Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

  • Shop
  • Subscribe to BMG
  • Contact
  • Log In
  • Front Page
  • All Posts
  • About
  • Rules
  • Events
  • Register on BMG

Marijuana legalization in Colorado & Washington hasn’t increased youth use

May 10, 2016 By SamTracy 15 Comments

One of the main arguments against marijuana legalization is that it will inevitably increase underage people’s access to marijuana, therefore increasing their use of the drug. But two studies released in the last month — one about Colorado and one about Washington, both of which legalized in 2012 — refute that claim.

Colorado:

Anonymous surveys given to about 40,000 Colorado students before and after legalization showed “no significant change” in marijuana use by children under 18 in the preceding 30 days.

Among high school students, use went from about 23 percent in 2005 to about 20 percent in 2014. Similarly, there was no significant change in use by kids younger than 13 in recent years.

Washington:

Researchers compared 2010 and 2014 data from the Washington State Healthy Youth Survey. Each year’s survey included questions about ease of access to marijuana, alcohol, cigarettes and other illicit drugs.

There was virtually no change in the proportion of teens who reported it was “easy” to access marijuana in 2010 (55 percent), compared to 2014 (54 percent) after the new law was enacted, according to the study.

We’re learning a lot from the experiences in Colorado, Washington, Oregon, DC, and Alaska. Luckily, one of the things we’ve learned is that marijuana legalization can be done responsibly, in a way that does not increase the amount of marijuana consumed by young people whose brains are still developing. The initiative in Massachusetts will regulate marijuana very tightly, and there is no reason to expect that our results will be any different.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0
0

Filed Under: User Tagged With: colorado, marijuana, marijuana legalization, poll, survey, washington, youth, youth drug use

Comments

  1. Christopher says

    May 10, 2016 at 4:35 pm

    I have to admit to still being very skeptical, especially when it seems to fly in the face of common sense and logic. There is really no way to tell how accurate either the before or after surveys are when you are. Maybe 21 vs. 18 makes all the difference as some jurisdictions are considering raising the cigarette age. Let’s hope so.

    Log in to Reply
    • Christopher says

      May 10, 2016 at 4:36 pm

      Consider “when you are” at the end of the second sentence above stricken.

      Log in to Reply
    • jconway says

      May 10, 2016 at 4:41 pm

      Anonymous public health surveys are actually quite accurate and used by law enforcement agencies and public health departments to assess teen drug and alcohol usage as well as guage the statistics on other behaviors. My own bias in favor of legalization aside, I do not question the accuracy of these kinds of surveys. They are from objective government bodies and the data they collect directly assess the impact policy changes will have. In our own state it’s data like this that lead so many lawmakers to conclude he 18/21 tobacco switch would have so much efficacy.

      Log in to Reply
    • SomervilleTom says

      May 10, 2016 at 8:26 pm

      However accurate this data is, it’s the best we’ve got. Some data is better than no data.

      Log in to Reply
    • SamTracy says

      May 11, 2016 at 10:02 am

      Legalization drives black market dealers out of business, since they can’t compete with convenient storefronts with better product that the big majority of their customers (who are over 21) can shop at. They used to sell to anyone, including some teenagers, but now they can’t stay afloat solely on teenagers’ business so they stop selling. Now, those teenagers don’t have a reliable source of marijuana, and have to resort to getting a 21+ friend to buy it for them like they do with alcohol, which is just as hard, if not harder, than calling their dealer. That’s basically what’s happening in CO & WA.

      Log in to Reply
      • Christopher says

        May 11, 2016 at 3:43 pm

        …teenagers DO get their hands on alcohol, so this isn’t going to be perfect.

        Log in to Reply
        • SamTracy says

          May 14, 2016 at 8:20 am

          And if we always shot down imperfect proposals, we’d never change anything.

