The Center for American Progress reports
On [February 27], days after White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer told reporters to expect stricter enforcement of federal pot law, Attorney General Jeff Sessions recycled discredited drug war talking points in remarks of his own.
"I believe it's an unhealthy practice, and current levels of THC in marijuana are very high compared to what they were a few years ago, and we're seeing real violence around that", Sessions said. "Experts are telling me there's more violence around marijuana than one would think and there's big money involved."
In reality, violent crime rates tend to decrease where marijuana is legalized.
Denver saw a 2.2 percent drop in violent crime rates in the year after the first legal recreational cannabis sales in Colorado. Overall property crime dropped by 8.9 percent [PDF] in the same period there, according to figures from the Drug Policy Alliance. In Washington, violent crime rates dropped by 10 percent [PDF] from 2011 to 2014. Voters legalized recreational marijuana there in 2012.
Medical marijuana laws, which have a longer track record for academics than recreational pot legalization, are also associated with stable or falling violent crime rates. In one 2014 study of the 11 states that legalized medical pot from 1990 to 2006, there was no increase in the seven major categories of violent crime and "some evidence of decreasing rates of some types of violent crime, namely homicide and assault."
[...] Elsewhere in his remarks, Sessions unwittingly made the case against treating pot activity like serious crime. "You can't sue somebody for drug debt". he said. "The only way to get your money is through strong-arm tactics, and violence tends to follow that."
Legalizing, regulating, and taxing the sale of marijuana is the surest way to remedying that exact tendency for pot commerce to trigger violent score-settling. Legalization invites pot business into the light, granting cannabusinesses at least partial access to official modes of recourse when they are defrauded.
8 states and the District of Columbia have legalised marijuana for recreational use.
Ever see anyone use cannabis and become more aggressive rather than more mellow?
Note: ThinkProgress redirects all accesses of their pages and will attach tracking numbers. I have made sure that those are not in the URLs.
(Score: 2) by jdavidb on Thursday March 02 2017, @06:43PM (8 children)
Experts are telling me there's more violence around marijuana than one would think
This is why we all need to be as scared as hell when people start talking about being governed by "experts."
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @06:58PM
...and be very wary of Lamestream Media's coverage of the regime (current, former, and future).
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @06:58PM (6 children)
Yes, when an asshole makes up fake experts to justify his assholery, that proves we don't need actual experts.
#MAGA!!!
(Score: 3, Insightful) by jdavidb on Thursday March 02 2017, @07:27PM (5 children)
Yes, when an asshole makes up fake experts to justify his assholery, that proves we don't need actual experts.
It's a good thing that there exist people in this world who can be trusted to objectively identify who is and is not an expert without ever abusing that authority.
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @07:55PM (4 children)
Your argument is nothing more than "its not perfect, so its shit."
Fuck you and your lazy nihilism.
(Score: 2) by jdavidb on Thursday March 02 2017, @09:03PM (3 children)
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02 2017, @10:19PM (2 children)
Oh please.
If your problem is with the "appointed" part rather than the "expert" part why aren't you arguing for better ways of choosing experts?
Instead all you argue for is to ignore experts and instead rely on ignorant loud-mouths.
(Score: 2) by jdavidb on Friday March 03 2017, @04:24AM (1 child)
If your problem is with the "appointed" part rather than the "expert" part why aren't you arguing for better ways of choosing experts? Instead all you argue for is to ignore experts and instead rely on ignorant loud-mouths.
No, I'm arguing that people ought to be free to choose their own experts, even if they are making a mistake.
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 04 2017, @06:27AM
That's an argument against government in general because if everybody is free to "choose" their own experts then that's meaningless unless they are also free to chose to follow the recommendations of their own experts.
And I'm sure you are now proudly thinking YES! That's exactly my point.
Which just means you've been participating in a circle-jerk of one.