They do it for the same reason that people drink beer or take any other drug -- it feels good. As for the risk, from my own observations, the average pot smoker gets busted about once every 25 years or so. Most of them have had either one bust in their entire lives, or none at all. The jail time isn't much of a risk for most of them.



That means it doesn't have any significant negative health effects for the vast majority of the people who use it. Certainly nothing in comparison to the comparable effects of alcohol.



Maybe I missed something. Did you provide any stats at all on the subject?



Did you find anything in there that says there is some magical chemical in pot that will make people crave completely different drugs they have never had?




What you seem to have missed is that any such association is not due to any property of pot. It is due to the policy on pot. Therefore, it would not be correct to say that pot is a "gateway drug" even if the correlation is shown. It would be more accurate to say that we have a "gateway drug policy" that creates an association where there was none.



No, the hows and whys are easily clear enough to determine that there is nothing inherent in the drug itself that will make people crave completely different drugs they have never had. As already stated, that's a belief in magic, not science, on the face of it.



Maybe you missed the report of the Institute of Medicine that I linked. If you want more information on related topics see http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer There are thousands of documents on drugs and the drug laws and related subjects there, and the history and development of the "gateway" urban legend is quite clear and beyond dispute.



Try taking that college course in logic and make this argument. See how fast you get flunked, even if the professor assumes that all your evidence is true. Even if the evidence for it was true, it still wouldn't make the case.

Apparently you need a lesson in something because you believe urban legends. Just FYI, "association" means nothing. Ice cream eating is associated with higher rates of drowning. Does that mean that ice cream causes drowning, or does it just reflect the fact that ice cream eating and swimming both increase in the summer?

Like I said, any college prof would have already flunked you in any basic logic class.



No, that isn't it, either, if you would read more extensive references on the subject. Every major study that has examined the subject has said that the primary cause is the prohibition laws themselves. That may in turn cause certain attitudes among certain people, but the basic cause is the black market created by the laws themselves.

As far as the influences of someone's own personality, some people naturally take more risks than others at just about everything. Heroin addicts are one example. Heroin use is a risky behavior but they engage in lots of risky behaviors. If you can find someone who is foolish enough to put a needle full of black market heroin in their arm then chances are they have done every risky thing they could think of before that -- marijuana just being one more item on the list. That says nothing at all about marijuana. It is purely a product of the person's behavior. Therefore, describing marijuana as a "gateway drug" because of that is totally erroneous.

There is nothing inherent in marijuana that makes it the only drug on the planet with magical properties to addict people to other drugs.

What a crock of shit you're spewing [b]wolfman[/b]!

So NOW you're saying that it's the [u]"prohibition laws"[/u] on pot are what cause people who smoke pot to magically crave even harder drugs? [%|]

So basically you're conceding that there IS a "gateway" phenomenon where pot smokers progress to harder drugs far more often than non-pot smokers - but it's just the [u]Gov't drug policy[/u] that forces potsmokers to move on to heroin or coke???  



And I provided a recent article that supports the exact notion I put forward - that there IS a gateway effect regarding pot - just the exact cause is not fully understood.

YOU were the one who pulled "one percent" figure out of your ass and used it like it was a real fact. I called you on that shitball statistic. It's up to YOU to support it with reputable research data or concede that it's just a [b]wolfman[/b] turdball you pulled out to make yourself sound somewhat informed.


And as far as you bringing up college logic classes, I'd like for you to show a logical proof of your irrational, contradictory, unsubstantiated claim that [b]"people who use pot are NOT more likely to move to harder drugs - but the reason they do is because of the Gov't. prohibition on pot."[/b] [whacko]

Put down the doobie and make up your mind: Are you saying that potsmokers are NOT much more likely to progress to harder drugs (which is what I've been saying and you've been vacillating on all along) or are you blaming it on "prohibition laws"?


And again, why the hell are you arguing this? It's NOT a conspiracy, it's NOT bullshit science, it's clear, supported and downright OBVIOUS to anyone who's over 21 years old that potsmokers are much more likely to progress to harder drugs than non potsmokers. (and it's not the Gov't fault).