          Log in to Reply
          • Christopher says

            May 14, 2016 at 2:21 pm

            …but I still am not convinced that it won’t get more prevalent because it is easier. Alcohol is legal. It is therefore sold at package and convenience stores and kept in many homes where kids have easy access to it. Pot is not yet legal. You can’t just go buy it in a store and I suspect most homes don’t have it lying around. I’m just really not looking forward to the cultural message, intended or not, that another drug is acceptable.

            Log in to Reply
  2. petr says

    May 11, 2016 at 12:34 pm

    We’re learning a lot from the experiences in Colorado, Washington, Oregon, DC, and Alaska. Luckily, one of the things we’ve learned is that marijuana legalization can be done responsibly, in a way that does not increase the amount of marijuana consumed by young people whose brains are still developing. The initiative in Massachusetts will regulate marijuana very tightly, and there is no reason to expect that our results will be any different.

    … without disputing the news as good, I will point out that Massachusetts geography is distinctly different than that of Washington (7x greater in land mass, for instance) or Colorado (bigger) or Alaska (even bigger).

    It is this difference, which translates into a difference in mobility, that might prove a problem for Massachusetts. Yeah, the black market will shrivel up and die if the nearest illicit drug buy is a several hour trek. However, there is no place in the CommonWealth that is more than an hours drive to another state… As far as I know, marijuana will continue to be illegal in New Hampshire, Vermont, New York and Rhode Island. And we can expect the black market there to continue, perhaps thrive depending upon the vigilance of respective state police at the borders. I expect, if the measure passes, that Massachusetts will see in an increase in tourism… but what is bought here, I gather, will have to be smoked here…

    So, don’t get me wrong, the survey seems sound and results in good news. But I don’t think we can discount the geography. That should be factored into the ultimate legislation…

    Log in to Reply
    • ryepower12 says

      May 11, 2016 at 4:51 pm

      Washington and Colorado may be many times our size in landmass, but most of their land mass is very, very empty.

      Like Massachusetts, both Colorado and Washington are dominated by their urban centers, which are plenty dense.

      Surely, Denver, Colorado Springs and Aurora would present no such geographic problems for a black market, and those three cities are over 25% of Colorado’s population. Washington is similarly centered around a few big cities, although Washington has a few more of them.

      While the states certainly have rural areas, they are relatively small parts of the population. And given the rates of addiction and abuse that often occur in poorer rural areas, I don’t think the black market has any geographical issue with getting their goods to market in them.

      Log in to Reply
      • petr says

        May 11, 2016 at 8:10 pm

        Washington and Colorado may be many times our size in landmass, but most of their land mass is very, very empty.

        No “but” necessary there. That’s the argument. Of the choices available to teens (or anybody) in the old paradigm — buy illegal here, or trek across the ‘very, very empty’ spaces to buy it illegally there — the very fact of ‘very very empty’ spaces makes the default — a local purchase– so much more attractive.

        That’s not the case in the CommonWealth… that is if you accept the argument made herein that black markets for a specific good dies entirely when that specific good is legalized. If the illicit trade can’t compete, locally, with the legitimated trade, for all the reasons listed previously in this diary, and withers on the vine… the choice of trekking to New Hampshire, Vermont, New York or Rhode Island remains. Nor is this merely theoretical: I grew up in Scituate Mass at a time when you couldn’t buy alcohol in the CommonWealth on a Sunday. We thought nothing of trekking to New Hampshire on Sunday afternoons to purchase alcohol. I also spent two years living in Colorado (working at a ski resort in the winters and at a golf course in the summers) and I can tell you, for any commodity you can name, legal or no, if you couldn’t purchase it locally then you were SOL.

        Log in to Reply
        • SamTracy says

          May 14, 2016 at 8:25 am

          It will make the black market a shadow of its former self, since there’s currently a massive black market in MA. But even in Colorado and Washington, there is still a black market (more in Washington because their taxes are higher), and we have black markets for loose cigarettes, DVDs, purses, and many other legal products. Shrinking the black market from a powerful force into a relatively tiny concern is still a great accomplishment, though.

