Replies

Thanks for the link. I found it noteworthy that your link is to a site advocating legalization of marijuana. More importantly, this was not a scientific article supporting the position you asserted. It was simply the expressing his own opinions of the data. What I found was interesting from his article was the following statement of fact and then his effort to explain it away. This is the statement:

“Epidemiological research also indicates that cannabis is the most prevalent illicit drug detected in fatally injured drivers and motor vehicle crash victims.11 Reasons for this are twofold. One, pot is by far the most widely used illicit drug among the US population, with nearly one out of two Americans admitting having tried it.12 Two, marijuana is the most readily detectable illicit drug in toxicological tests. Marijuana’s primary psychoactive compound, THC, may be detected in blood for several hours, and in some extreme cases days after past use,13 long after any impairing effects have worn off.

So what we know from the studies the author cited is that marijuana is the most prevalent substance found in traffic fatalities. And you think this supports your position of legalizing marijuana? Granted he tries to explain it away because of marijuana's residual presence in the blood for several hours. But that is just his guess that the driver's who caused that accident just had THC in their blood, but weren't impaired. Notice there is no reference to any study to support his claim. What we can fairly conclude is that in fatalities involving illicit drugs, marijuana is the most common illegal drug in the system of the driver. Not only doesn't this support your position, it completely undermines it.

Try again.

You wrote:

So what we know from the studies the author cited is that marijuana is the most prevalent substance found in traffic fatalities.

No, the statement was:

Epidemiological research also indicates that cannabis is the most prevalent illicit drug detected in fatally injured drivers and motor vehicle crash victims.

Leaving out alcohol and prescription medications. Additionally, it doesn't state whether it's the contributor, merely that it was present, which it can be for days after smoking at detectable but physiologically ineffective levels...

But that is just his guess that the driver's who caused that accident just had THC in their blood, but weren't impaired.

You're assuming that the victim caused the accident, which is unsupported, for all you know the majority of the fatalities are victims of drunk, or merely lousy, drivers.