Okay, just to give you the benefit of the doubt [b]wolfman[/b] I reread all yours and mine posts again.

This is why I think you're blowing smoke out your ass. I started off with this statement:
Then I later defended my statement with this recent medical report:
That supports EXACTLY my original statement I made here.

You then responded to my claim that "a significant proportion of potsmokers progress to harder drugs" with this:

Then I asked you to provide data or citations for your "one percent" claim. You childishly replied with this:

So much for your aspirations for earning an "A" in that hypothetical Logic class of yours. You're asked to provide citations to support your claim and you childishly reply "NO. You go first!" [rolleyes]


One more time: I provided recent medical confirmation of my original statement. I also stated that the mechanism of this "gateway effect" of marijuana use is not fully understood and is obviously multifactorial.

You flatly (and even mockingly) said that it WASN'T a property of pot itself (yet provided no credible reports to support that denial) and insisted that it was simply because of some magical property of prohibition laws and Gov't policy that causes potsmokers to crave harder drugs.



Bottom line:
[b]I supported every word I said in my original statement with documentation.

You haven't even BEGUN to support your "one percent" factoid denial that a significant proportion of potsmokers progress to harder drugs.

It also correlates with the belief in global warming.

This reminds of the gun control movement.  Those who nothing on the subject get their knowledge from others with an agenda and spout the bullshit as facts.

TheMac, Though I [i]kind of[/i] support your position, let me give you some food for thought.

When was the Second Amendment written?  

How far back are [b]WE[/b] going to support [b]our[/b] position?

No flame intended, Sir.

[imbroglio] Thank You[/imbroglio]

Think, Seek the Truth. Do Not Be Willfully Ignorant.

[size=1]Quote by The_Macallan:__________________
And again, why the hell are you arguing this? It's NOT a conspiracy, it's NOT bullshit science, it's clear, supported and downright OBVIOUS to anyone who's over 21 years old that potsmokers are much more likely to progress to harder drugs than non potsmokers. (and it's not the Gov't fault).[/size=1]______________________

YES, Marijuana is A Gateway Drug [b]AWAY from HARD Drugs.[/b]

Alcoholic have use it to Quit Drinking, thus Saving their Lives.

Heroin Addicts have Used it TO STEP DOWN from HARD CORE DRUGS<

Why ???? Because it is LESS Harmful.

[size=1]Quote by The_Macallan:_____________
It's NOT a conspiracy
[/size=1]_____________________

[b]Yes, It IS, A Conspiracy FROM the TRUTH.[/b]

FYI:[url]www-unix.oit.umass.edu/~verdant/Marijuana_FAQ/X0047_8_Isnt_marijuana_a_g.html[/url]

[size=1]8) Isn't marijuana a gateway drug?-Doesn't it lead to use of harder drugs?

[b]This is totally untrue. In fact,[/b] researchers are looking into using marijuana to help crack addicts to quit. There are 40 million people in this country (U.S.) who have smoked marijuana for a period of their lives -- why aren't there tens of millions of heroin users, then? In Amsterdam, both marijuana use and heroin use went *down* after marijuana was decriminalized -- even though there was a short rise in cannabis use right after decriminalization. Unlike addictive drugs, marijuana causes almost no tolerance. Some people even report a reverse tolerance. That is, the longer they have used the less marijuana they need to get `high.' So users of marijuana do not usually get bored and `look for something more powerful'. If anything, marijuana keeps people from doing harder drugs.
The idea that using marijuana will lead you to use heroin or speed is called the `gateway theory' or the `stepping stone hypothesis.' It has been a favorite trick of the anti-drug propaganda artists, because it casts marijuana as something insidious with hidden dangers and pitfalls. There have never been any real statistics to back this idea up, but somehow it was the single biggest thing which the newspapers yelled about during Reefer Madness II. (Perhaps this was because the CIA was looking for someone to blame for the increase in heroin use after Viet Nam.)