          Log in to Reply
        • SomervilleTom says

          May 14, 2016 at 10:19 am

          What we call the “black market” for marijuana is organized crime.

          Marijuana was not interesting to organized crime until the Reagan-era “war on drugs” caused its street price — and hence its profitability — to skyrocket. The primary impact of the “war on drugs” has been to replace amateur weed sellers with professional (and far more violent) criminals.

          Legalizing marijuana in Massachusetts will be a significant step towards reversing this foolish and failed Reagan-era policy. Real progress requires legalization at the federal level, and that will come with time.

          In the meantime, though, if marijuana is legal in Massachusetts then I’m not sure why people would drive to New Hampshire, Vermont, New York or Rhode Island to buy more expensive weed (I guess Maine just doesn’t count. 🙂 ). If marijuana is LEGAL in Massachusetts and illegal in the surrounding states, then I suspect residents of those surrounding states will be driving to Massachusetts to buy their weed.

          I, frankly, doubt that Massachusetts authorities (or those in neighboring states) will bother posting border patrols to snag residents of neighboring states returning home with weed purchased for their individual consumption. Among other things, that seems like a very effective way to increase the pressure to legalize weed in our neighboring states.

          This measure will surely reduce the influence of the black market, and that’s good enough for me.

          Log in to Reply
          • Christopher says

            May 14, 2016 at 2:16 pm

            …that a key point of a union such as ours is that states CAN’T set up border patrols at state lines.

            Log in to Reply
        • ryepower12 says

          May 16, 2016 at 6:04 pm

          No “but” necessary there. That’s the argument.

          NO, that was not my argument.

          My argument was that the vast majority of people who live in those states live in densely populated areas within those states — areas with plenty of density to make any black market feasible. And my argument is factually correct.

          This:

          Of the choices available to teens (or anybody) in the old paradigm — buy illegal here, or trek across the ‘very, very empty’ spaces to buy it illegally there

          isn’t what happens for the vast majority of people in those states, because the vast majority of people live in large cities or towns/cities near large cities.

          if you couldn’t purchase it locally then you were SOL.

          What can’t you purchase in Denver, or Seattle? In Aurora or Tacoma? It’s cities like these in Washington and Colorado where large majorities of the population live. Maybe it wasn’t that day back in the olden days when you lived there… but in case people haven’t noticed, we’ve had a trend going on several decades now where people are moving into urban areas and out of rural ones. Those trends hold true in Washington and Colorado, too.

          I made a second argument, which you ignored completely, suggesting that rural areas have plenty of drug addiction, which would suggest the black market is having no trouble reaching those places — contrary to your thoughts. You’ve offered no evidence to suggest otherwise. If a post office can deliver to these places, drug dealers can find one addict willing to go to them as a means of supporting their own addiction — including addicts who are open on Sundays. Drug distribution ain’t that hard when there’s a market, but their markets can collapse if we want them to by legalizing and regulating their current product of choice.

          Log in to Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Recommended Posts

  • Progressive Mass Shouldn’t Back Stupid Primaries (2)

Recent User Posts

Zero Net Energy – August 2022

August 18, 2022 By gmoke Leave a Comment

Liz

August 17, 2022 By johntmay 5 Comments

Progressive Mass Shouldn’t Back Stupid Primaries

August 12, 2022 By jconway 12 Comments

There Is Not A Chance the White House is Happy With This Timing

August 10, 2022 By terrymcginty 8 Comments

Site issue: Unable to reply to comments

August 10, 2022 By SomervilleTom 4 Comments

Why do PUKES oppose $35 insulin for diabetics with private insurance?

