would expect more crashes with more drivers even if the rate of accidents (i.e. number crashes/number of drivers) was unchanged. Just relying on the resident population (e.g. from a census) does not address this issue adequately. One would also expect more crashes on unfamiliar roads, particularly in rural areas. By definition, tourists would be on roads with which they typically have little or no familiarity. Both factors would need to be statistically controlled. As it is, the study is superficial and worthless.

YMMV wrote:

L L wrote:

Wouldn’t it be more useful to collect data on car crashes of high people?

But, yeah, more high people will mean more crashes.

More high people would mean more cars sitting at intersections for several light changes with the turn signal on, and taking half an hour to get through the drive-thru. Any additional crashes would involve being rear-ended for going 15 mph below the speed limit.

This is the real reason crashes have increased with legalization. This myth that driving high is safe is a dangerous myth. People who wouldn't drive drunk think it's ok to drive high.

The solution is enforcement and education of the public that driving high is dangerous. Traffic cops are just now starting to enforce DWI laws for marijuana, but it still gets a free pass sometimes.