The gateway theory of drug use is no longer generally accepted by the medical community. Prohibitionists used to point at numbers which showed that a large percentage of the hard drug users `started with marijuana.' They had it backwards -- many hard drug users also use marijuana. There are two reasons for this. One is that marijuana can be used to `take the edge off' the effects of some hard drugs. The other is a recently discovered fact of adolescent psychology -- there is a personality type which uses drugs, basically because drugs are exciting and dangerous, a thrill.

On sociological grounds, another sort of gateway theory has been argued which claims that marijuana is the source of the drug subculture and leads to other drugs through that culture. By the same token this is untrue -- marijuana does not create the drug subculture, the drug subculture uses marijuana. There are many marijuana users who are not a part of the subculture.

[b]This brings up another example of how marijuana legalization could actually reduce the use of illicit drugs.[/b] Even though there is no magical `stepping stone' effect, people who choose to buy marijuana often buy from dealers who deal in many different illegal drugs. [b]This means that they have access to illegal drugs, and might decide to try them out. In this case it is the laws which lead to hard drug use.[/b] If marijuana were legal, the drug markets would be separated, and less people would start using the illegal drugs. Maybe this is why emergency room admissions for hard drugs have gone down in the states that decriminalized marijuana during the 70's.[/size=1]

We Do Agree that it should Be Legalize,

nixon started the WAR to Harass the 60's Vietnam Peace Hippies,
Just like you wish they smoke themslves to death, problem is NO ONE has Died from a Marijuana OVER DOSE. [b]FACT.[/b]

EDUCATION is the Answer.
Not the government Propaganda.

^^^^^^^^
FIXED BAYONETS
[size=1]^ Million Gun Freedom March on Washington July 4th, 2003. A Well-Regulated Militia Being Necessary To The...
[url]www.Cures-not-wars.org/[/url] Truth Will Liberate Earth.
[url]www.RKBA.org/antis/hci-master[/url]Allege 1993 feinstein/hci PRETEXT for TOTAL Gun Freedom Confiscation.
[url]www.digitalAngel.net/[/url]Revelation 13:18  ID-GPS-MONEY [red]BAN[/red] Human Power Implant Micro-chip.
   
Never Again, Never Forget --  Seek the Truth , Liberate Your Mind -- We Are At War[/size=1]
 
FIXED BAYONETS -- FORWARD

VX

These are the sum total cited references for the entire C&P "report" you posted:

That's all.

Talk about being willfully ignorant.

Since when does a single paper written in [b]1977 [/b]constitute what CURRENT medical thought is regarding the "gateway effect" of cannabis?

After perusing the rest of the site you linked to, I can only say... do you also present "facts"  from VPI when discussing firearm issues???

You post some homegrown (pun-intended) website from some nobody named Brian S. Julin as "the TRUTH"?!. [%|]

That site is one of the most incomplete jumbles of irrelevant sources, outdated reports and questionable "experts" (e.g. Noam Chomsky) I could ever imagine. But there's just enough "real" medical reports cited in the mix to keep it looking somewhat vaguely respectable so as to not dismiss it ALL out of hand.

Now whether those sources are properly used and interpreted by the author Mr. Julin is another matter.



Says who??? Lester Grinspoon back in 1977? [rolleyes]

I posted from the "Journal of the American Medical Association" report from THIS YEAR.

You posted from "Journal of Secondary Education".

Sorry, but the "gateway effect" is real. It's accepted. It's the TRUTH.

Hemp is NOT the wear-all, cure-all, be-all, super snake-oil that this link or the rest of the folks at NORML make it out to be.