August 8, 2022 By fredrichlariccia 3 Comments

Recent Comments

  • jconway on LizTake it from an expert, third parties are doomed to fail…
  • jconway on Progressive Mass Shouldn’t Back Stupid PrimariesPost the interview online and let voters judge for thems…
  • johntmay on LizAs the news of Mar-a-Lago unfolds, and the economy impro…
  • johntmay on Liz“the enemy of my enemy is my friend.” Kautilya, the Hind…
  • SomervilleTom on Progressive Mass Shouldn’t Back Stupid PrimariesAs I've said several times already, the commentary on th…
  • Keith Bernard on Progressive Mass Shouldn’t Back Stupid PrimariesI was on the interview with Rep Vitolo. He was outwardly…
  • Keith Bernard on LizFirst of all, gross. While I appreciate Ms. Cheney's cou…

Archive

@bluemassgroup on Twitter

#mapoli

qpalfrey Quentin Palfrey @qpalfrey ·
37m

This religious discrimination by Mystic Valley Charter School is outrageous and unacceptable —especially after earlier discriminatory incidents involving the same school. #mapoli

halal talal @TalalUnfiltered

Mystic Valley Charter School is violating the First Amendment right of its students to practice their religion, by preventing them from wearing hijab (spelled disrespectfully as "jihab", I assume as a jihad joke).

@mysticvalleyrcs

Reply on Twitter 1560775410211819523 Retweet on Twitter 1560775410211819523 Like on Twitter 1560775410211819523 Twitter 1560775410211819523
baickinblack Michael Baick @baickinblack ·
40m

They might have brought him in to be a pitcher, but he goes to bat for all of us. #mapoli

Eric Lesser @EricLesser

Just threw the first pitch for the @WooSox! #mapoli

Reply on Twitter 1560774828193349633 Retweet on Twitter 1560774828193349633 Like on Twitter 1560774828193349633 Twitter 1560774828193349633
headlineoptics Headline Optics @headlineoptics ·
44m

How Boston-Area Officials Are Responding to Transit Turmoil https://www.masspolicyreport.com/2022/08/19/how-boston-area-officials-are-responding-to-transit-turmoil/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter @masspolicy #MApoli #Massachusetts

Reply on Twitter 1560773748034138112 Retweet on Twitter 1560773748034138112 Like on Twitter 1560773748034138112 Twitter 1560773748034138112
wtfdic_hour Brian Riccio @wtfdic_hour ·
45m

Not for nothing, but I happen to have close, personal relations with certain high net worth individuals who support this tax...#mapoli? 😏

Progressive Mass @ProgressiveMass

That's why we're fighting for the #FairShareAmendment: Yes on Q1. Q1 will provide significant new resources to maintain our transportation infrastructure across the state before another crisis occurs, and only those who earn more than $1m a year will pay more. #mapoli (4/x)

Reply on Twitter 1560773462481932288 Retweet on Twitter 1560773462481932288 Like on Twitter 1560773462481932288 Twitter 1560773462481932288
gamiator Stephanie @gamiator ·
46m

5 Steps To Start Your #Dropshipping Busine̍ss For Passive Income.

😍
#mapoli #mytwitteranniversary #barbs #nickiminaj #mobradio #milagrogramz #fake #pand

👉👉https://go.fiverr.com/visit/?bta=169592&brand=fiverrcpa&afp=random-hashtag&afp1=stores/dropshipping&landingPage=https://www.fiverr.com/stores/dropshipping&t=1660952281

Reply on Twitter 1560773108205645824 Retweet on Twitter 1560773108205645824 Like on Twitter 1560773108205645824 Twitter 1560773108205645824
ericlesser Eric Lesser @ericlesser ·
48m

Just threw the first pitch for the @WooSox! #mapoli

Reply on Twitter 1560772638657617922 Retweet on Twitter 1560772638657617922 Like on Twitter 1560772638657617922 11 Twitter 1560772638657617922
Load More

From our sponsors




Google Calendar







Search

Archives

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter




Copyright © 2022 Owned and operated by BMG Media Empire LLC. Read the terms of use. Some rights reserved.