[b]BTW... at least I'm glad we can meet half-way and agree that the STUPID anti-pot crusade in the War On Drugs has got to go. [:)][/b]

Well, shitabrick, dude!  I'm confused:  [url=http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=194245&w=activePop]Who're you going to believe?[/url]

[size=1]Quote by The_Macallan:__________________
Talk about being willfully Ignorant. ______________[/size=1]

FYI: [url]http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/289/4/427[/url]

[size=1][b]Journal of the American Medical Association
[red]January 22, 2003 -[/red][/size=1][/b]


The association may arise from the effects of the peer and social context within which cannabis is used and obtained. In particular, early access to and use of cannabis may reduce perceived barriers against the use of [red]other illegal drugs and provide access to these drugs.[/red]

FYI: [url]www-unix.oit.umass.edu/~verdant/Marijuana_FAQ/X0047_8_Isnt_marijuana_a_g.html[/url]

[b]This brings up another example of how marijuana legalization could actually reduce the use of illicit drugs.[/b] Even though there is no magical `stepping stone' effect, people who choose to buy marijuana often buy from dealers who deal in many different illegal drugs. [red]This means that they have access to illegal drugs, and might decide to try them out. In this case it is the laws which lead to hard drug use.[/red] If marijuana were legal, [b]the drug markets would be separated,[/b] and less people would start using the illegal drugs. Maybe this is why emergency room admissions for hard drugs have gone down in the states that decriminalized marijuana during the 70's.

[size=1]Quote by The_Macallan:__________________
do you also present "facts" from VPI when discussing firearm issues???
______________[/size=1]

[url]http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/search?fulltext=gun&submit.x=15&submit.y=10[/url]

[size=1]Subsequent Criminal Activity Among Violent Misdemeanants Who Seek to Purchase Handguns: Risk Factors and Effectiveness of Denying Handgun Purchase

Gun Carrying and Homicide Prevention

Homicide and Suicide Rates Associated With Implementation of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act

Gun Violence: The Real Costs

The Future of Firearm Violence Prevention: Building on Success

Would Prevention of Gun Carrying Reduce US Homicide Rates?

Risks and Benefits of Gun Ownership

Does Owning a Firearm Increase or Decrease the Risk of Death?

What Are the Risks and Benefits of Keeping a Gun in the Home?

Impact of the Brady Act on Homicide and Suicide Rates

Youth Violence Prevention: The Physician's Role

Violent Criminal Activity Among Handgun Purchasers With Prior Misdemeanor Convictions

Complementary Strategies to Prevent Firearm Injury

Would Prevention of Gun Carrying Reduce US Homicide Rates?[/size=1]

Sorry, I am Not a member, to you have access to these reports, If I recall Correctly, JAMA are Anti-Gun.

More Propangada.

Do you SEE your GATEWAY Yet.

[size=1]Quote by The_Macallan:__________________
BTW... at least I'm glad we can meet half-way and agree that the STUPID anti-pot crusade in the War On Drugs has got to go.______________[/size=1]

Medications Not Wars.

BTW, Thanks for the JAMA link.

[size=1]^ Million Gun Freedom March on Washington July 4th, 2003. A Well-Regulated Militia Being Necessary To The...
[url]www.Cures-not-wars.org/[/url] Truth Will Liberate Earth.
[url]www.RKBA.org/antis/hci-master[/url]Allege 1993 feinstein/hci PRETEXT for TOTAL Gun Freedom Confiscation.
[url]www.digitalAngel.net/[/url]Revelation 13:18  ID-GPS-MONEY [red]BAN[/red] Human Power Implant Micro-chip.
   
Never Again, Never Forget --  Seek the Truth , Liberate Your Mind -- We Are At War[/size=1]
 
FIXED BAYONETS -- FORWARD

VX

Others have already posted some fairly good info on the topic. But, in case you had trouble reading before any such association is due to two primary factors.

The first is that these drugs are sold by the same illegal dealers, therefore, someone who buys marijuana often has the chance to buy other drugs. You know, same as someone going to the liquor store to buy beer will be exposed to hard liquor.

The second factor is simple risk taking behavior -- that is, people who drink a lot of beer are also likely to drink harder liquor.

Neither one of those really has anything to do with the inherent properties of pot.

Do you think there is some magical ingredient in pot that makes people crave other drugs? If so, what is it?

(Not that you have read enough research that you would have the foggiest clue.)